Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

DiegoForAllNeighbors t1_irgyyzy wrote

I am running for City Council and I would not support this ordinance without hearing about the following… does second hand smoke outside endanger others? How many nuisance come into city council from the smell of weed? I’m assuming it’s the smell that bothers people more than the smoke? What is the enforcement mechanism? I’m sort of over laws without enforcement that semi-moralize an activity but then accomplish little… For people who have traveled to other parts of the world where things like public container laws are not a thing, there is not rampant public drunkenness. Quite the opposite. Also— when it comes to issues of drug policy, government should consult people with lived experience: people in recovery from substance use and/or active consumers— somehow I doubt the City explored their opinion on this, but I would love to be wrong…

−7

Proof-Variation7005 t1_irh4qpq wrote

I think you’re missing the plot a bit. Usually ordinances like this and limiting cigarette smoking are very selectively enforced based on race and class. More often than not, this is just a vehicle to harass the homeless.

The argument for this on a health risk basis is a weak one. Secondhand smoke from cigarettes or pot in an open space is an annoyance to people, but it’s hardly a serious health risk.

5

DiegoForAllNeighbors t1_irh726e wrote

Indeed this is precisely what I was trying to get at in a diplomatic and charitable way because I believe that to be a generally constructive way of doing business. I think you’ll get a kick out of our website.

Thank you! www.diegoforallneighbors.com

0