3 ms·

Can you offer a more descriptive and less evasive answer? I'm not trying to be rude (and not a smoker), I'm honestly curious as to what you would do "different"

Can you offer a more descriptive and less evasive answer? I'm not trying to be rude (and not a smoker), I'm honestly curious as to what you would do "different". Most states have moved to blocking smoking in public areas to differing extents, the more blatant exceptions to this tend to be areas like Las Vegas where establishments pay fines for the repeat violations of their customers.

Mz 14y ago
Sorry. There is no intent to be evasive. The thing I am reacting negatively to is not the current laws concerning smoking but specifically the public announcement that they will only issues warnings. That is practically an invitation to people who want to be defiant assholes to do whatever they want. Laws are merely one tool for trying to keep the peace. And the reality is that if you actually have to enforce the law (overly much), you have already kind of failed. I struggle with how to say this clearly, because any sweeping statement is going to be wrong and invite attack and a lot of people are very uncomfortable with how things actually work. But, basically, you announce what is illegal knowing some people will politely do as they are told and then you put in place just enough consequences to act as a deterent to folks who are less inclined to simply do as they are told. Of course, some people will break the law for various reasons. Either they didn't know or it is a poorly designed law that is nearly impossible to obey or...whatever. However if things are done right, there will only be a moderate need for active enforcement. But an announcement like this amounts to a public invitation to do as you please. Some people will do it just because of this invitation, just like some seventeen year olds with college ID's will drink because some places will take a college ID at the door. It is a loophole and some people will take childish glee in that space where it kind of is forbidden but really is not. That is the piece I hope California handles better. I also hope that the fact that there is medical marijuana here already will help prevent the "must get drunk on my 21st birthday" style of reaction that you so often see when things finally get legalized. I believe that drugs and alcohol tend to attract people who somehow benefit physically. In California, if you really need marijuana and can prove it, it is already legal. Folks who are merely recreational users are going to be less rabid about wanting to fight for and exercise their right to toke. I think it is the people who strongly benefit (medically in some way) who are the most vehement. And those people are mostly already okay to smoke it here. So I am hoping that helps make it a non-event with people happy to keep it behind closed doors.

Mz 14y ago

Sorry. There is no intent to be evasive. The thing I am reacting negatively to is not the current laws concerning smoking but specifically the public announcement that they will only issues warnings. That is practically an invitation to people who want to be defiant assholes to do whatever they want. Laws are merely one tool for trying to keep the peace. And the reality is that if you actually have to enforce the law (overly much), you have already kind of failed. I struggle with how to say this clearly, because any sweeping statement is going to be wrong and invite attack and a lot of people are very uncomfortable with how things actually work. But, basically, you announce what is illegal knowing some people will politely do as they are told and then you put in place just enough consequences to act as a deterent to folks who are less inclined to simply do as they are told. Of course, some people will break the law for various reasons. Either they didn't know or it is a poorly designed law that is nearly impossible to obey or...whatever. However if things are done right, there will only be a moderate need for active enforcement. But an announcement like this amounts to a public invitation to do as you please. Some people will do it just because of this invitation, just like some seventeen year olds with college ID's will drink because some places will take a college ID at the door. It is a loophole and some people will take childish glee in that space where it kind of is forbidden but really is not. That is the piece I hope California handles better. I also hope that the fact that there is medical marijuana here already will help prevent the "must get drunk on my 21st birthday" style of reaction that you so often see when things finally get legalized. I believe that drugs and alcohol tend to attract people who somehow benefit physically. In California, if you really need marijuana and can prove it, it is already legal. Folks who are merely recreational users are going to be less rabid about wanting to fight for and exercise their right to toke. I think it is the people who strongly benefit (medically in some way) who are the most vehement. And those people are mostly already okay to smoke it here. So I am hoping that helps make it a non-event with people happy to keep it behind closed doors.