Ok, this post is a rant on my part. In the grand scheme of things I realize that my rant is not going to change the reality that the poor and the marginalized in this country are increasingly being treated as though they were prisoners of some hierarchical moral crusade that harbors with it the de facto right to make people's lives increasingly more difficult, but it does feel good to let it all out once in awhile. I could not help myself when I read this news piece the other day. So here it goes....
Effective Aug. 17, tenants of Boulder County Housing Authority properties will no longer be able to use electronic cigarettes or vapor-smoking devices inside any of the county's 611 rental units or on most of the grounds outside those units.
Um, I guess that the Housing "Authority" has forgotten that "public" housing is owned not by them, but by the people.
They have also seem to have forgotten that we have the 4th Amendment in America which expressly states that unreasonable search and seizure is ILLEGAL in the great United States of America. Therefore, they CANNOT arbitrarily search the homes of poor people to see if they are smoking or vaping just because they damn well feel like it.
They also seem to think that they can change the definition of smoke in its vernacular on a whim...again, just because they feel like it. They cannot.
The new policy's expanded smoking prohibition also applies to marijuana.
Well, we saw that coming, now didn't we? Yeah, marijuana is legal in Colorado, but these people can do whatever they want because they have special powers that are only reserved for the special few.
They also seem to think that they can change the definition of smoke in its vernacular on a whim...again, just because they feel like it. They cannot, but that does not stop them from trying to redefine physics and science itself.
The new no-smoking policy the commissioners approved Thursday defines "smoking or smoke" as "either the carrying, smoking, burning, inhaling or exhaling of any kind of lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, hookah, weed, herbs, incense, or any other lighted smoking equipment, or the use of any electronic smoking or vapor smoking device."
No incense for you, ok? ...and no vaping either, because vaping is smoking, ok? Got that? While we're at it, for the sake of consistency, why don't we ban tea kettles to?
Williford said the policy update wasn't prompted by any specific complaints from or about tenants. But she said officials decided the update was needed....
Well of course there were no complaints. That is likely due to the fact that most people are decent people who do not make it their life's mission to look for a problem where it does not exist. Real people are far to busy with the vicissitudes of every life to waste time on such nonsense. Most Americans that I have met in my lifetime also tend to hold our Bill of Rights in high regard; it is clear that these people do not. Their agenda takes precedence over our Democratic Republic. Aren't these people special?
In the past, she said, "I would always say anything that emits smoke, you shouldn't be using."
I hate to break it to you honey, but it is none of your damn business what legal substance(s) people choose to put into their own bodies. Got that? This is not a dictatorship and poor people are not your prisoners.
..she said most of the county-owned rental properties
Again, they have gotten it all backwards, for it is the people who are the sole proprietors of "public" housing and newsflash: smokers and vapers of legal marijuana, tobacco, and other nicotine/tobacco alternatives are citizens of the United States with rights just like everyone else. You, on the other hand, are merely an administrator to the public trust that is owned by the people. You cannot therefore, arbitrarily dictate from on high that smokers and vapers have no stake (or rights) when it comes to public housing.
..repeated violations could eventually result in the Housing Authority initiating the legal process of evicting them.
You cannot evict American citizens from their own property for taking part in a legal activity. Shame on you for thinking that you can.
Can anyone honestly dispute at this point that the anti-smoking crusade is not in large part fueled by prejudice, dogma and hate?