Why is the SNP always legislating against Scottish freedom?
Cameron's red tape challenge - to produce as much as possible
Introducing the sobriety pill
Californian county's home smoking ban excludes marijuana
French fast food chain unveils Star Wars burgers, complete with black Darth Vader bun
How to improve your, err ... oh, it's on the tip of my tongue
Coming soon to the UK: Meteorite-aged wine
Sophisticated Sweden, the country with towns named 'The Butthole', 'Deep Arse', 'Sex Swamp' and 'Trollop's Mound'
This is what science is for! A fridge that cools beer in four minutes
Boring playgrounds and safety fears ---> fat kids
Tiny frogs
1 comment:
For Marin County, north of San Francisco, to ban private apartment and condo smoking inside ones own home, but only for tobacco, not marijuana - same for the college campus, no smoking indoors or outdoors, but marijuana smoking spelled out as an exemption, as AOK - this is typical. This is typical of the "progressive liberal" mindset of all of northern California, with the ideology seeming to be headquartered out of San Francisco, where they dream these things up first - but Marin County, where many rich UCSF doctors live, possibly including Glantz, will go out of their way to legitimize harassment and assault on tobacco smokers by banning it outdoors on campus and inside private homes - but at the same time, and like usual, the ones who hate tobacco smokers simply LOVE marijuana smokers. So when they come to your town saying they wish to legalize pot - that does NOT mean they are going to ease up on smoking bans - not in the least. In fact, they will legalize one at the expense of making illegal the other. In northern California, that is exactly how it works and I would expect elsewhere eventually too. I am not against marijuana nor do I think it should be criminalized, it could be legalized, mainstreamed and taxed the same as tobacco (once was/still is, depending on locale) - but no, to the "liberal progressive" ideologues in NorCal, they treat it as a see-saw, one made legal at the expense of the other made illegal.
Post a Comment