Is Marylands new smoking ban Constitutional?

[Midnightrider]

Please do tell, why?

So, if I charge my kids rent or take on a roomate, I am now subject?

Seriously grown tired of this idiocy. A home is a private place, a restaruante is not. THAT IS ALL

 

[Kyle]

Constitutionally, yes. If we, through our legislatures and courts, decide that regulating private behavior for health reasons is constitutional, then yes, regulating anything for health reasons is likewise constitutional.

I am not saying it is right, appropriate, necessary, or even a good idea. I'm solely talking about a constitutional argument because that is what the original question in this thread was.

It might be legislated but it wouldn't be constitutional unless it were ammended and ratified... Or some pompus, pius pr### on a supreme court pulls another fast one and reinterprets the document by ignoring portions of the text and their intent.

 

[Larry Gude]

How do...

Seriously grown tired of this idiocy. A home is a private place, a restaruante is not. THAT IS ALL

...you live with yourself? Maybe we can get the government to start regulating idiocy in the home? Until then, I guess you're stuck?

 

[Larry Gude]

How do you form...

Seriously grown tired of this idiocy. A home is a private place, a restaruante is not. THAT IS ALL

..an opinion with that kind of reasoning?

 

[vraiblonde]

A home is a private place, a restaruante is not. THAT IS ALL

AGAIN, there is a difference between "privacy" and "private property".

If you decide to stand naked in your window, in full view of the neighbors, you have relinquished your privacy, but your home is still private property.

And, AGAIN, go into a restaurant and start causing a disturbance, then see what you are charged with when the OWNER asks you to leave and you refuse. (They charge you with trespassing, which one cannot be charged with on public property)

 

[Larry Gude]

You don't seem...

AGAIN, there is a difference between "privacy" and "private property".

If you decide to stand naked in your window, in full view of the neighbors, you have relinquished your privacy, but your home is still private property.

And, AGAIN, go into a restaurant and start causing a disturbance, then see what you are charged with when the OWNER asks you to leave and you refuse. (They charge you with trespassing, which one cannot be charged with on public property)

...to be paying attention. Midnight said it is thus, therefore, it is thus.

 

[Bird Dog]

The Fifth Amendment states:





This is where smoking bans are unconstitutional.

A bar/restaurant/club IS private property. End of story. You can argue that it's not, but it in fact IS. When the government enacts laws regulating YOUR private property, they are in effect taking it for public use without just compensation.

They may justify it by saying it's for the "public good", but there was a time that books such as "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" were banned for the public good. Many groups today advocating the banning of pornography for the public good.

So I will suggest that some little busybody who wants to ban ANYTHING for the public good is just a control freak with too much time on their hands, who should consider taking over a third-world nation to satisfy their desire for dictatorship.

Does that mean I can open a brothel as long as I own the property?
They are telling me what I can or cannot do.
Can I open a gambling casino or have #### fights or dog fights??

Heck, they even banned pigeon shoots on private farms.

Somethings are regulated for the "common good".

 

[Dutch6]

Does that mean I can open a brothel as long as I own the property?
They are telling me what I can or cannot do.
Can I open a gambling casino or have #### fights or dog fights??

Heck, they even banned pigeon shoots on private farms.

Somethings are regulated for the "common good".

Those activities ARE illegal. Smoking is NOT.

 

[aps45819]

They may justify it by saying it's for the "public good", but there was a time that books such as "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" were banned for the public good..

Believe that one is currently banned from public schools. It promotes vandalism and truancy. Not to mention how Huck refers to Jim

 

[vraiblonde]

Does that mean I can open a brothel as long as I own the property?
They are telling me what I can or cannot do.
Can I open a gambling casino or have #### fights or dog fights??

No. Nor can you mainline heroin - even on your own property.

 

[MMDad]

Those activities ARE illegal. Smoking is NOT.

It will be soon. The public, through our legislature, has spoken.

 

[Bird Dog]

Does that mean I can open a brothel as long as I own the property?
They are telling me what I can or cannot do.
Can I open a gambling casino or have #### fights or dog fights??

Heck, they even banned pigeon shoots on private farms.

Somethings are regulated for the "common good".

Should of said "rooster fights"

 

[Kyle]

Believe that one is currently banned from public schools. It promotes vandalism and truancy. Not to mention how Huck refers to Jim

Yet they go on referring to each other as ###### constantly... Amazing isn't it?

 

[forestal]

Oh heavens to Betsy of course it's Constitutional.

Your right to pollute your lungs does not extend to polluting mine.

 

[Bronwyn]

Yes or no.

I am not a smoker, and I have never smoked. My husband does. I really think they are taking away people's rights here, and I'm against it. I can sit in the non smoking section. When I go to the bar, the smoke doesn't bother me. And if it did, I wouldn't go.

 

[awpitt]

Yes or no.

I voted Yes. Sorry, Larry, but the 4th doesn't cover this. It covers warrents, Merranda, etc.

 

[Ken King]

Yes or no.

Is it really a ban? If it is either SB91 or HB359 there are plenty of loopholes to allow for smoking inside these establishments.

 

[kom526]

Now for the next survey question...How many non smokers say the ban is constitutional?

Former smoker here saying that this is ban is complete and utter BS. If the state REALLY wants to do some good, they should find out why the F@#K gas prices are shooting through the roof.

 

[awpitt]

Now for the next survey question...How many non smokers say the ban is constitutional?

Former smoker here saying that this is ban is complete and utter BS. If the state REALLY wants to do some good, they should find out why the F@#K gas prices are shooting through the roof.

As a former smoker, I voted yes because the new law is constitutional. I wasn’t able to find constitutional language that would make this unconstitutional. Since you say that it is unconstitutional, what language do you base your assertion on? Article and Section?

 

[Ken King]

Now for the next survey question...How many non smokers say the ban is constitutional?

Former smoker here saying that this is ban is complete and utter BS. If the state REALLY wants to do some good, they should find out why the F@#K gas prices are shooting through the roof.

Since it is no ban at all and is only being expressed as one (that is chock full of exceptions), I say what difference does it make?