Well we’ve finally made it. A court ruling on smoking on balconies

maxyzee on 29/12/2022 - 19:53

Well this is something. I’m sure this was posted on one of the forums a couple of years ago.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/room-with-a-feud-apartme…

TLDR: An apartment owner complained to their strata about their neighbours smoking in the balcony and took through to the NSW high court which ruled in their favour.

It means that a precedent has now been set for any strata to ban any activity that strata seems to be to the detriment of other apartment dwellers.

Me personally I don’t like how this is going. I guess we’ll see where this goes.

Home & Garden

Comments

    • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 00:13
      +4

      Should we ban those too?

      Yes. And usually except for main roads, they’re already banned

      Why not?

      No “why not”, I’m still on your side here

      How is it different?

      1) it’s not in terms of the impact to the individual. Noise pollution, light pollution, cigarette pollution, all of these are incredibly dangerous to the people dealing with them. They can all significantly impact on quality of sleep and quality of life and they should all be taken seriously.

      But 2) EPA have paid a lot more attention to noise pollution than light or smoke pollution, so the work they’ve done in this space tends to mean that people are more understanding of how their noise impacts others. Whether they attempt to mitigate this is another story, but authorities take noise pollution much more seriously because of this.

        • Quantumcat on 30/12/2022 - 09:16
          +2

          Why should someone have to do that, when the smoker could also close their own windows and prevent their activity infringing on their neighbours

        • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 09:31
          +2

          Just gonna link my other comment bc I can’t type it again

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/13178330/redir

        • andrew229 on 30/12/2022 - 23:34
          +1

          No it’s not manageable just by closing windows. I live in a house , and I don’t care if my neighbors smoke, as we are far away from them. But people who live in apartments can be very badly affected by their neighbors smoking. This is a great rule change and I’m sure it will go national in a couple of years.

        • smartazz104 on 31/12/2022 - 11:07

          Why don't smokers go and get stuffed instead,.

        • ihfree on 31/12/2022 - 12:24

          Have a read about about the impact that ICE vehicles and in particular diesel engines have on air quality and health. It's not simply a matter on closing a window.

          Many dwellings don't have air conditioning so a window is also a method of regulating the temperature.

          Houses and units don't have their own dedicated filtration and fumes outside will make their way into houses.

          If we keep going with your thinking, houses would need dedicated air filtration. We don't all live in a bubble.

    • andrew229 on 30/12/2022 - 23:36
      +2

      Because a truck driving in the street is different from the neighbor smoking right next to you. A truck is different from the cigarette.

    • p1 ama on 31/12/2022 - 15:09

      I'm not taking a stand on this issue either way because I'm not adequately informed. However, I do think there's a fundamental difference.

      When you choose to live on a main road, for instance, you should know that you will be subject to noise, diesel exhaust…etc., just like it you choose to live near train lines, airports, a large factory…etc.

      In those cases, one can reasonably say that those who live there are making an informed choice about what they are getting themselves into.

      Furthermore, there is some "control" one has on these matters, e.g. you can petition your council, so in some way, there is "democratic" representation.

      It's different with living in a block with smokers on the balcony because nobody can possibly know before they buy a property whether this is an issue or whether one day a smoker can move in.

      I've always been of the mind that more things in strata living should be democratic, e.g. we can vote on whether to allow smoking on balconies or not. I think this ruling clarifies those issues.

    • cadwalader on 01/01/2023 - 16:24

      trucks delivering stuff benefits a ton more people than a smoker being allowed to smoke in their balconies.

  • Eeples on 29/12/2022 - 23:54
    +21

    Let’s do something similar to New Zealand but stronger.

    Ban cigarette sales to anyone born after 1st Jan 2005.

    • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 00:20
      +1

      Agree with this. Not only are we legitimately assisting the health of the younger generation, we’re also saving them money because smoking is expensive.

      The only downside is we will lose the taxes from cigarettes that is being pumped into our healthcare (which I daresay is why we haven’t implemented this yet), but surely with new generations now not smoking, this offsets itself.

    • franco cozzo on 30/12/2022 - 05:44
      +1

      so when can we expect alcohol and sugar to be on the list?

      • Eeples on 30/12/2022 - 21:47
        +3

        Oh the slippery slope argument.

        How I missed you.

        • jellykingdom on 03/01/2023 - 07:23
          +1

          In fairness, this entire forum post is a slippery slope argument…

      • p1 ama on 31/12/2022 - 15:10
        +7

        When "secondary drinking" and "secondary sugar consumption" becomes harmful ;)

  • bobbified on 30/12/2022 - 00:13
    +3

    The next closest place for them to smoke would be outside the main entrance on the footpath where it's public land. If all the smokers in the building are forced to smoke outside, it won't be a good look and will probably devalue all the apartments in that block. And strata won't be able to do shit.

    • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 00:28
      +1

      Really great point here - and something as a neighbour to smokers has definitely considered, thought about and generally just constantly not thought about anything else…

      There’s two main counterpoints I’ve thought of (that are 100% based in musings and not fact, so I’m keen for alternative POVs)

      1) Will they actually go to the footpath? Yes, many will because smoking is an addiction, but how many are casual smokers/or people who only smoke when they have guests/entertain that now won’t?

      1a) How many addicted smokers will become ex-smokers because it’s not as easy as opening a door to the balcony? This is 100% a hypothesis, but we can’t pretend that some people (even if it literally 1 person) will end up quitting rather than having to get to the footpath to smoke.

      2) Can we have some buildings that are smoking buildings? Like hotel floors? Don’t buy/rent here if you don’t like the idea that some of your neighbours are allowed to smoke? As long as these buildings are set back from the neighbouring ones, I think this could be a solution.

      2a) Oh no, *dedicated smoking buildings devalues all the apartments in that block? Shocker. It’s almost like the majority of people don’t like the idea of smokers…

      • maxyzee on 30/12/2022 - 00:49

        Those are some really interesting points. But I in reality I don’t think no. 2 or 2a would actually ever be a reality. Because…

        Just another thing that I’ve observed over the last couple years when seeing how expensive cigarettes have become. I’m now seeing (albeit seemingly homeless people at the moment) more and more people trudging through used cigarette butts to see if the can find some used butts that still have some tobacco in them to salvage cos they simply can’t afford to buy cigarettes. It’s the one of the saddest sights to see and I’d just give them one if I happened to have one on hand but there’s nothing you can really do. What I’m I gonna say, no you really should quit!?!?

        • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 01:18
          +1

          You’re right. I said it above, but smoking is first and foremost an addiction, which is not an easy thing to overcome.

          Perhaps if the health system was funded appropriately to help people recover from addictions, then we would be able to support people through this, and not have to witness people in the streets smoking used butts, or as I experienced a lot when working at Colesworth, watch people put back a few days to a weeks worth of food for them and their family just to pay for a pack of smokes.

          (Ideally they wouldn’t get addicted in the first place, but that’s where the NZ approach helps)

      • UberIsCool on 30/12/2022 - 11:33

        This already happens in front of fancy hotels

    • [Deactivated] on 30/12/2022 - 01:28
      +1

      Oh, loving it. Butts all over the footpath would add another 50K to your apartment value, for sure.

      • jjjaar on 30/12/2022 - 11:56
        +3

        If smokers can clean up after themselves in their balconies, they should be able to do the same on the footpath. But you’re right, they’re mostly inconsiderate people anyway, so they probably wouldn’t.

        • serpserpserp on 02/01/2023 - 19:20

          Most smokers just toss them off the balcony.

      • Miss B on 31/12/2022 - 16:28

        Sounds like they're disgusting slobs. If people like that live in the apartment block they're going to be dirtying up the place and lowering the value already.

  • CauseNEffect on 30/12/2022 - 01:24
    +3

    Happy to see smoking disgusting cigarettes banned. Zero chance this can be enforced…

    However, banning bbqs that produce smoke is down right insane, unaustralian and unenforceable.

    Good luck managing the disputes and Karen's.

    • [Deactivated] on 30/12/2022 - 01:29

      If you try stop me smoking* I'll just start burning citronella candles 24*7.

      • and I don't even smoke.
      • smartazz104 on 31/12/2022 - 11:09
        +1

        It sure sounds like you smoke though, or else why defend them so rabidly?

        • Alzori on 01/01/2023 - 00:01
          +2

          Cares about his right to make other people's balconies unpleasant and hazards to resident's health.

    • p1 ama on 31/12/2022 - 15:12
      +1

      However, banning bbqs that produce smoke is down right insane, unaustralian and unenforceable.

      Nobody BBQs 24/7 on their balcony the way that smokers smoke on their balcony, so it's fundamentally a different degree of issue.

  • franco cozzo on 30/12/2022 - 05:43
    -3

    how about get the heck out of other peoples hecking business for a hecking change!?!?

    • Quantumcat on 30/12/2022 - 09:18
      +8

      Shouldn't the smokers get out of other people's business by letting them live their life and keeping their habit from affecting anyone else?

  • TheMindsetTraveller on 30/12/2022 - 08:56
    +3

    Well, the ruling is one thing, but enforcement is another. Just saying.

    Just like strata has almost zero powers when it comes to illegally parked cars onsite.

  • iCandy on 30/12/2022 - 09:29
    -2

    The trouble is that bans always start with something most people will agree with. Followed by slowly introducing other bans that may/will affect you down the road. For example, I LOVE a good curry, but imagine living next door to a large Indian family. Curry has a very strong and long lasting smell that permeates soft furnishings. I, myself, have no problem with this, but someone will eventually and now a precedent has been set, what’s to stop the strata banning pungent smelling cooking?

    • Quantumcat on 30/12/2022 - 09:38
      +2

      Cooking generally happens in people's houses not on their balcony next to your window (most people who want smoking on balconies banned are quite happy if people want to do it inside their own homes). So sure you may be able to smell it a bit while it is being cooked, but it does not infect your home like smoke from cigarettes does. It also doesn't cause cancer.

    • [Deactivated] on 31/12/2022 - 10:42
      +1

      My canteen at work when someone heats something up, much worse than smoke 😂

      • smartazz104 on 31/12/2022 - 11:10
        +1

        Well the heating up certain foods can be easily banned at work.

      • spedohero on 02/01/2023 - 16:27
        +1

        Esp curry

    • cadwalader on 01/01/2023 - 16:29
      -1

      I love pungent smelling cooking and cook it all the time. I hate it in my rooms, beds, linen and my clothes though. So I shut all the doors in my house when I cook.

      Strata aren't banning smoking. If they take this same action for pungent smelling food, they'll just say don't cook it on your balconies.

      • MorriJ on 01/01/2023 - 22:32
        +1

        they'll just say don't cook it on your balconie

        Why? The precedent for nuisance is now set and smells from within your apartment may require regulation.

        Per the article:
        "In the final decision in October, the tribunal found Newport, Traynor and any guests to their unit must not smoke tobacco on their balcony, nor allow fumes from inside their apartment to reach the Pittman-Cartwright residence."

        The precedent is for your next door neighbour to sue you for cooking your pungent smelling foods and prevent you from cooking inside in the future if they can demonstrate nuisance.

        • cadwalader on 01/01/2023 - 22:48

          If they can demonstrate that the health detriment and nuisance of pungent smelling foods are on the same level as cigarette food then the onus is on me as a member of the community to prevent such offending fumes from leaving my house. Any measures in place to keep cool air in will keep the odors of pungent smelling food in, the same thing with smoking.

          If I further refuse to respect the rights of my neighbours to have a reasonable enjoyment of their property with my open-air pungent cooking habits, I would endeavour to stay in a place with a bigger plot of land or air buffer between my neighbours property to continue said cooking habits.

    • kiriakoz on 01/01/2023 - 23:24
      +1

      There's no such food as "curry", it's just Indian food. And that thing that you can smell is called "flavour". The only people cooking something called "curry" is anglo saxons using Keen's curry powder.

      Also, "pungent smelling cooking" isn't bad for your health, cigarette's are! That's the distinction. It's always been the distinction.

      • iCandy on 02/01/2023 - 09:22
        -1

        Calm down numpty. Even Indian restaurants call their food curry, I’m aware it means gravy but 100 points for virtue signalling. You missed the point entirely. Once the precedent has been set, other idiosyncratic issues will pop up and may/will also be banned. There are a lot of people who dislike INDIAN FOOD cooking and you better believe they will complain and have that banned. Balcony BBQs are next I’d say, gently boiling all of you frogs who can’t see beyond the precedent being set. SMH.

        • kiriakoz on 02/01/2023 - 11:22

          Nah, I didn't miss the point, the main point (and the cut off point here) is the impact it does to your health. Smoking impacts other people's health, flavoursome food does not.

          The slippery slope argument that you're using has been used against all sorts of things over the years, including immigration and the civil rights movement, stop fearmongering.

        • cadwalader on 02/01/2023 - 20:08
          +1

          I'll gladly keep every single bit of my cooking indoors if I never have to smell cigarette smoke coming in to my apartment.

          If I want to smoke, cook my Indian food outdoors and eat durian outside my house. I'll buy a detached house with a large enough smell buffer.

          • kiriakoz on 02/01/2023 - 20:24

            @cadwalader: But even then, none of those are as bad as smoking because it can lead to cancer. Also, unless you're mental, those will probably only happen every-so-often not more than ten times per day on average like smoking.

            • iCandy on 02/01/2023 - 20:42

              @kiriakoz: Um…Indians cook Indian food every day…

              • kiriakoz on 02/01/2023 - 20:54

                @iCandy: It doesn't all smell the same ffs, they cook with spice blends - if anything, those smells are good for you - garlic, turmeric, ginger, etc all good for your health so smelling them can't possibly be bad.

                It's still not going to be as frequent and as bad as smoking.

              • cadwalader on 02/01/2023 - 23:55

                @iCandy: ten times a day on their balcony? and it has the same health detriments as cigarette smoke?

                • kiriakoz on 03/01/2023 - 10:29

                  @cadwalader: It's okay, now he's deliberately pretending not to understand. If you expect people on the internet to argue in good faith, guess again.

                  • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 12:40

                    @kiriakoz: Its kind of funny watching people try to compare smoking to cooking food and truck on the road.

                    • kiriakoz on 03/01/2023 - 12:43

                      @cadwalader: It's funny but also sad. I hope they're just all biased smokers who are trying to defend their own habit. Otherwise, if it's an indication that this is how they actually think, it's worrying. Even worse, people this unable to think logically are FORCED to vote in elections which means their stupidity impacts me personally.

                    • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 13:21

                      @cadwalader: It’s kind of funny watching people with low IQ who are unable to practise critical thinking…

                      • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 13:27
                        +1

                        @iCandy: cRiTiCaL tHinKiNg i.e "the point" : Smoking = Cooking?

                        "Oh no, they've come for the smokers, now they'll come for the cookers"?

                        • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:25

                          @cadwalader: Yes because it’s NeVeR HaPpEnEd that once a precedent has been set, the precedent is used to expand the ban. You’re just embarrassing yourself now.

                          • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:29

                            @iCandy:

                            Yes because it’s NeVeR HaPpEnEd that once a precedent has been set, the precedent is used to expand the ban

                            Can quote me where I made a point like this?

                            So your point is that banning a thing is possible so banning anything is possible.

                            Damn the first city ruler for creating a precedent for banning a thing..

                            • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:35

                              @cadwalader: Look. Up. The. Meaning. Of. Obtuse. Kiriakoz…I mean Cadwalader…

                              • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:38

                                @iCandy: Is some weird theory that we're the same people and personal attacks the only argument you have left?

                            • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:36

                              @cadwalader: Here you are Kiriakoz

                              "Oh no, they've come for the smokers, now they'll come for the cookers"?

                              • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:42

                                @iCandy: How is smoking anything like cooking?

                                Unless you really fear that since they have banned smoking, they'll also ban body odour, perfumes, scented candles, mowing, mosquito coils and any other smells?

                                • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:43

                                  @cadwalader: Look. It’s been fun but it’s getting boring now. Toodles Kiriakoz/Cadwallader.

                            • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:38

                              @cadwalader: Can you quote me where I said you made a point like this? I’ll wait.

                              • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:45

                                @iCandy:

                                Can you quote me where I said you made a point like this? I’ll wait.

                                Here you go.

                                Yes because it’s NeVeR HaPpEnEd that once a precedent has been set, the precedent is used to expand the ban.

                                So what kind of ban expansion are you worrying about if its not about anything related to smells?

                                • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:46

                                  @cadwalader: Still waiting for you to show me where I said YOU made a point like this.

                                  • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:51

                                    @iCandy:

                                    Yes because it’s NeVeR HaPpEnEd that once a precedent has been set, the precedent is used to expand the ban.

                                    This was your sacarstic response to me saying "Oh no, they've come for the smokers, now they'll come for the cookers"?

                                    So your point was not

                                    once a precedent has been set, the precedent is used to expand the ban

                                    and you don't think that cooking will be banned because smoking was banned? Well then thanks for agreeing

                                    • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:52

                                      @cadwalader: Yes yes, how will I ever recover 🥱

                                      • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:53

                                        @iCandy:

                                        how will I ever recover

                                        How can I answer this question?

                                        • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:56

                                          @cadwalader: You seem to need to have the last word. Knock yourself out!

                                          • cadwalader on 03/01/2023 - 20:59

                                            @iCandy: Once the precedent of having the last word has been set, other idiosyncratic issues will pop up and the last word will need to had. There are a lot of people who dislike not having the last word and you better believe they will make sure they have it. Gently boiling all of you frogs who can’t see beyond the precedent being set. SMH.

                            • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:42

                              @cadwalader: Here’s another

                              Oh no, they've come for the smokers. Now watch out cookers, they'll come for you too.

                • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 13:21

                  @cadwalader: You missed the point too.

                  • kiriakoz on 03/01/2023 - 13:46
                    +1

                    @iCandy: Have you ever considered that the reason people keep missing your point is because you're not very articulate? This is the part where you actually explain it better using English.

                    • iCandy on 03/01/2023 - 20:24

                      @kiriakoz: Nope. You’re just ignorant and obtuse. You might have to look those words up.

                      • kiriakoz on 03/01/2023 - 20:27

                        @iCandy: Oh right, two people have told you that they don't know what you're on about (that's 100% of respondants), and your reply is that WE are "ignorant and obtuse". Sounds like you don't have a point.

      • serpserpserp on 02/01/2023 - 19:21
        +2

        Keen's is so bad.

  • WordsToSayIt on 30/12/2022 - 09:36
    +1

    I understand that smoking can be due to PTSD etc but we need to find a better way to manage. Therapy can be very helpful.

  • UberIsCool on 30/12/2022 - 11:33

    Next up, no more BBQ please, yuk

    • Quantumcat on 30/12/2022 - 11:42
      +3

      At least BBQs on the balcony are only occasionally not several times a day every day.

      • UberIsCool on 30/12/2022 - 11:42
        -1

        Won’t be missed then

    • cheapies2019 on 30/12/2022 - 11:57

      I felt such an immense justice for the court ruling that I went to the Pitt Street Shopping mall and did this. just to take a couple more days off me life.

  • pharkurnell on 30/12/2022 - 12:17
    +2

    Intercourse smoking… it stinks.

    Now to ban 20 people standing outside front door of shopping centers in packs of flogs.

    We cant afford to completely ban it, its idiot tax, and gov co thrives on it.

  • ton1 on 30/12/2022 - 13:09
    +1

    Ahh i remember when you could smoke on planes and no one would complain

    • smartazz104 on 31/12/2022 - 11:11
      +1

      Or when petrol had lead it in and no-one complained; come to think of it, that's why the older generation are the way they are…

  • Ramrunner on 30/12/2022 - 17:34
    -1

    I'm an ex smoker.

    I DO NOT believe smoking on your own balcony should be banned. Any part of premises you own you should be allowed to do whatever you please. This is really becoming way to over authoritive.

    I DO LOVE what New Zealand has done (and Hawaii to an extent) and the eventual and gradually all sales of tobacco to be banned completely. Our govenrment are cowards in that this has not been done yet. Why? No doubt because the enormous tax (money) they make on tobacco they do not want to lose. It's not really used for anything (you really think the Quit campaign is using all the dollars made from taxes effectively???). If they used the money to invent a safe way to smoke or some alternative I'd be all behind it but because they don't I'd rather just abolish smoking alltogether.

    Save our kids.

    BUT

    while smoking is allowed, people should be allowed to do it on their property. It is crazy to allow smoking as legal, but not allow you to smoke on your own private property.

    • Quantumcat on 30/12/2022 - 20:18
      +5

      Maybe you missed the point, but it isn't going to be illegal, just that strata have the ability to ban it. Just like they can ban owning pets or painting your front door orange.

      • Ramrunner on 31/12/2022 - 11:34
        -1

        No I did get that, just probably did not word it well "I DO NOT believe smoking on your own balcony should be banned".

        I should have said "should be able to be banned".

        Point taken though. I think I got my neck hairs up as your private property that you pay for, your "last bastion" so to speak - should remain yours to do with as you please in my opinion. Especially if the product in question (tobacco) is in fact unfortunately still legal to smoke.

        Somebody wrote a comment about smkoing meth on the balcony. THAT should of course not be allowed.

        • Quantumcat on 31/12/2022 - 14:02
          +2

          I think I got my neck hairs up as your private property that you pay for, your "last bastion" so to speak - should remain yours to do with as you please in my opinion.

          The problem is you are affecting someone else's private property, which they should also be allowed to do what they want with. Why should they not be able to use their balcony and have to keep their windows shut at all times, and have their apartment be stuffy and hot like an oven all summer? For something they have had no choice in? If a smoker doesn't like it, they can be the ones to move, or choose to quit.

          Strata have been able to make rules for their units for as long as strata has existed - like I mentioned, they can also decide how you are allowed to decorate the outside of your place, they can restrict what pets you have, how you use common areas, etc. It isn't really any different. When you buy a place with strata you are accepting that your "last bastion" comes with rules. If you don't like those rules you don't have to buy a place in that strata complex.

          • Ramrunner on 31/12/2022 - 16:45
            -2

            @Quantumcat: Look I actually agree with most of what you are saying but we REALLY need to watch this slippery slope.

            When my next door neighbour decides to mow the lawn or chainsaw a tree at 6am in the morning, waking up myself and kids and making it impossible to have a conversation outside under my patio (this happens often), then should I seek help somewhere to get them banned from mowing their lawn or otherwise making a racket? When the honkey nuts shoot up and hit my roof and windows (luckily not enough speed to break them). When his sprinklers pump bore water all over my cars? He's on his property, I'm on mine. But he is affecting my property. I'm not going to ban him, I'll have a beer with him and mention it, have a chat about it. Like we used to do before the internet you know?

            As far as legalities go with strata bans etc. this is my point exactly. Yes, when you buy a place with strata you abide by the rules, if that includes a ban on smoking on the balcony, you quit smoking, or you don't rent/buy there, absolutely. Then you have a choice. However if the rule comes in later and you are established there, I DO NOT think it is fair at all and then I disagree with the whole thing. Whether you like the smoker on not - I don't care how you look at it from a very obvious non smoker viewpoint, he/she also has rights. Simple as that.

            By the way I think you are exagerating. Even though I haven't smoked for a long time, I would absolutely still use my balcony if someone was smoking on another one next door. The vast majority of people I know have windows closed and aircon on so the whole "hot like an oven all summer" is really stretching things too, but I guess to make your point you can make it sound worse.

            You'll be surprised what other pollutants hit your lungs far more than passive smoking too.

            In short I don't disagree with you the possible effect of passive smoking etc, but smokers are not sub-human and have the same rights as you. Fact.

            • Quantumcat on 31/12/2022 - 18:03

              @Ramrunner:

              When my next door neighbour decides to mow the lawn or chainsaw a tree at 6am in the morning, waking up myself and kids and making it impossible to have a conversation outside under my patio (this happens often), then should I seek help somewhere to get them banned from mowing their lawn or otherwise making a racket?

              Do they do this 5-10 times a day? Then yes you would be reasonable in wanting to get it banned. If they just do it once a fortnight, then no. Most smokers do it several times a day, not once a fortnight.

              However if the rule comes in later and you are established there, I DO NOT think it is fair at all

              It would be incredibly unlucky. But there would be a vote of people on the committee before it happened, so if you were on the committee and got out-voted, you'd have to be willing to abide by it since you're in a strata unit as that's the way it works. It would be equally unlucky if you happened to own a dog or cat and they voted no pets, or you wanted to get solar panels and they voted against anyone being allowed to install them. I don't think it is unfair as such, as it is the way things work and you got out-voted. It would be more unfair for the majority of owners who voted for it if the rule didn't come into force.

            • p1 ama on 02/01/2023 - 01:40

              @Ramrunner:

              In short I don't disagree with you the possible effect of passive smoking etc, but smokers are not sub-human and have the same rights as you. Fact.

              This idea that somehow smokers are a social group just doesn't make any sense to me. It's an action, not an innate characteristic of an individual. Having a rule that bans smoking on balconies is not "discriminating against smokers" anymore than speed limits are "discriminating against drivers" and noise ordinances are "discriminating against musicians". The rule applies equally to everyone and addresses an action, not an innate characteristic.

              He's on his property, I'm on mine. But he is affecting my property. I'm not going to ban him, I'll have a beer with him and mention it, have a chat about it. Like we used to do before the internet you know?

              The funny thing is, what you're already describing is already banned, so please do your research before just spewing facts like you know what you are talking about.

              https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/questions/times-for-lawn-…

              Noise from mowing and power tools are only allowed from 8am to 8pm on Sundays and public holidays, and 7am to 8pm on other days.

              You may be completely right that these rules are not properly enforced, however, smoking bans will also not be either, so it's horses for courses, right?

              The idea that we've only begun banning things recently is bollocks - we've had regulations on what we can and can't do in social settings since the stone age. Contrary to what you're saying, we have actually reduced regulations on what you can and can't do over time - the world has actually become more laisse-faire and accepting. Yes, we have increased regulation in some areas, but as a society, there is overall far less regulation.

    • Alzori on 01/01/2023 - 00:06
      +1

      So… I can theoretically install an air raid siren on my balcony? Because it's my property and I can do what I want on it? Nothing I'm doing is outside my balcony, so…

  • Assburg on 31/12/2022 - 04:11
    -3

    I hope everyone in this thread who is upset by smoking doesn't drink alcohol, doesn't drive a car, doesn't have noisy kids, has never left the house without brushing their teeth, doesn't wear too much deo, etc

    I smoke less than once a month, not a drinker, no kids, ride a bicycle, etc., Minimal impact on other people's lives but… You just gotta accept nobody's perfect and living in a city means putting up with other people's imperfections. You're not forced to live in the city, just like they're not forced to smoke.

    People in this thread seem like they'd be less offended if they lived next to a serial killer or a child sex offender, as long as they do their business with the windows closed.

    • Motek Benzona on 31/12/2022 - 11:10
      -2

      Probably the most sensible post in amongst all the rants from those who want to control others.

      "Well we’ve finally made it" is an indicitive statement of a nosey control freak who assumes everyone thinks the same as them or should do the same as them.
      Its a 21st century curse, your comment gets an upvote from me.

    • bargaino on 31/12/2022 - 11:38
      +4

      Maybe you have to accept some restrictions. Just as you can't ride your bicycle on a freeway or down the corridor of your flats, you can't blow smoke in other people's faces. Even most smokers don't smoke inside their own homes anymore. They know it is a disgusting, filthy habit, and have the decency to feel shame.

      • mirovich on 31/12/2022 - 11:41
        -1

        Feel shame? Lol. Get off your high horse.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join