What's that Smell?

[Trausti]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

On what legal precedent you to base the right to limit the rights of others to smoke pot?

The agreed terms for living in the building would be the obvious. Smoking pot on the premises was a breach. Don't like that term, don't live there.

 

[ronburgundy]

I'd add that you could sue your neighbor if his pot cloud rained on your property. It's considered a trespass. Usually involves animal stink and dung, but the analogy would be easy to make. Don't need an ordinance.

You do need an ordinance and you have no rational principle on which to base it. It is no different than the smell of a fireplace or a BBQ. Only an ordinance that would make those also illegal would justify making pot smell illegal.

In fact, if anything the amount of actual neighbor impacting carcinogens associated with a fireplace or BBQ are likely higher than smellable pot. Thus, it would be more justified to make those illegal and not pot smell.

 

[ronburgundy]

On what legal basis should pot smell be treated any different than perfume (far more vile IMO), the smell of BBQ, curry, a fireplace, etc.?

A neighbor smoking pot gives you a brief exposure to an odor no more intense than odor from these things that last as long or often many times longer.

Unless its going to be illegal for people to grill out or use their fireplace, cook strong smelling foods, or simply plant flowers, then it cannot be illegal for your neighbors to occassionally smell your weed.

I don't think people have the right to stink up the neighborhood regardless of the nature of the stink.

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

Well, fireplaces and BBQs cause objectively as much "stink" as a dozen pot heads. The moment any one of my 10 nearest neighbors lights their grill or fireplace, I can smell it. So, any ordinance that would be applicable to pot smoking other than maybe a 50 person non-stop commune of potheads, would have to make grilling and fireplaces illegal pretty much under all circumstances, and probably flower beds too, or cooking with spices.

Bottom line is that people do many things every day that the neighbors can smell, and the law would laugh most such complaints out of courts and no cop would issue a ticket. That means that smelling pot would not serve as any reasonable basis for a complaint. IT would have to something very unusually extreme and constant that goes beyond any of these other types of "stinks".

 

[AthenaAwakened]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

On what legal precedent you to base the right to limit the rights of others to smoke pot?

The agreed terms for living in the building would be the obvious. Smoking pot on the premises was a breach. Don't like that term, don't live there.

We aren't talking about private property with an HOA agreement but neighbors with no agreement among themselve outside standard public law. And we are also talking about ONE SPECIFIC smell. Why not all foul odors? Plus how does one formulate a workable and specific definition of the word FOUL? Do you just know it when you smell it?

 

[untermensche]

We aren't talking about private property with an HOA agreement but neighbors with no agreement among themselve outside standard public law. And we are also talking about ONE SPECIFIC smell. Why not all foul odors? Plus how does one formulate a workable and specific definition of the word FOUL? Do you just know it when you smell it?

You would need some kind of objective evidence.

The police will have smell detectors.

Trained dogs.

 

[Trausti]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

On what legal precedent you to base the right to limit the rights of others to smoke pot?

The agreed terms for living in the building would be the obvious. Smoking pot on the premises was a breach. Don't like that term, don't live there.

We aren't talking about private property with an HOA agreement but neighbors with no agreement among themselve outside standard public law. And we are also talking about ONE SPECIFIC smell. Why not all foul odors? Plus how does one formulate a workable and specific definition of the word FOUL? Do you just know it when you smell it?

Sue your neighbor (people do that all the time). If the jury agrees that pot is foul, that's that.

 

[Trausti]

Pig odor lawsuits: http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/05/corporate_hog_farm_loses_lawsuit_missouri.php

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Pig odor lawsuits: http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/05/corporate_hog_farm_loses_lawsuit_missouri.php

Hmmm

Let's go deeper shall we?

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Smithfield Foods said it had set aside $39 million to cover litigation costs in Missouri. Set aside a third of that for attorneys' fees and costs, and it works out to about $90,000 for each defendant.

Sounds like a lot, especially considering that many of the plaintiffs are members of the same families. But consider what they're giving up for their $90,000.

If you live downwind from a facility that processes hundreds of thousands of hogs a year, the value of your home is approximately zero. You can still farm the land but good luck selling the house.

Under the terms of a bill passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2011 and signed into law by Gov. Jay Nixon, CAFOs are designated as "permanent nuisances," not "continuing nuisances." Being a permanent nuisance actually works to Premium Standard's benefit.

Future plaintiffs will get one shot in court, not multiple shots year after year. Plaintiffs can recover only the fair market value of their property, plus whatever punitive damages a court might award.

In effect, the law granted eminent domain authority to CAFOs and chose Big Pig over small farmers, or at least over the small farmers who don't raise pigs for Premium Standard.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinio...cle_d62b8bf9-2558-5266-8ccc-cc9051223bc5.html

So Actually, the lawsuits, even with the awards, wound up protecting the hog farms, allowing them to continue stinking, and limiting the rights of plaintiffs to sue.

Since the Hog Farm correlates to the pot smokers and the plaintiffs to the offended parties, if this is the case law you use, the pot smoker would be fined once and thereafter could smoke till the cows come home and the never have to pay another nickel, never have to worry about curtailing any behavior after that.

You wouldn't happen to have any LEGISLATIVE law that gives you the right to never to smell bad odors, do you?

 

[arkirk]

Hmmm

Let's go deeper shall we?

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Smithfield Foods said it had set aside $39 million to cover litigation costs in Missouri. Set aside a third of that for attorneys' fees and costs, and it works out to about $90,000 for each defendant.

Sounds like a lot, especially considering that many of the plaintiffs are members of the same families. But consider what they're giving up for their $90,000.

If you live downwind from a facility that processes hundreds of thousands of hogs a year, the value of your home is approximately zero. You can still farm the land but good luck selling the house.

Under the terms of a bill passed by the Missouri Legislature in 2011 and signed into law by Gov. Jay Nixon, CAFOs are designated as "permanent nuisances," not "continuing nuisances." Being a permanent nuisance actually works to Premium Standard's benefit.

Future plaintiffs will get one shot in court, not multiple shots year after year. Plaintiffs can recover only the fair market value of their property, plus whatever punitive damages a court might award.

In effect, the law granted eminent domain authority to CAFOs and chose Big Pig over small farmers, or at least over the small farmers who don't raise pigs for Premium Standard.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinio...cle_d62b8bf9-2558-5266-8ccc-cc9051223bc5.html

So Actually, the lawsuits, even with the awards, wound up protecting the hog farms, allowing them to continue stinking, and limiting the rights of plaintiffs to sue.

Since the Hog Farm correlates to the pot smokers and the plaintiffs to the offended parties, if this is the case law you use, the pot smoker would be fined once and thereafter could smoke till the cows come home and the never have to pay another nickel, never have to worry about curtailing any behavior after that.

You wouldn't happen to have any LEGISLATIVE law that gives you the right to never to smell bad odors, do you?

Water rights settlements look a lot like that too if they happen in our courts. The plaintiffs are suing because they are begging for relief. The bad guys just go to court to buy the right to continue what they are doing. Nobody ever says STOP! Often these settlements have confidentiality components as well.

 

[bleubird]

A bit after Alaska passed a new MJ law last Nov.There was an increase of customers that commented on the smell of people that were carrying MJ.Hell! I can judge the shit by the stink.I am 63 and have seen a lot of the evolution of MJ.
Yes,we need to learn how to respect others,but for me mobile phones rudeness is a much bigger problem.

And if you never had good bud,than just shut the fuck up!

 

[Malintent]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

a nuisance is a nuisance. Legally, an odor can be considered a form of trespass. ANY offensive smell can be considered pollution or trespassing. If you cannot reasonably escape an odor coming from a neighbor, then they are technically committing a form of trespass. It does not have to be pot smoke (which does not smell bad to me at all, by the way), but can be anything. So, I agree that you are within your rights to insist they take greater care to not trespass on you with their emanations.... but Pot smoke is no different than anything else that has a strong or distinctive odor.

Also, I would just like to say that while I do not object to the smell of pot... the smell of cigarette smoke is very offensive to me... and FAR more prevalent... so where is the ordinance on that known carcinogenic horrible smell?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

 

[ronburgundy]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

Few regard anything on your list as offensive at the levels neighbors normally experience it.

 

[Potoooooooo]

It might just be a stretched out wolf
http://io9.com/this-stretched-out-wolfs-pee-smells-like-marijuana-1707801636

 

[ronburgundy]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

Few regard anything on your list as offensive at the levels neighbors normally experience it.

Irrelevant. Offensive is a purely personal and subjective judgement. If I say it offends me then its offensive and a nuisance to me.

 

[Trausti]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

Few regard anything on your list as offensive at the levels neighbors normally experience it.

Irrelevant. Offensive is a purely personal and subjective judgement. If I say it offends me then its offensive and a nuisance to me.

Don't think it'd be difficult convincing a jury that pot falls in the offensive category. Though I'd say that how close you are to your neighbors matters, too. In residences that are close together, like condos and apartments, this would seem more a trespass than scattered houses in the suburbs.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

Few regard anything on your list as offensive at the levels neighbors normally experience it.

But he does find the list of things offensive. Or is there a number of offended people that is a cutoff for was is and is not officially offensive?

 

[Malintent]

And you base this limitation of rights on what?

I doubt one pot smoker would be an issue. A bunch of pot-heads, though, are another matter.

So what is your beef? What real world scenario do you find that frightens you?

In live in WA, which has decriminalized pot. The folks in the unit below began having pot parties on their patio. The smoke seeped up and invaded other units, especially mine. Closing the windows didn't help. I could not avoid the constant stench and it gave me headaches. I didn't want to be "that guy," but when it appeared this was not a one off event but a nightly ritual, I informed management and they sent out a blanket reminder that the rules prohibited pot use in the building. It's wonderful to be self-righteous about limiting other rights to do what they want, until it happens to you. It really sucks. If your neighbor took to raising hogs and let the pleasant smell of manure piles carrying over into your house, would you be okay with it?

Exactly.

To paraphrase an old saying: Your right to stink ends where my nose begins.


Note that I feel differently about pre-existing nuisances. You don't get to move next to a farm and complain about the animals. You don't get to move next to an airport and complain about the noise.

So, for the nth time, do you agree that I have as much right to prevent you from using your fireplace, cooking indian food, or planting flowers, as you do from preventing me from smoking pot in a manner that you can smell? What about cutting your lawn? That is as strong and distinctive as pot smell.

Few regard anything on your list as offensive at the levels neighbors normally experience it.

Irrelevant. Offensive is a purely personal and subjective judgement. If I say it offends me then its offensive and a nuisance to me.

This is true...offense is in the eye of the beholder. Luckily, though, no one has the right to not be offended. It all comes down to reasonableness... The local culture gets to decide what is reasonable... and sometime a jury is needed to determine what that is.

 

[prideandfall]

Irrelevant. Offensive is a purely personal and subjective judgement. If I say it offends me then its offensive and a nuisance to me.

true, but also irrelevant.
as so many people (especially around on these forums, especially lately) are apt to forget to ignore, as much as you may want to believe we're all unique snowflakes swirling in a dance for our own making, we're just a heaving collection of grunting animals, and thus your personal opinion has as close to no importance whatsoever as it's statistically possible to get.

it doesn't matter if you find the smell of pot tolerable, or if you hate the smell of BBQ - just as it doesn't matter if i find the sound of a baby crying to be infinitely more intolerable than the sound of loud music or a dog barking.
just because a couple individuals think their opinions matter doesn't mean that there is enough people sharing that opinion to make laws out of it, and some of you whiners are just going to have to learn to accept that.