I’m sure that considering my audience the answer to this question is probably a resounding, “NO!” from the majority of you, however the question is currently being reviewed in California courts right now. I’ll be honest, as someone that lives in an apartment in California I also would prefer that this new bill doesn’t go through, but after looking into it more and more I’ve started to change my tune. While protecting the rights of cannabis consumers is incredibly important to me, especially for those people that are patients, I’m starting to think that this bill is fairly reasonable. Hopefully by the end of this article you’ll come to see it that way too.
The proposed bill isn’t so much of an attack on medical marijuana patients as it is a way to protect the rights and health of families that might be living in very close proximities. California already has laws in place that give a landlord the right to evict someone for smoking tobacco inside of their apartments and this bill looks to clarify that should include marijuana as well. We all know that secondhand tobacco smoke is a major health hazard, not to mention borderline disgusting, but it is getting harder to deny that secondhand cannabis smoke isn’t much better for your health. A recent study in California indicated that secondhand cannabis smoke can cause cardiovascular effects similar to secondhand tobacco smoke. There was a notable drop in blood vessel function in the study’s participants. Whether or not that is entirely true is still up for debate, but it is hard to deny that non smokers and children could easily be bothered by the smell of too many joints in one day. I already go outside to smoke as a courtesy, but when the weather is as consistent as it is in LA, I guess that’s a convenience I have that others might not. The bill is actually fairly reasonable because it still permits tenants to consume edibles or capsules within their residence.
Many medical marijuana advocacy groups in the state seem to agree that the demands aren’t too unreasonable as well, because most are remaining neutral on the subject. The one addition to the bill that they hope to include is the exception of vaporizers that have not shown to have the same negative secondhand effects. Admittedly while I smoke outside, I still dab in my apartment and would hope that the lawmakers could recognize the big distinction between the two. In many ways landlords already have this right, but this bill would cement it into law. With the way things are looking, I think we can expect it to be codified very soon.