Smoking banned inside apartments in San Francisco — unless it’s cannabis
According to analysis, secondhand smoke causes more than 41,000 Americans a year
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.San Francisco residents will soon be banned from smoking inside apartments after a ban was backed in a vote — but with one exception.
Residents will still be able to smoke cannabis indoors, according to the ban, which was passed by The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.
Supervisors voted 10-1 on the proposals, which were introduced by the board’s president, Norman Yee.
The ban prohibits smoking tobacco inside buildings with three or more apartments and in all common areas, while cannabis — both medial and non medial — are permitted.
Activists had argued that banning cannabis would take away their only legal place to smoke the substance, which is banned in public places in the Bay Area, ABC News reported.
Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who wrote the amendment to exempt cannabis, said: “Unlike tobacco smokers who could still leave their apartments to step out to the curb or smoke in other permitted outdoor smoking areas, cannabis users would have no such legal alternatives.”
Mr Yee, meanwhile, thanked supervisors who supported the ban in a Twitter post, and wrote he was happy to see San Francisco residents protected from secondhand smoke.
“Secondhand smoke causes harm, and everyone should have clean air to breathe where they live,” he added.
San Francisco becomes the sixty-third Californian city to introduce such a ban, according to ABC News, while smoking tobacco was already banned in most public spaces.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), tobacco smoke claims more than 480,000 American lives a year, with more than 41,000 deaths caused by secondhand smoke exposure.
Anyone who violates the San Francisco ban could face a $1,000 charge once the ban is backed in a second vote next week, which board supervisors are expected to do.
The proposals would then become law 30 days later.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments