Would you tell a lie to save a cat?

On 3/23/2015 7:39 PM, Lesley Madigan wrote:
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 7:24:30 PM UTC, jmcquown wrote:
But I am a considerate smoker.

and many people have a problem with that concept. Many years ago
I was trying to get into a game that the ref was holding at his home
and he said he'd love to have me play but I smoke and his son has asthma
so he couldn't invite me into his home.

Why on earth not if you were not going to smoke anywhere near?

I was backed up by four rabid non-smokers who all said the same thing
they'd had me in their houses and said I'd never smoked in their houses
(Well I wouldn't would I?

I don't think you would. Just as I would't. I never smoked a cigarette
even outside on a non-smoker's patio or balcony unless I asked first and
was told by the host/hostess of a gathering "Smoking is allowed
outside." As I said, I try to be respectful. All they have to do is
say "no".

Their house their rules

Yes indeed. I remember going to a party (this was a lot of years ago,
at least 25, but a funny memory) with a guy friend. He didn't want to
go stag (so to speak) to this party. It was held in a very nice house.
The downstairs bathroom was the designated "smoking area". I have no
idea why; from what I remember there was an open patio or a deck (or
maybe both) off the kitchen but that was not the smoker's area.

Anyway, when I craved a cigarette I did ask where the smoking area was.
I was pointed to a rather large but what turned out to be enclosed
bathroom. Oh, there was a little vanity area. But no ventilation that
I recall. And lots of women nice clothes smoking cigarettes.

The guy who brought me to the party tracked down us smokers down said,
"So this is where you're all hiding!" He lit up a cigarette and said,
"I knew I'd find the smoking room."

Weird that the people throwing the party didn't have the smoking area
outside with some fresh air. Rather trapped us in a supposed to be
impressive American bathroom.

if I'd wanted a cigarette I went outside to smoke but this guy was
convinced I'd cross this threshold and light up then presumably blow
smoke in his son's face

Sounds like a bit of a crazy person. Definl

Slave of the Fabulous Furballs

Well, I do believe I have always been a considerate smoker. I have
never consciously blown smoke in anyone's face.

Jill

wrote:
On 3/20/2015 11:45 AM, Christina Websell wrote:
"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-18 10:52 PM, Christina Websell wrote:
"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-11 6:30 PM, Lesley Madigan wrote:
When my mum was buying a place it had a "no pets" clause. She explained
that she was currently looking after my brothers cat (He been sent to
New
York by his company for 3-4 months and this was before the pet passport
scheme so if he took his cat with him then at the end of that time when
he came back to the UK he would have had to put Schroedinger in
quarantine for 6 months)

They told her the reason for the clause was if there was an
irresponsible
pet owner like say someone who let their dogs out when they went to
work
of a morning and left them to run around all day then they could use
it.
They had no problem with an indoor only cat

I was told by many people that no one took these rules seriously and no
one would even notice an extra cat. But it would only take one
disgruntled
or spiteful neighbour - perhaps one who disliked or was allergic to
cats -
who pointed out to the board the existence of a second cat to put me in
the legal position of having to either get rid of one of my cats or move
out. I didn't want to be vulnerable to that sort of thing (or to lie
about
my cats).

That sort of thing happens, even without legal justification. There was
a
local media article a little while ago about people who were trying to
force a neighbour to stop smoking even though the building rules allowed
smoking in the units (although not in the common areas) and the
neighbour
had voluntarily agreed to smoke only on his balcony.

Cheryl

so what could be worse? having a second cat or being a smoker?
Could you be thrown out for either?



Which is worse and what would happen would depend on the terms of the
lease or the building rules. In the case of the smoker there weren't any
rules against him smoking inside his apartment or on his balcony, but his
neighbour wanted him to stop anyway, and, not having any way to force him
to change, tried to do so by embarrassing him publicly. I don't know what
happened in the end.

Cheryl

If smoking is allowed, a neighbour has no right to subject *his* neighbour
to public embarrassment for smoking in his own apartment. IMO. What next?
I don't like how you dress??
I have my own house and I can do what I want, within reason, including
smoking. I don't smoke but surely you can smoke in your own home even if
it's rented.

I can do so much as I want here that I can keep pigs if I want to .
Haven't. That's one of the reasons why I don't want to move to a bungalow.
Smoking in a house is not going to have an effect on someone who doesn't
enter the house. Smoking in an apartment can effect those in adjoining
apartments. The way you dress may offend, but it doesn't hurt anybody.
Second hand smoke not only can hurt, it can kill.
You may be able to keep pigs where you are, but there are a good many
places where you can't keep farm animals at your home.
Aside from the fact that smoking is what killed my husband, I find that
a great many smokers are totally inconsiderate of others. I am very
happy that I currently know very few people who smoke. I would be very
happy if all tobacco disappeared from the world.
--
Joy Unlimited
Colorful Crocheted Critters
Photos at http://www.PictureTrail.com/joy9

Back in the 70's, when I smoked, if someone asked me nicely to put it out, I was more than happy too. When someone screamed at me, which did happen occasionally, I told them what they could do, where they could go, while I blew smoke in their face.
--
:-)
Don't let the Zombies get you!!!!

My God is better than your god!!!!

On 3/23/2015 4:10 PM, Jack Campin wrote:
Smoking in a house is not going to have an effect on someone who doesn't
enter the house. Smoking in an apartment can effect those in adjoining
apartments. The way you dress may offend, but it doesn't hurt anybody.
Second hand smoke not only can hurt, it can kill.

It isn't just second hand smoke.

I once lived in an Edinburgh tenement with a smoker in the first
floor of the stair next door. He made a habit of smoking in bed.
He died and the next door stair was uninhabitable for a few weeks.
Our stair escaped with just reeking of smoke for months.

The fire station was only a minute's drive away. If it had been
much further, everybody in the stair next door would have died and
my flat would have gone.

Most fire deaths in the UK are caused by smoking. In a significant
proportion of them it isn't the smoker who dies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Cross_fire

I don't know the US stats but I've always had a rule - no smoking in the
bedrooms. My house, my apartment, whatever - no getting into bed and
lighting up. Same rule for any guests who stayed over.

Jill

"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On 2015-03-11 10:43 AM, dgk wrote:

I remember reading something like this concerning a will - the cat's
caretaker was allowed to live in a lavish home as long as the cat was
alive. After 30 years or something the bank began to be suspicious,
and sure enough, whenever the cat died the guy got another one that
looked like it.

I'm actually moving into a Home Owner's Association thing where we
have to obey the rules, and one rather odd rule is that you can have
one pet that is up to 20 lbs, or two that total 25. It really is
referring to dogs, but I'm not going to make a fuss about it.

The only real issue is that I was considering bringing an outside cat
named Baby. But I'm leaving instructions with my neighbor that if they
have to move, or anything medical happens to Baby, or if her mother
(Jet) dies, I'm going to come back and get Baby. That will give me
four.

When I made my big move to an apartment-type condo, one of my requirements
while looking was I would only look at placed that pets were permitted. I
rapidly discovered that buildings that did allow pets generally allowed
only one - so when I found a place I was seriously interested in, I put as
a condition on my offer that the board must permit me to have two cats.
They agreed, and I have it in writing.

Many of the building residents have pets - cats are less obvious, but I
often meet people bringing dogs in or out - the rules say a "fish, bird,
one cat or dog of reasonable size...". Clearly "reasonable" is a matter of
interpretation; there's a dog that looks to me like a husky in one of the
apartments on my floor; a nice animal.

Now, just over a year later, I'm really happy with my move, and glad I
found such a pet-friendly building.

Cheryl

I would not want to rent. It means you cannot do what you want.

"Takayuki" wrote in message
...
Only hoomins are negligent enough to leave such hazards lying around, so
we
all owe him reparations.
It took a while to find out " who done it* and it was not me.
Or him.

Christina Websell wrote:

I would not want to rent. It means you cannot do what you want.

In the U.S., if you have the misfortune of OWNING where there is a
Homeowners Association, you can't either! Many of them began because a
development had common areas - like swimming pools - that required
maintenance. Unfortunately some HOA members have a power complex - they
want to impose their notions on everyone else. (They seem to be very
prevalent in Arizona, where even if you own a good sized piece of
property, you cannot do what you want - meaning planting trees and
landscaping according to your own tastes.)

On 3/25/2015 3:49 PM, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


Christina Websell wrote:

I would not want to rent. It means you cannot do what you want.

In the U.S., if you have the misfortune of OWNING where there is a
Homeowners Association, you can't either! Many of them began because a
development had common areas - like swimming pools - that required
maintenance. Unfortunately some HOA members have a power complex - they
want to impose their notions on everyone else. (They seem to be very
prevalent in Arizona, where even if you own a good sized piece of
property, you cannot do what you want - meaning planting trees and
landscaping according to your own tastes.)

You're right, Evelyn. My mother left me this house, which I own
outright. But because of the HOA (Home Owner's Association) there are
lots of things I can't do without permission. If I want to paint the
outside of my house I have to get approval from the board. Only certain
shades are allowed. Good thing I don't want to paint my house bright
purple because they'd turn me down flat.

Some things we have the option of voting for or against. Next year
we're getting a new swimming pool, which I voted against. The ayes won,
however. That damn pool is going to cost $1,555,000. (That's
£1,045,849). So, everyone who owns a home here will be assessed an
extra $1530 to pay for the new pool. Guess I'll have to find some
really strong sunblock and learn how to swim so I can recoup my money.

I really loved my last apartment and so did Persia! This was it:

http://www.apartmentguide.com/apartm...io-Homes/1559/

The great thing about renting was I didn't have to pay for routine
maintenance. Such as lawn care. Or broken appliances, which they
supplied. Said appliances included the refrigerator, stove, dishwasher,
washer & dryer, water heater, HVAC (heating/ventilation/air
conditioning). If any of those things broke they'd repair or replace
them. (I lived there 11 years so I know they were very good about that
sort of thing.) They also supplied and replaced the smoke alarm
batteries and HVAC filters several times a year. The cost was built
into the monthly rent. As a home owner, I have to take care of all
those things myself. That's on top of paying monthly HOA fees.

Jill

On 3/25/2015 12:49 PM, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


Christina Websell wrote:

I would not want to rent. It means you cannot do what you want.

In the U.S., if you have the misfortune of OWNING where there is a
Homeowners Association, you can't either! Many of them began because a
development had common areas - like swimming pools - that required
maintenance. Unfortunately some HOA members have a power complex - they
want to impose their notions on everyone else. (They seem to be very
prevalent in Arizona, where even if you own a good sized piece of
property, you cannot do what you want - meaning planting trees and
landscaping according to your own tastes.)

There was a court case here in California last year (or maybe the year
before) because a HOA told one of the homeowners he couldn't fly his
American flag because his flagpole was too high to met HOA regulations.
He won the case, but most people just give in, or move.

--
Joy Unlimited
Colorful Crocheted Critters
Photos at http://www.PictureTrail.com/joy9

Joy wrote:
On 3/25/2015 12:49 PM, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:

There was a court case here in California last year (or maybe the year
before) because a HOA told one of the homeowners he couldn't fly his
American flag because his flagpole was too high to met HOA regulations.
He won the case, but most people just give in, or move.

I'd probably have been just contrary enough to fly a Confederate flag
(or British or French or Canadian) without altering the height of the
flagpole!

"Sylvia M" wrote in message
...


As a former smoker, who quit Many years ago, when I catch a whiff of
smoke, like in a patio of a restaurant,(where smoking may be allowed) I
tend to inhale ;-)

Sylvia

Me too. I've given up tobacco since November 2014.