Opinion

The City of Los Angeles et al. appeal from an order granting a preliminary injunction restraining enforcement of Los Angeles Municipal Code section 45.19.

The ordinance in question regulates the display to minors of drug paraphernalia for sale. In pertinent part the ordinance makes it unlawful for a person in charge of a business establishment to knowingly allow a minor, not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian, to enter and remain within any room where drug paraphernalia is displayed for sale. Drug paraphernalia is defined as “any device designed primarily for use” for smoking or ingesting certain substances. The ordinance further defines the phrase “designed primarily for” and also specifically includes certain named and described devices.

The trial court’s primary reason for issuing a preliminary injunction was the court’s doubt as to the constitutionality of the ordinance, on grounds of vagueness.

In Music Plus Four, Inc. v. Barnet (1980) 114 Cal.App.3d 113, 125-129 [ 170 Cal.Rptr. 419 ], the court held that an essentially similar ordinance of the City of Westminster was not unconstitutionally vague.

The. City of Los Angeles ordinance in the instant case is far more specific than the Westminster ordinance, and thus respondents cannot successfully contend that it is unconstitutionally vague.

As alternative grounds for upholding the injunction, respondents argue that the ordinance violates due process on the ground it is not rationally related to a permissible state purpose, infringes upon freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment of the United States Con stitution, and violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection of the law. These arguments were all rejected in Barnet , and the Supreme Court denied hearing. (Id., at pp. 121-132.)

For the reasons iñdicated in Barnet , which was also an appeal from a preliminary injunction, the trial court erred in enjoining enforcement of the Los Angeles ordinance.

The order granting a preliminary injunction is reversed.

Stephens, Acting P. J., and Hastings, J., concurred.

The petition of respondent Music Plus Four, Inc. for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied January 13, 1982. Kaus, J., did not participate therein.

Appendix

“An ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to regulate the display of drug paraphernalia to minors.

“WHEREAS, sales displays of drug paraphernalia to minors can encourage the acquisition, experimentation with, and use thereof by such minors to their ultimate harm, and can create misunderstandings among them with respect to the safety and acceptability of drug use; and

“WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that the health and safety of minors be protected; and

“WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of minors that their exposure to sales displays of drug paraphernalia be also known to their parents and legal guardians in order that said parents and guardians may be better able to provide cautionary counsel to those minors in their charge with respect to the effects of the use thereof, and of drug involvement resulting therefrom;

The full text of the ordinance is attached to this opinion as an appendix.