• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Smoking Illegal With Children In Car[W:501]

Do you agree with ban on smoking inside cars with children?


  • Total voters
    84
I voted other. I don't think it should be illegal for the simple "slippery slope" argument. If we are going tostart making stupid things illegal we are going to need to hire a lot more cops, judges, lawyers, prison guards, etc, etc, etc


yeah it's a bad idea and stupid to be smoking in the car with kids, but so are a lot of other things. my problem is with who gets to choose which stupidity is illegal and which is not.
 
I voted other. I don't think it should be illegal for the simple "slippery slope" argument. If we are going tostart making stupid things illegal we are going to need to hire a lot more cops, judges, lawyers, prison guards, etc, etc, etc


yeah it's a bad idea and stupid to be smoking in the car with kids, but so are a lot of other things. my problem is with who gets to choose which stupidity is illegal and which is not.

True. Good point. I don't see any way to police people who are smoking with children in their cars unless it's coincidental. Same with seat belts.
 
I responded other for a simple reason - I fully agree that people who insist on smoking shouldn't do so in the presence of children, particularly when those children have no way to escape second hand smoke. I object, however, to the government micromanaging citizen use of a legal product. People, unfortunately, aren't always smart enough to do what's right. However, tobacco products have been proven, beyond a doubt, to be a significant cause of many cancers and the cause of untold deaths. I find it incredible that government continues to legalize a known killer solely because it produces significant tax revenue. They quickly take other known carcinogens out of circulation - but those don't bring $billions into government coffers.

At least cigarette use is falling in this country. Hopefully it will be almost entirely gone in 20 years.
 
I voted other. I did so because it is plain to me that the anti smoking crusade has led to hyperbolic claims about the effects of secondhand smoke. While I think it is very likely there is some effect, it is difficult to wade through what passes for analysis of the studies. The crusaders have ruined their credibility. As a consequence, I am having difficulty determining whether the danger posed is comparable to having your children live in a polluted city or ... what, exactly. And, no, I don't think that ANY amount of danger warrants a law.

For the record, I quit smoking (again) 2 years ago. I quit because I didn't like the effect on my body and mood day to day. I sincerely hope it was the last time I quit.
 
I'm guessing enforcement is not a top priority. Not worried.

I did so because it is plain to me that the anti smoking crusade has led to hyperbolic claims about the effects of secondhand smoke.

I don't smoke, but I think many non-smokers are God damned ******s. While an undergraduate, I got to hear all sorts of nonsense from Minnesotan liberals about the harmful effects of second-hand smoke with incredibly strong wind gusts and large open spaces. The mere act of being behind a smoker was so horrible as to demand that no one do it. Of course, when it's -30, the only poor souls that are outside (apparently filling the air with harmful carcinogens) are smokers, huddling together around the heated glow of their cigarettes.
 
I'm guessing enforcement is not a top priority. Not worried.



I don't smoke, but I think many non-smokers are God damned ******s. While an undergraduate, I got to hear all sorts of nonsense from Minnesotan liberals about the harmful effects of second-hand smoke with incredibly strong wind gusts and large open spaces. The mere act of being behind a smoker was so horrible as to demand that no one do it. Of course, when it's -30, the only poor souls that are outside smoking (apparently filling the air with harmful carcinogens) are smokers, huddling together around the heated glow of their cigarettes.

Yeah, but this is about smoking inside your car with a baby or children. Some dumb people even keep the windows rolled up and fish bowl the car with cigarette smoke. That HAS to have some effect on health. I agree though that a law is probably not going to be effective at all.
 
Keep the window cracked. Good enough.

Modern automobiles, beginning with Saab, way back in 1961, have had flow-thru ventilation....so, if this is "good enough", I do not know. Parents who love their children simply will NOT smoke in their presence,,,but,,,love cannot be legislated....can it ???
Don't our police have enough to do ?
BTW, I doubt if a "cracked open" window will be sufficient.
 
I guess we just have to accept the fact that some people are idiots and they are going to have children.
 
Yeah, but this is about smoking inside your car with a baby or children. Some dumb people even keep the windows rolled up and fish bowl the car with cigarette smoke. That HAS to have some effect on health. I agree though that a law is probably not going to be effective at all.

Think about it though... living in NYC its just bad just walking outside some days. LA the same thing. Bakersfield, Phoenix, Pittsburgh.... There are still cities where the air quality is so bad it is some of the worst air in the nation. Isn't it a bit hypocritical for some states to create new laws about smoking in cars when just living in their cities is like smoking a pack a day? Funny thing about air quality... according to Health Magazine, 6 out of the 13 worst cities with air pollution is one of the most regulated States - California.
 
Yeah, but this is about smoking inside your car with a baby or children. Some dumb people even keep the windows rolled up and fish bowl the car with cigarette smoke. That HAS to have some effect on health. I agree though that a law is probably not going to be effective at all.

That's why I said enforcement is not going to be a priority, so I would not be worried about enforcement, resources being used to deal with this (as opposed to seat belt use), and so forth.
 
Think about it though... living in NYC its just bad just walking outside some days. LA the same thing. Bakersfield, Phoenix, Pittsburgh.... There are still cities where the air quality is so bad it is some of the worst air in the nation. Isn't it a bit hypocritical for some states to create new laws about smoking in cars when just living in their cities is like smoking a pack a day? Funny thing about air quality... according to Health Magazine, 6 out of the 13 worst cities with air pollution is one of the most regulated States - California.

I don't know if smoking in the car with the windows rolled up is as bad for a baby as breathing the air in a polluted city, and common sense would tend to tell me that it isn't as bad, when you can see that the baby is inhaling pretty much all smoke while inside the fish bowled car. That's disgusting!
 
Government is getting way too far into our lives
 
That's why I said enforcement is not going to be a priority, so I would not be worried about enforcement, resources being used to deal with this (as opposed to seat belt use), and so forth.

Well if people know they aren't going to enforce it, then what's the point anyway?
 
I'm not saying you should be able to smoke anywhere and everywhere, but a car is private property. That's only a step away from saying you can't smoke in your house.

True, IMO, absolutely true.
The trouble is, love cannot be legislated.
Or, am I wrong and ignorance is the problem...which also cannot be legal/illegal.
Education is the answer, and this CAN be improved by the law-makers.
 
Well if people know they aren't going to enforce it, then what's the point anyway?

Sometimes people think regulations passed, regardless of implementation are good. I am not among them, unless in the future we can get enforcement later on. With regard to smoking regulations, I am generally opposed.
 
I don't know if smoking in the car with the windows rolled up is as bad for a baby as breathing the air in a polluted city, and common sense would tend to tell me that it isn't as bad, when you can see that the baby is inhaling pretty much all smoke while inside the fish bowled car. That's disgusting!

Cigarettes have hundreds of different chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic. Pollution from a surrounding industrial area could contain hundreds of thousands of chemicals of all different types. What that pollution settles on an area and the weather systems cannot move that pollution out, that baby is breathing in those thousands of chemicals every minute of every day for years, not just car trips. Common sense tells me polluted cities like LA can cause much worse symptoms since it's in the air the child breaths every day all day - inside our out.
 
True, IMO, absolutely true.
The trouble is, love cannot be legislated.
Or, am I wrong and ignorance is the problem...which also cannot be legal/illegal.
Education is the answer, and this CAN be improved by the law-makers.

Jesus... MORE lawmakers making yet MORE laws? There's gotta be a different solution.
 
Cigarettes have hundreds of different chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic. Pollution from a surrounding industrial area could contain hundreds of thousands of chemicals of all different types. What that pollution settles on an area and the weather systems cannot move that pollution out, that baby is breathing in those thousands of chemicals every minute of every day for years, not just car trips. Common sense tells me polluted cities like LA can cause much worse symptoms since it's in the air the child breaths every day all day - inside our out.

They have tiny little bodies, and being in a confined area with all that smoke cannot be good for them, and that is something that can be controlled, whereas what is in the area cannot, at least not by the parents/guardians of said child/children.
 
Here it is under the age of 16 in most provinces but Nova Scotia where it is 19 (the age required to buy cigarettes).
I consider Canada to be a more advanced nation....Give us another decade, and we may catch up.
One's health is more important than another's "perceived freedom" .
 
Sometimes people think regulations passed, regardless of implementation are good. I am not among them, unless in the future we can get enforcement later on. With regard to smoking regulations, I am generally opposed.

Smoking in general doesn't bother me that much, although I do think it's smelly, so I am not for regulations with regards to adults smoking, but some people just show no common sense when it comes to exposing their child to smoke, and that's a shame. The way it sticks to everything and smells everything (including your baby!!) should be a clue that it's pretty bad to do it in an enclosed space like that.
 
I don't smoke, but I think many non-smokers are God damned ******s.

I think many smokers are god damned selfish morons who are too stupid to know what they're doing to themselves and too pig-headed and arrogant to understand what they may be doing to others.

I grew up with a smoking father. Cigars and pipes. I smoked as a late teen and early 20-something.

Then I quit for good.

I wonder how may people here objecting to this new ban are parents of small children, or just smokers without kids who are getting more and more butt-hurt over the growing public objection to their deadly and filthy habit?
 
Odd how we are so quick to crack down on Tobacco, and yet the movement is in favor of marijuana.

In the meantime, in defense of honesty and consistency, let me know when the banners agree that we also need to ban children below the age of 8 from living in Los Angeles.
 
They have tiny little bodies, and being in a confined area with all that smoke cannot be good for them, and that is something that can be controlled, whereas what is in the area cannot, at least not by the parents/guardians of said child/children.

it can if you make it illegal........
 
Back
Top Bottom