How do you KNOW that?
Do you have links or studies that you yourself have performed that prove the carcinogens in cigarette smoke do not affect children's lungs while smoking in a confined space?
I am shocked someone wants to smoke around their kids. Unbeliveable. Why would you want to do that if there was even an off chance?
Nobody disagrees (spite is not disagreeing).
Do you have links or studies that prove smoking in a car always harms the non-smoker?
Bad parenting is common.
Dude - shooting a gun up into the air isn't always dangerous or deadly - so you advocate such things at parties and celebrations?
Do you have links or studies that prove smoking in a car always harms the non-smoker?
In children, secondhand smoke causes the following:3
Ear infections
More frequent and severe asthma attacks
Respiratory symptoms (e.g., coughing, sneezing, shortness of breath)
Respiratory infections (i.e., bronchitis, pneumonia)
A greater risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)
In children aged 18 months or younger, secondhand smoke exposure is responsible for—4
An estimated 150,000–300,000 new cases of bronchitis and pneumonia annually
Approximately 7,500–15,000 hospitalizations annually in the United States
Which part says that smoking is always harmful to non-smokers that are somehow near them? This is about actually inhaling the smoke, which study proves that smoke is always inhaled?
You younguns probably won't acknowledge the fact that people smoked in their cars, with their children for DECADES...We even smoked on airplanes, in restaurants and bars, at the doctor's office, in the hospital and any other place that we dam well pleased.. We have lost these freedoms because of a slippery slope that someone decided to slide down and our other freedoms are flying out the window as we speak... This country has changed so much and is still changing and not for the better....When all is said and done, you will have lost all of your freedoms...
Really? If you have your infant child in your car and you are smoking, do you seriously think it isn't going to affect your baby in some way? And with all we know about the special ingredients in cigarettes, don't you think it's dumb to take that kind of risk.
I'm not for the banning of it, but I am for the education of ignorant people who do these things. It's really stupid, can be avoided and when babies DO get sick from it, it costs everyone in the long run.
Will the smoke always get to them?
It is stupid to smoke, and for weak people. Bad parents are often weak people.
Will the smoke always get to them?
It is stupid to smoke, and for weak people. Bad parents are often weak people.
Again, any reasonable person would not take that risk when it comes to their infant's tiny little lungs.
To your second statement, okay, so we basically agree then. If you want to argue about the banning, then do that, but it really doesn't help anyone to argue from the perspective that secondhand smoke in a small enclosed space is not going to be harmful to a baby or small child's lungs. There is clear evidence that it can and does effect their health in a negative way.
I realize that you can't ban stupidity.
Rather presumptuous to assume that any parent that smokes is a weak person and a bad person.
Any CDC studies on that?
Again, any reasonable person would not take that risk when it comes to their infant's tiny little lungs.
To your second statement, okay, so we basically agree then. If you want to argue about the banning, then do that, but it really doesn't help anyone to argue from the perspective that secondhand smoke in a small enclosed space is not going to be harmful to a baby or small child's lungs. There is clear evidence that it can and does effect their health in a negative way.
I realize that you can't ban stupidity.
A lot of people, unfortunately, can't play nice with other people, and do in fact require laws to control their behavior.
A lot of people, unfortunately, can't play nice with other people, and do in fact require laws to control their behavior.
Well you and I will have to agree to disagree on the banning issue. I think it is unenforceable and a waste of time, money and human resources.
Ah, but the state will make more money off these douchenozzles, and that's something I'm absolutely fine with.
Ah, but the state will make more money off these douchenozzles, and that's something I'm absolutely fine with.
Losing money is not make money.
I cant beleive someone would argue for the right to smoke around there kids cause there is no PROOF it causes medical problems every time. Crazy.
I'm completely happy with smokers in cars with children losing money. Personally, I'd like to see all that money go to a fund for children's education or something equally positive.
I'm completely happy with smokers in cars with children losing money. Personally, I'd like to see all that money go to a fund for children's education or something equally positive.
Ah, but the city will make more money off these douchenozzles, and that's something I'm absolutely fine with.
Make them donate to a childrens hospital or force them to go on rounds with respiratory threapy at a childrens hospital. surely the only reason someone would want to smoke around children is ignorance. Or they just want to harm children. Is there any other reason?
Nah, they don't actively want to harm anyone. But every drug addict in need of their fix who's told they can't have it reverts to a six year old state of self absorption that simply can't be reasoned with. You're not dealing with a rational, reasoning person here. That's why laws are needed for these people.