• 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
Happens all the time. One need only to be reported. No proof is needed, only speculation and conjecture. The state moves in and "investigates" often removing the child from the home in the process.

Only that's not true at all. Look at all the steps needed in a liberal state like Michigan...

Children's Protective Services Investigation Process
Investigation

CPS has 30 days to complete an investigation unless extenuating circumstances require an extension. A CPS investigation must begin within 24 hours and usually includes:

Face-to-face interviews with the alleged child victim(s), the child's caretaker(s), the alleged perpetrator(s).
Viewing the family's home.
Reviewing any necessary documents, such as police reports, criminal history, medical reports, school reports, CPS case file, etc.
Interviewing neighbors, friends, relatives or professionals that have had contact with the family.
An assessment of the child's safety.
An assessment of the child's future risk of abuse and/or neglect.
An assessment of the family's needs and strengths.


CPS investigator considers the following factors during the investigation:

Are there alternative explanations to the allegations?
What are the family dynamics and family circumstances?
Who is making the complaint?
Is there corroborating evidence? (For example, witness statements, findings during a home visit, etc.)
Should there be a medical exam of the child?
Does the child have an injury? If so:
What is the explanation of the injury?
Is that explanation feasible?
Where is the injury located?
Is there more than one injury at different stages of healing?
What is the condition of the home? (For example, cleanliness, safety hazards, etc.)
What is the condition of the child? (For example, appropriately dressed, cleanliness, etc.)
Are the child's basic needs being met?
Is there adequate supervision?
Are the caretakers emotionally/mentally abusing the child?

Disposition of the CPS Investigation

Based on the review of the above factors, CPS must determine if there is a preponderance of evidence of child abuse or neglect. Preponderance of evidence means evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than evidence which is offered in opposition to it; a 51% likelihood that abuse or neglect occurred.

Following a completed investigation, CPS will put a case in one of the following categories:

Category V-Cases in which CPS is unable to locate the family, no evidence of child abuse or neglect is found or the court declines to issue an order requiring family cooperation during the investigation.
Category IV-Cases in which a preponderance of evidence of child abuse or neglect is not found. The department must assist the child's family in voluntarily participating in community-based services commensurate with risk level determined by the risk assessment (structured decision making tool).
Category III-Cases in which the department determines that there is a preponderance of evidence of child abuse or neglect and the risk assessment indicates a low or moderate risk. A referral to community-based services must be made by CPS.
Category II-Cases in which the department determines that there is a preponderance of evidence of child abuse or neglect and the risk assessment indicates a high or intensive risk. Services must be provided by CPS, in conjunction with community-based services.
Category I-Cases in which the department determines that there is a preponderance of evidence of child abuse or neglect and a court petition is needed and/or required. Services must be provided by CPS (or foster care), in conjunction with community-based services.


When a case is placed in Category II or I, the perpetrator's name is listed on the Child Abuse and Neglect Central Registry. See the Central Registry page for more information regarding central registry.

Court Petitions

If necessary to ensure a child's safety, CPS may file a petition with the court requesting that the court order any of the following:

The family to cooperate with in-home services.
Removal of the perpetrator from the home.
Removal of the child from the home.

CPS cannot remove a child from the home without a court order. The court may deny the petition, including the request for removal.
 
We are not talking monkeys here....Do I believe "all" of the hype about smoking? No, I do not...Do I think that smoking is good for you? Of course not.. Why can't you answer my question?

Why did you put "all" in air quotes?

Which of the health risks mentioned by the CDC do you qualify as hype?

CDC - Overviews of Diseases/Conditions - Campaign Resources - Tips from Former Smokers - Smoking & Tobacco Use

Or how about the Mayo Clinic?

Secondhand smoke: Avoid dangers in the air - Mayo Clinic
 
Why did you put "all" in air quotes?

Which of the health risks mentioned by the CDC do you qualify as hype?

CDC - Overviews of Diseases/Conditions - Campaign Resources - Tips from Former Smokers - Smoking & Tobacco Use

Or how about the Mayo Clinic?

Secondhand smoke: Avoid dangers in the air - Mayo Clinic

There is a difference between second hand smoke in an inclosed with limited air circulation (no one is arguing against this BTW) and smoking while driving with a cracked window, which delivers significant air circulation, and air evacuation out the window actually.

You just seem to continue to want to gloss over that difference.
 
There is a difference between second hand smoke in an inclosed with limited air circulation (no one is arguing against this BTW) and smoking while driving with a cracked window, which delivers significant air circulation, and air evacuation out the window actually.

You just seem to continue to want to gloss over that difference.

That dead horse has been whipped, beaten, sexually violated and had its mother insulted.
 
My thinking exactly.

Just how much government intervention and interdiction in our lives are we suppose to tolerate? Gotta draw a line someplace that the government can't cross.

Meanwhile, in California, I think it's illegal to smoke in your own backyard. So much for your house being your castle.

Who cares about the law...what about your children's health?
 
There is a difference between second hand smoke in an inclosed with limited air circulation (no one is arguing against this BTW) and smoking while driving with a cracked window, which delivers significant air circulation, and air evacuation out the window actually.

You just seem to continue to want to gloss over that difference.

Cars are not in constant motion. Stop lights. Stop signs. Traffic. There's not a constant strong vacuum out a cracked window.

Again - take some windex and a white paper towel and go clean the back windows of a smokers car.

It's all right there in it's gross brownish-yellow glory.

An adult smoking in a car is effectively MAKING a child smoke too.

It's really THAT simple.

Would you walk into your child's bedroom while they're sleeping, close the door, and light up a cigarette?
Is that reasonable behavior for an adult?
 
I've finally come up with a work around that should please everyone.

We all know that smoke rises, so have the children lie down on the floor of the backseat with their breathing holes close to the floor. The Cops are happy because they can't see the children in your car while you are smoking. The smokers get to smoke, and the children get to breathe the cleanest air in the car.

Another good idea would be to dress appropriately for the climate and roll all of the windows completely down whenever children are in the car.

Those of you with roof luggage racks could put the children up there in a comfortable custom made box. Others could simply put the kids in the trunk.

There's quite a few ways to accomplish the child clean air act without legislation.
 
Only that's not true at all. Look at all the steps needed in a liberal state like Michigan...

Those are the legal steps.
 
I've finally come up with a work around that should please everyone.

We all know that smoke rises, so have the children lie down on the floor of the backseat with their breathing holes close to the floor. The Cops are happy because they can't see the children in your car while you are smoking. The smokers get to smoke, and the children get to breathe the cleanest air in the car.

Another good idea would be to dress appropriately for the climate and roll all of the windows completely down whenever children are in the car.

Those of you with roof luggage racks could put the children up there in a comfortable custom made box. Others could simply put the kids in the trunk.

There's quite a few ways to accomplish the child clean air act without legislation.

How about a limo? The adults can roll up the glass partition and smoke away and the kids can travel in style.
 
As long at they open a window first, I bet some will reason.

The word I would use is rationalize.

It is simply a bad excuse to try to justify one's own selfishness.
 
I think there are WAY too many laws as it is.

But any parent that wants to fight for the 'right' to smoke in a car with children in it so they can lawfully shorten these kids lives is one (insert insult) ________________ parent.

If anyone smoked in my car with children passengers...they would either butt out or get out.
 
As long at they open a window first, I bet some will reason.

Smoking_comic1.jpg
 
Cars are not in constant motion. Stop lights. Stop signs. Traffic. There's not a constant strong vacuum out a cracked window.

Again - take some windex and a white paper towel and go clean the back windows of a smokers car.

It's all right there in it's gross brownish-yellow glory.

An adult smoking in a car is effectively MAKING a child smoke too.

It's really THAT simple.

Would you walk into your child's bedroom while they're sleeping, close the door, and light up a cigarette?
Is that reasonable behavior for an adult?

Good points DF.

A lot of smokers believe that the cracked window theory works. However, many have different behaviors when smoking in a car when the car is and isn't occupied by passengers. Despite any specific cautions used by opening windows, there are studies that show that risks are still present.

Just as you noted in your post, there have been studies show that gaseous and particulate components of tobacco smoke absorb into the upholstery and other surfaces inside a car, and then re-emmited back into the air (aka 3rd hand smoke) over the course of many days, exposing passengers to toxins long after anyone actually smoked in the car.

Thirdhand smoke causes DNA damage in human cells

Berkeley Lab Confirms Thirdhand Smoke Causes DNA Damage « Berkeley Lab News Center

In some experiments, volunteer smokers smoked inside the vehicles under controlled conditions with different window positions, vent settings, air conditioner settings, and vehicle speeds while we measured the interior pollutants such as carbon monoxide, fine particulate matter, and the carcinogen benzene.

With the windows closed and the vent set on “recirculation,” the air change rate was less than 7 air changes per hour for all speeds and all cars tested. Opening a window by just 3” increased the vehicle’s air change rate by 8 to 12 times. With passive ventilation – air vents open and no fan or air conditioning – the air change rate was directly proportional to the vehicle’s speed from 14 to 72 mph. Particles decrease more rapidly than predicted by the air change rate because they stick to interior surfaces.

The air change rate determines the persistence of pollutants inside a vehicle, and it also is important for understanding the rate at which pollutants on the roadway enter the vehicle, or the "sheltering effect” of a car. With the windows closed and recirculation on (or the air conditioner set to maximum), we found that a single cigarette caused extremely high interior concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5, or particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter), with levels over 2,000 micrograms per cubic meter.

PM2.5 can enter deep into the lungs and has a health-based outdoor air quality standard of 35 micrograms averaged over 24 hours set by the USEPA. If averaged over 24 hours, a single cigarette smoked in a car would cause a personal exposure of 21 micrograms, and smoking two cigarettes would bring the average to 42 micrograms, exceeding the federal air quality standard for PM2.5. The high fine particle concentrations inside a motor vehicle from smoking suggests there is a serious health risk to both adults and children traveling in a car with a smoker.

Publication | Tobacco Smoke
 
Cars are not in constant motion. Stop lights. Stop signs. Traffic. There's not a constant strong vacuum out a cracked window.

Again - take some windex and a white paper towel and go clean the back windows of a smokers car.

It's all right there in it's gross brownish-yellow glory.

An adult smoking in a car is effectively MAKING a child smoke too.

It's really THAT simple.

Would you walk into your child's bedroom while they're sleeping, close the door, and light up a cigarette?
Is that reasonable behavior for an adult?

I most fervently disagree. Your comparison is not the same and is apples and oranges.

Yes, cars stop and are not in motion. However, there is a federal standard for automobiles that make the OEMs have positive ventilation at all times, essentially the fan set on low all the time to discharge any gasoline fumes out of the passenger cabin - back from the days when that was a problem - don't think it is any more.

Who cares about the law...what about your children's health?

My children's health is fine. No ill effects, at least not from this. I smoke out in the garage when I'm home.
 
Last edited:
toddler+boy+smoking.jpg


Man, it just burns me up thinking about all those do-gooders who would restrict MY rights to expose my children to carcinogens.

they are all just blowing smoke!
 
I most fervently disagree. Your comparison is not the same and is apples and oranges.

Yes, cars stop and are not in motion. However, there is a federal standard for automobiles that make the OEMs have positive ventilation at all times, essentially the fan set on low all the time to discharge any gasoline fumes out of the passenger cabin - back from the days when that was a problem - don't think it is any more.



My children's health is fine. No ill effects, at least not from this. I smoke out in the garage when I'm home.

Do you ever smoke in the car with your children?
 

I know cars, and I've not stated anything that wasn't fact.

Cardinal's post hits the nail on the head in every way imaginable.

I just test drove a used car that had been previously owned by a smoker.

The smell was overwhelming. The upholstery was stained.

And this was after a thorough dealership cleaning and detailing.

There may be just enough positive pressure in a car to keep gasoline fumes out, but that doesn't work for fumes that are initiated inside the car.

Put a gasoline can inside the car and then crack a window.

Again - bottom line here - if you smoke inside a car - so does everyone else inside the car.

If you wouldn't hand your 5 year old a cigarette and let him/her smoke it - then you have no business smoking while in your car with him/her.

Unless you're willing to state that 5 year old's should be allowed to smoke, please go back to my previous post with the ostrich.
 
Okay, but how would you prove something like that, when an asthma exacerbation can be caused by so many different things, and sometimes they don't even know why a person had an exacerbation. I just can't see ripping little children away from their parents like that. I've known several friends growing up who were in foster care, and some of those homes are awful, and it's not always the foster parents are awful or abusive, but a lot of times the other foster kids in the home. And with the other horrible abuses that take place against children, I wouldn't feel comfortable sinking resources into investigating people for smoking.

Well that's why it's a court process, you know, investigating the conditions of the home overall, checking into the parents otherwise - etc etc.

There are other medical conditions out there and sometimes parents have had their children taken away because the parents were only harming their children through their decisions and activities, rather than helping. Mainly, what gets that ball rolling is that a doctor give advice - and that advice is routinely not followed. Attitude of the parent goes far in such situations. It's not easy to prove - but I'm not going to err on 'well it's hard so let's not care' - It's hard, so let's leave that up to the people who deal with that sort of thing.
 
Cardinal's post hits the nail on the head in every way imaginable.

I just test drove a used car that had been previously owned by a smoker.

The smell was overwhelming. The upholstery was stained.

And this was after a thorough dealership cleaning and detailing.

There may be just enough positive pressure in a car to keep gasoline fumes out, but that doesn't work for fumes that are initiated inside the car.

Put a gasoline can inside the car and then crack a window.

Again - bottom line here - if you smoke inside a car - so does everyone else inside the car.

If you wouldn't hand your 5 year old a cigarette and let him/her smoke it - then you have no business smoking while in your car with him/her.

Unless you're willing to state that 5 year old's should be allowed to smoke, please go back to my previous post with the ostrich.

You have no way of knowing whether the previous owner cracked the window or not. That invalidates your assertion.
 
Yeah - which the state follows. Unless you can show evidence to the contrary.

Your claim is that they always follow those steps? That is rather silly to believe.
 
Back
Top Bottom