• 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
What the hell am I talking about? Texas is one of the worst states and there are multiple organizations fighting CPS everyday... I have been in family court too, and listened to the lies, the delaying tactics and the other outrageous behavior of these CPS workers, so I'm sure you are more aware of this than you are letting on...

There is no panacea in any state agencies, which are charged with managing abandoned, abused, and neglected kids. It cost between 2000.00 to 5000.00 a month (per child) for the state to place kids who are not considered to be "special needs". Those children can cost a state 10.000 a month and up.

Most CPS agencies are working on a shoestring budget. Caseworkers might carry 50 plus kids. They work endless hours. They are significantly underpaid. The burnout rate is like 3 years. The paperwork produced on each kid per month is beyond belief.

My point is that there is no conspiracy at work here by agencies to abduct kids and make sure that their lives are miserable. What possible motive do you suspect is at play according to your claim?

Being under CPS manage is the last place kids need to be...granted.

But I assure you that I've seen many, many, many abusive, neglect, etc parents lie their asses off in court. We live in a world where not all things are equal by any stretch of the imagination. My role in representing children was to do just that...I worked for the kids, not the CPS, not the state's interest, not the parents. It might amaze you that some kids being a ward of the state are safer. And believe me when I tell you that I'm not a fan of children being away from their families. But when their families are the source of their being physically and mentally disassembled and exploited...just know that there are a hell of a lot of people who should never have the right to reproduce.
 
Last edited:
Honestly..... thread completely derailed ....

76d31508_c851d40e_Derail_1.jpeg



You guys need to GET A ROOM.
 
Honestly..... thread completely derailed ....

You guys need to GET A ROOM.

Off topic.

Back to the topic, I do not agree with the state banning smoking in a car.
 
I don't believe that's the reason I gave. Higlighting the to me portion suggests you are not following the meaning of the sentence. The reason would risk, health risk, danger, and has nothing to do with my like or dislike.

And you think the government has every business completely regulating any and all health risks using force if needed?
 
And you think the government has every business completely regulating any and all health risks using force if needed?

This keeps coming back to a simple and logical point.

You have every right to F yourself up all you want.
Your right to do that however stops when it starts f-ing with someone elses rights.
Especially when it's a restrained child in a very close environment.
 
This keeps coming back to a simple and logical point.

You have every right to F yourself up all you want.
Your right to do that however stops when it starts f-ing with someone elses rights.
Especially when it's a restrained child in a very close environment.

Unless they are 9 or up.
 
This keeps coming back to a simple and logical point.

You have every right to F yourself up all you want.
Your right to do that however stops when it starts f-ing with someone elses rights.
Especially when it's a restrained child in a very close environment.

So now the government is going to force you to be a better parent.

When has the government ever been good at anything?

Is that the place of the government?

Also.... Why hasn't the government banned smoking on streets, in your own backyard if you are close enough to your neighbors by X amount of feet that the neighbor could reasonably have to suffer the smell when blown by the wind?

What about a law not allowing your vehicle to exhaust vehicle fumes near a pedestrian on a sidewalk?

No driving in mud/water puddles that may splash nearby pedestrians?

Im sorry, using your criteria the list of LAWS can go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on.


That isn't the America I want to live in.
 
How does CPS decide when to remove a child from his parents? | news10.net

The above source explains the procedures CPS is supposed to follow. And how often that is not the case.

Father of foster child who died speaks to KVUE | kvue.com Austin

^CPS took this child from her parents because they smoked pot. She died in foster care.

There's much more where that came from--

While you're swimming through all of those links that point out the horrible things...everything from the CPS abductions and maltreatment of children by foster homes. See how many you can find about tens of thousands (perhaps 100s of thousands) parents who have abused and neglected...and abandoned their kids that caused their kids to be come awards of the state. If a kid winds up as a ward of the state...that is abuse in and of itself. Oh, don't forget about all of the parents who have brutalized, tortured, and murdered their kids. They missed out on all of the abuse at the hands of the state.

State governments have for years consistently cut funding to agencies who are charged with the huge tasks of providing some type of safety net for kids. There is an oxymoron at work when funding is cut to these agencies. It's usually done by those legislators who cry about abortion and the killing of the poor little innocent unborn. Or who work to cut social services which feed kids and provide health care. Kids can't advocate for themselves. They aren't responsible for their parents failings. Go figure?
 
So now the government is going to force you to be a better parent.

There are already laws to that point. If you feel this is the one thing that will tip the scales toward all-out totalitarianism, then I will be sure to find the complete score to The Road and play the smallest violin in the world.
 
Honestly..... thread completely derailed ....

76d31508_c851d40e_Derail_1.jpeg



You guys need to GET A ROOM.

No, CPS is involved in this discussion since people have foolishly stated that smoking in a car with children is child abuse.

While you're swimming through all of those links that point out the horrible things...everything from the CPS abductions and maltreatment of children by foster homes. See how many you can find about tens of thousands (perhaps 100s of thousands) parents who have abused and neglected...and abandoned their kids that caused their kids to be come awards of the state. If a kid winds up as a ward of the state...that is abuse in and of itself. Oh, don't forget about all of the parents who have brutalized, tortured, and murdered their kids. They missed out on all of the abuse at the hands of the state.

State governments have for years consistently cut funding to agencies who are charged with the huge tasks of providing some type of safety net for kids. There is an oxymoron at work when funding is cut to these agencies. It's usually done by those legislators who cry about abortion and the killing of the poor little innocent unborn. Or who work to cut social services which feed kids and provide health care. Kids can't advocate for themselves. They aren't responsible for their parents failings. Go figure?

Is your answer making new laws and adding to the bureaucracy? This approach is not logical.
 
No, CPS is involved in this discussion since people have foolishly stated that smoking in a car with children is child abuse.

Is your answer making new laws and adding to the bureaucracy? This approach is not logical.

New laws? Adding to Bureaucracy? That's hilarious. I never stated an answer...only pointed out the realities about the system and it's relationship to parents who abuse, neglect and abandon (oh and murder) their kids. And my comments...had nothing specifically about smoking.

So I assume that you are supporting not regulating parents ability to smoke around their kids? Or more specifically smoke inside of a car, which also has children present?

No disrespect to you personally, but given the undeniable data that tobacco products are seriously dangerous, and children are powerless to remove themselves from environments which has the potential to cause them harm.

I'd say people who adamantly speak out against children being protected from a known danger (cigarette/or the like smoke)...is an addict's swan song. Sooner or later...protecting kids will happen. And it looks like sooner might be he case.

How that type of regulation or law might play out in CPS...I don't have a clue.
 
New laws? Adding to Bureaucracy? That's hilarious. I never stated an answer...only pointed out the realities about the system and it's relationship to parents who abuse, neglect and abandon (oh and murder) their kids. And my comments...had nothing specifically about smoking.

So I assume that you are supporting not regulating parents ability to smoke around their kids? Or more specifically smoke inside of a car, which also has children present?

No disrespect to you personally, but given the undeniable data that tobacco products are seriously dangerous, and children are powerless to remove themselves from environments which has the potential to cause them harm.

I'd say people who adamantly speak out against children being protected from a known danger (cigarette/or the like smoke)...is an addict's swan song. Sooner or later...protecting kids will happen. And it looks like sooner might be he case.

How that type of regulation or law might play out in CPS...I don't have a clue.

My point is this: yes, I acknowledge that smoking is unhealthy and kids shouldn't be exposed to that. And granted, parents who smoke around their kids are self centered douche bags. However, I cannot support more restrictions based on harm that might or might not take place. An entire generation of people grew up with parents who smoked in cars. Most of them are fine. If we start make laws based on what might happen, society will definitely become too restrictive. Of course exceptions do exist, and they need to be handled on a case by case basis. If a child has asthma and is constantly exposed to cigarette smoke, his or her life could be an immediate danger. THAT would be a situation where CPS could already intervene without a smoke ban placed on everyone else. But adding another law to an increasing bureaucracy is foolish. There is a long list of actions parents should avoid around children. Do all of them need bans? In a free society, people need to be able to govern themselves. This requires an educated population. With that in mind, I can see why people are being dumbed down.
 
I dont care even a little bit if you smoke. You know good and well I was talking about you smoking with children in the car with you.

You are king so you gonna smoke in your car with your kids, even though it almost certainly causes the kids harm? I hope their respiratory problems PLEASE you. Unbelieveable.

Sonny my parents and grandparents ALL smoked in the car with me and they smoked a hell of a lot more than I have and I DIDNT have a choice. That said after 19 years of that I had a very thorough physical related to a job I was going to take including chest x-rays and lung capacity tests, my lungs were fine, as good or better than any other healthy 19 year old males. When I smoke in my smoking vehicles or den, and I take passengers or guests, it is known I smoke and that if they can come along if they wish, I don't MAKE people come with me child or adult.

As I said before secondhand smoke danger is minimal at worst case scenarios. There are NO studies that PROVE secondhand smoke does any harm let alone significant harm. Cars and diesels and even electric motors put out more noxious fumes by far and nobody is having a cow about what those carcinogens do to people and children. I am most definitely NOT going to worry about either secondhand smoke or noxious fumes from equipment. Risk is part of life, some people know that some don't. Last I checked, nobody lives forever. Life is a terminal disease. I am not going to get all hot and bothered about something that might cause harm over a very long period of exposure. I don't live my life that way I and I teach the children they shouldn't live it that way themselves. People have to learn to live with and assume risk and learn how to identify that risk that really requires mitigation and that risk that doesn't. Secondhand smoke is far down my list of risks that require mitigation if any.
 
Smoking with your kids in the car is a stupid and avoidable risk. It is truly sad you want to. I wish you could be arrested for child abuse, because that is exactly what it is.
Sonny my parents and grandparents ALL smoked in the car with me and they smoked a hell of a lot more than I have and I DIDNT have a choice. That said after 19 years of that I had a very thorough physical related to a job I was going to take including chest x-rays and lung capacity tests, my lungs were fine, as good or better than any other healthy 19 year old males. When I smoke in my smoking vehicles or den, and I take passengers or guests, it is known I smoke and that if they can come along if they wish, I don't MAKE people come with me child or adult.

As I said before secondhand smoke danger is minimal at worst case scenarios. There are NO studies that PROVE secondhand smoke does any harm let alone significant harm. Cars and diesels and even electric motors put out more noxious fumes by far and nobody is having a cow about what those carcinogens do to people and children. I am most definitely NOT going to worry about either secondhand smoke or noxious fumes from equipment. Risk is part of life, some people know that some don't. Last I checked, nobody lives forever. Life is a terminal disease. I am not going to get all hot and bothered about something that might cause harm over a very long period of exposure. I don't live my life that way I and I teach the children they shouldn't live it that way themselves. People have to learn to live with and assume risk and learn how to identify that risk that really requires mitigation and that risk that doesn't. Secondhand smoke is far down my list of risks that require mitigation if any.
 
Smoking with your kids in the car is a stupid and avoidable risk.

I am glad we cleared up that addiction is free from cigarette use.
 
My point is this: yes, I acknowledge that smoking is unhealthy and kids shouldn't be exposed to that. And granted, parents who smoke around their kids are self centered douche bags. However, I cannot support more restrictions based on harm that might or might not take place. An entire generation of people grew up with parents who smoked in cars. Most of them are fine. If we start make laws based on what might happen, society will definitely become too restrictive. Of course exceptions do exist, and they need to be handled on a case by case basis. If a child has asthma and is constantly exposed to cigarette smoke, his or her life could be an immediate danger. THAT would be a situation where CPS could already intervene without a smoke ban placed on everyone else. But adding another law to an increasing bureaucracy is foolish. There is a long list of actions parents should avoid around children. Do all of them need bans? In a free society, people need to be able to govern themselves. This requires an educated population. With that in mind, I can see why people are being dumbed down.

You think that this is about what might happen? Are you saying that all of the accumulated data on children's health attributed directly to cigarette smoke...KNOWN health issues CAUSED by cigarette smoke (a history of what has happened) is some sort of a conspiracy against freedom and the right to self-govern by taking actions to significantly reduce children's exposure to known health risks...that are so unpredictable.

What part of "children can't advocate for themselves...and...they can't remove themselves from known dangers"....don't you understand? This isn't about adults having the right to self-govern. This is about addicts who ignore the known dangers of smoking, who are willing to go to any length to protect their addiction...not their children.

If you are a smoker. And I tell you that the next cigarette that you smoke around your kid will cause it to have a lifetime of health issues. Would you smoke it?

That's a calculated risk that all smokers impose on their kids...when they choose self govern while also engaging in a self-destructive behavior.

We, as individuals, don't live in glass boxes. We don't have an invisible shield around us that protects others from our self-destructive behaviors.

You want to shoot dope or smoke till you die...groovy, your an adult, go for it. But don't expose me or your kid to all of the negative consequences of your behaviors just because you have the right to self-destruct.
 
Smoking with your kids in the car is a stupid and avoidable risk. It is truly sad you want to. I wish you could be arrested for child abuse, because that is exactly what it is.

I do, and if you want to come stop me you are welcome to. I could use a pair of boots.

Secondhand smoke is, if a risk a very very minimal one at best. What's truly sad is you think its any of your business whether or not I smoke with children in the car or the house. If I were you and as neurotic I would just go ahead and get a rebreather apparatus and wear it all day. You would be amazed at the crap you ingest in your lungs on a regular and ongoing basis. You would never come out of your bubble house with out one.
 
And you think the government has every business completely regulating any and all health risks using force if needed?

It's not all or nothing, and regulations are not new. I think some common sense concerns for children isn't a horrible thing.
 
You think that this is about what might happen? Are you saying that all of the accumulated data on children's health attributed directly to cigarette smoke...KNOWN health issues CAUSED by cigarette smoke (a history of what has happened) is some sort of a conspiracy against freedom and the right to self-govern by taking actions to significantly reduce children's exposure to known health risks...that are so unpredictable.

What part of "children can't advocate for themselves...and...they can't remove themselves from known dangers"....don't you understand? This isn't about adults having the right to self-govern. This is about addicts who ignore the known dangers of smoking, who are willing to go to any length to protect their addiction...not their children.

If you are a smoker. And I tell you that the next cigarette that you smoke around your kid will cause it to have a lifetime of health issues. Would you smoke it?

That's a calculated risk that all smokers impose on their kids...when they choose self govern while also engaging in a self-destructive behavior.

We, as individuals, don't live in glass boxes. We don't have an invisible shield around us that protects others from our self-destructive behaviors.

You want to shoot dope or smoke till you die...groovy, your an adult, go for it. But don't expose me or your kid to all of the negative consequences of your behaviors just because you have the right to self-destruct.

I'm not a smoker. I just don't see the point in adding another law or ban to an ever-increasing government. And arresting these people? Jesus Christ, the lunacy of certain opinions-

Let's follow the illogic here: parent smokes in the car with a child; therefore, that is child abuse.. bzzzzz first non sequitur.

Parents smoke in cars with children; therefore, another law/ban will stop this from happening.. ding! second non sequitur.




But here's the real dumb ass reasoning.. parent smokes in the car with a child; therefore, he or she needs to be arrested.

1039532.gif


i mean holy ****, the US already has over 2 million of its citizens in prison with nearly half being non violent drug users. Let's add people who smoke in cars with children to the umpteemth retarded law that people can be arrested for breaking.

And the most insidious claim in this thread: children need to be taken from parents who smoke in the car with their child. You have got to have feces in your skull to believe that ****ing nonsense. Place a child in fostercare..rip them from their home and put them with potentially dangerous strangers.. jesus h. christ wtf is wrong with people? Risks and dangers are an inherent part of existing. And the reason why so many people have their collective heads up their posteriors is because they are coddled and pruned like the special little snow flakes they think they are.
 
I'm not a smoker. I just don't see the point in adding another law or ban to an ever-increasing government. And arresting these people? Jesus Christ, the lunacy of certain opinions.

Groovy....alrighty then...

I didn't say put people in prison. I didn't say take kids from parents. I said...let addicts be responsible for their own self destructive behaviors...smoke their brains out. But don't force the consequences of their addiction off on their kids...or anybody else.

People have addictions will indeed leave claw marks before they let go of the self destructive consequences of their addiction....and at the expense of others.

I don't give a ratsass who wants to self-destruct. In fact, I'm for legalization of every drug known to humankind. But self governing also means being self responsible for their behaviors in their environments...and respecting other peoples rights. Adults can do that. Kids...they can't.

Bottom line is that people shouldn't put their addiction before the welfare of their kids...and you don't know what the health implications are within the dynamics of any given person who smokes around his or her family. It's unpredictable. But there are real issues that exist. To say that they don't or somehow claim to know who will be affected and who won't ...don't think you can do that. Nobody can. It is clearly a calculated risk. Knowing damn well there is documented proof that smoking can **** you up...or kill you...and that second hand smoke can **** other people up...and still denying is insane.

There is no conspiracy here to rob anybody of any freedom. Freedom comes with a prices. And that is to respect the rights of other to exercise their freedom. To infringe on others rights...isn't exercising freedom. Kids should have the right to be as secure as possible.

Problems caused from smoking ARE 100% preventable.
 
Back
Top Bottom