• 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 in Cars

What do you think about smoking in cars?

  • Total voters
    41
Tucker Case said:
No. I'm saying that we should focus on real dangers instead of imaginary ones. Car accidents are the number one killer of children under 18. Second-hand smoke ain't even on the radar.

If we want to ban something in order to protect children, we should ban something that will actually do something useful. The bonus is that banning people from driving their children around will also prevent any of them from being exposed to second hand smoke in the car.



By putting their kids in the car, they place that child at far more risk for death and long term injury than second-hand smoke does. The child often doesn't have a choice to be in a car. If it's all about the children, we should simply ban driving with children in the car altogether. Problem solved and now we can actually protect children in the process.
Click to expand...

I think that your example is not only irrational, but you have confirmed my belief that you don't really have serious concern about the health of children.

CAR ACCIDENTS are just that. BUT diseases and death cause by children being FORCED to be exposed to secondhand smoke in both the home and cars are 100% PREVENTABLE.
 
Wake said:
Earlier today I heard a conversation about Arkansas, and the illegality of smoking in cars with the windows up. According to them, it's illegal to smoke in a car with children that are, iirc, 6 years of age or younger? I don't know which law this is, and have beeb searching for it to find out exactly what the law entails.

I have this link that seems to support the conversation I heard: Law on smoking in car with children could change Arkansas - The Debate Team - BabyCenter

Assuming this is true, I have no problem with the law.

In fact, I'd like to see smoking in cars with the windows up completely banned, because I've heard 2nd/3rd-hand smoke is pretty dangerous.

Would you like to see this law applied for the whole country? What do you think?
Click to expand...

I was one of the children forced to sit in a car driven by a smoking parent. Now that I can vote, I'm retaliating by fully supporting a full smoking ban in cars. I don't care about your rights because you didn't care about mine.

Smoking bans: don't like them, don't smoke.
 
iacardsfan said:
Though smokers might not be intending harm to children in a vehicle, they still are, like stated above the child is left defenseless to it, and could in turn have a negative health reaction. That in the long run the taxpayers will end up paying for. Smoke all you want, it is not mine or the gov't choice, but when the burden falls on the taxpayer to pay for this neglect is when the line has to be drawn. Waste your life if you want, just don't expect a penny from me to pay for medical bills.
Click to expand...

Since when does government have the authority to restrict freedom because we assume that the child's healthcare costs will be placed on the taxpayers?

Another perfect example of why national health care is just another power grab for the federal government.
 
Removable Mind said:
I think that your example is not only irrational, but you have confirmed my belief that you don't really have serious concern about the health of children.

CAR ACCIDENTS are just that. BUT diseases and death cause by children being FORCED to be exposed to secondhand smoke in both the home and cars are 100% PREVENTABLE.
Click to expand...

Preventable by proper choices of parents. Not the government's business.
 
Yes I can see it now. Police chasing down that mad smoker for lighting up in their car and dragging them away in cuffs. It'll be a crime wave and the officer will enforce that about as often as jay walking. Talk about a waste of time and resources. :roll:
 
Originally Posted by Removable Mind
I think that your example is not only irrational, but you have confirmed my belief that you don't really have serious concern about the health of children.

CAR ACCIDENTS are just that. BUT diseases and death cause by children being FORCED to be exposed to secondhand smoke in both the home and cars are 100% PREVENTABLE.
Click to expand...

Caine said:
Preventable by proper choices of parents. Not the government's business
Click to expand...
.

It's not customary that addicts make sound choices. When people refuse to be responsible...someone else will fill that role for them, and the irresponsible rarely like the decisions and choices made for them.
 
Removable Mind said:
I think that your example is not only irrational, but you have confirmed my belief that you don't really have serious concern about the health of children.

CAR ACCIDENTS are just that. BUT diseases and death cause by children being FORCED to be exposed to secondhand smoke in both the home and cars are 100% PREVENTABLE.
Click to expand...

Deaths of children due to car accidents are 100% PREVENTABLE.. OMG!!!!! And they are FORCED INTO CARS!!!! They have no choice!!!!! And a hell f a lot more children die from car accidents than second hand smoke. An absurdly larger number. Like the vast majority of children who die under the age of 18 die form car accidents.

And these deaths are 100% PREVENTABLE..
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
Deaths of children due to car accidents are 100% PREVENTABLE.. OMG!!!!! And they are FORCED INTO CARS!!!! They have no choice!!!!! And a hell f a lot more children die from car accidents than second hand smoke. An absurdly larger number. Like the vast majority of children who die under the age of 18 die form car accidents.

And these deaths are 100% PREVENTABLE..
Click to expand...

From this link: Secondhand Smoke and Children - Secondhand Smoke

a California EPA study has estimated that between 1900 and 2700 children die annually of SIDS due to secondhand smoke
Click to expand...


This is from this link: Children & Car Accidents; the Alarming Statistics

According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA), nearly 250,000 children are injured every year in car accidents.

This means that on any given day nearly 700 children are harmed due to accidents on our roadways. Of the 250,000 kids injured each year, approximately 2,000 die from their injuries.
Click to expand...

So technically more children die of secondhand smoke, which is more preventable then say getting hit by a possible impaired driver.
 
iacardsfan said:
So technically more children die of secondhand smoke...
Click to expand...

I like your dishonest and utterly transparent selective editing of the quote by leaving out "There are a variety of opinions about the role secondhand smoke plays after birth in SIDS deaths, but..."

You realize one study does not make for "technically". It means at best Hypothetically.

But there's another massive problem with your dishonest approach. You failed to provide any evidence that this estimate had anything to do with exposure in cars.

Not only that, you are obviously citing flawed information. Here's why: If those numbers are at all accurate, they would basically account for each and every SIDS death that occurs annually in the US (which is about 2500 per year).

At most, second hand smoke exposure has been shown to be a risk factor for SIDS, but it is certainly not the primary cause, nor is it even the worst of the smoking related causes (smoking while pregnant does a lot more to increase SIDS risk).

Therefore, I have call bull**** on that study, since it clearly indicates that second hand smoke is the primary cause of SIDS, which is known to be false.

NOw if they were citing WORLDWIDE stats, then you are again using a dishonest tactic by comparing that to the US statistics for traffic accidents. Worldwide, a few hundred thousand children die each year from traffic accidents which were 100% preventable.
 
Tucker Case said:
I like your dishonest and utterly transparent selective editing of the quote by leaving out "There are a variety of opinions about the role secondhand smoke plays after birth in SIDS deaths, but..."

You realize one study does not make for "technically". It means at best Hypothetically.

But there's another massive problem with your dishonest approach. You failed to provide any evidence that this estimate had anything to do with exposure in cars.

Not only that, you are obviously citing flawed information. Here's why: If those numbers are at all accurate, they would basically account for each and every SIDS death that occurs annually in the US (which is about 2500 per year).

At most, second hand smoke exposure has been shown to be a risk factor for SIDS, but it is certainly not the primary cause, nor is it even the worst of the smoking related causes (smoking while pregnant does a lot more to increase SIDS risk).

Therefore, I have call bull**** on that study, since it clearly indicates that second hand smoke is the primary cause of SIDS, which is known to be false.

NOw if they were citing WORLDWIDE stats, then you are again using a dishonest tactic by comparing that to the US statistics for traffic accidents. Worldwide, a few hundred thousand children die each year from traffic accidents which were 100% preventable.
Click to expand...

well yes but this law is for the united states, we cannot make laws for other countries.
 
iacardsfan said:
well yes but this law is for the united states, we cannot make laws for other countries.
Click to expand...

Then we should only compare data from the US. The second hand smoke/SIDS data you cited was worldwide.

Therefore, it's clear that many more children are killed by being car passengers than by SHS. And your own data indicated that 250,000 children are harmed by being car passengers yearly. 700 daily.

It's clear we need to ban children being driven in cars because all of these injuries and deaths are 100% preventable!
 
Tucker Case said:
Deaths of children due to car accidents are 100% PREVENTABLE.. OMG!!!!! And they are FORCED INTO CARS!!!! They have no choice!!!!! And a hell f a lot more children die from car accidents than second hand smoke. An absurdly larger number. Like the vast majority of children who die under the age of 18 die form car accidents.

And these deaths are 100% PREVENTABLE..
Click to expand...

Beam my kids up Scotty. When transportation options ends - so does our modern way of life. Do you prefer horse and buggy?

More effective safety devices can be made to protect kid in cars. One of the easiest safety devices to use by a parent is - Don't smoke in the car with a kid held hostage.
 
Removable Mind said:
Beam my kids up Scotty. When transportation options ends - so does our modern way of life. Do you prefer horse and buggy?
Click to expand...

How does not putting your kids at risk end the modern way of life?

More effective safety devices can be made to protect kid in cars.
Click to expand...

When one is 100% effective, then we should rescind the ban.

One of the easiest safety devices to use by a parent is - Don't smoke in the car with a kid held hostage.
Click to expand...

So you support holding them hostage in the car and putting their lives at great risk, but you just frown on smoking while doing so.
 
Thunder said:
tobacco is legal.

until its illegal, folks have the right to smoke in their own home or in their car.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with people smoking in the car. What I DO have a problem with is when they flick their butts out the window. That's a public litter nuisance. If you want to smoke, man up and use your ashtray, don't throw your trash at me.
 
Tucker Case said:
Deaths of children due to car accidents are 100% PREVENTABLE.. OMG!!!!! And they are FORCED INTO CARS!!!! They have no choice!!!!! And a hell f a lot more children die from car accidents than second hand smoke. An absurdly larger number. Like the vast majority of children who die under the age of 18 die form car accidents.

And these deaths are 100% PREVENTABLE..
Click to expand...
Talk about emotions >>
This makes little sense>>
I must say that I favor attempts to save lives, also that the best methods be used.
Education.
Having the police stop a vehicle full of children with smoking so-called adults....not so good, but, if there are other offenses...I don't know....easy to say "why not?"
The rights of the children are of greater value...I do not like the concept of totally equal rights...
Are the anti-smoking nazis going too far ??
 
Tucker Case said:
How does not putting your kids at risk end the modern way of life?



When one is 100% effective, then we should rescind the ban.



So you support holding them hostage in the car and putting their lives at great risk, but you just frown on smoking while doing so.
Click to expand...

Tuck, then offer up an workable alternative to cars being used as transportation.

Life is a Syndrome, it's woes are made up of a multitude of living problems, diseases, etc. Maybe systematically eliminating the individual problems that make up the Syndrome...it might begin to significantly reduce the risk of death under any circumstance.

As of today, it is impossible to stop transporting children in cars. But it is 100% possible to stop smoking in cars where children will be passengers.
 
rocket88 said:
I don't have a problem with people smoking in the car. What I DO have a problem with is when they flick their butts out the window. That's a public litter nuisance. If you want to smoke, man up and use your ashtray, don't throw your trash at me.
Click to expand...

Yeah right, when I see the state corrections prisoners picking up trash on the side of the roads that's what they're filling bags with, cig filters, NOT...lol

When we get to the point when we're told what to ingest, drink, eat, smoke and how to dress then we've essentially lost all our freedom of expression as individuals. We might as well be North Korea.
 
rocket88 said:
I don't have a problem with people smoking in the car. What I DO have a problem with is when they flick their butts out the window. That's a public litter nuisance. If you want to smoke, man up and use your ashtray, don't throw your trash at me.
Click to expand...
Here, I'd love to see an additional tax on weeds, say one penny per butt to cover the clean up cost...
Tired of picking up slobs trash !
Again - education ..
In the military, an exhausted cigarette is "field stripped".
 
Removable Mind said:
But it is 100% possible to stop smoking in cars where children will be passengers.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. We can't even make it 100% possible to stop drinking and driving, cell phone use, or other distractions while driving.
 
grip said:
Yeah right, when I see the state corrections prisoners picking up trash on the side of the roads that's what they're filling bags with, cig filters, NOT...lol

When we get to the point when we're told what to ingest, drink, eat, smoke and how to dress then we've essentially lost all our freedom of expression as individuals. We might as well be North Korea.
Click to expand...
Male bovine feces !
Its the people who are stripping away their own rights thru criminal acts and slovenliness.
And from what I see we are losing nothing.
Being a slob is NOT freedom of expression !
 
Thorgasm said:
No it isn't. We can't even make it 100% possible to stop drinking and driving, cell phone use, or other distractions while driving.
Click to expand...
Lets not shoot for 100% - this is impossible!
However, inroads have been made, I'm sure there are stats to prove this..
And I'm sure, that as each generation passes, people become more responsible.
But its the irresponsible ones who receive all the publicity..
 
earthworm said:
Male bovine feces !
Its the people who are stripping away their own rights thru criminal acts and slovenliness.
And from what I see we are losing nothing.
Being a slob is NOT freedom of expression !
Click to expand...

Male bovine what bahaha... that's nasty :lol:

Alright make a law to field strip butts. I'd like to start with the Dallas Cheerleaders.

I smoked in the hospital parking lot where there was no smoking on hospital grounds and never got caught because I kept popping my head up and down. Now do you really want me driving that way also? Might be a little dangerous.

Slob!? Why I resemble that remark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom