• 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
Moderator's Warning:
Cut out the personal comments.
 
What are you talking about? Do you want a kid to stay with a parent that does not care if the kid can breath or not? I specifically talked about an asthmaitc kid going to the hospital repeated with an asthma attack whose parents smoke, I have seen little kids come in wheezing so you could hear them accross the ER and they reeked of cigarette smoke. Think about Maslow, which is more important Oxygen or family relationships?

The PROBLEM is that you would have to prove that in court in order to have the child removed. You would have to prove that the cigarette smoke is the definitive CAUSE instead of just an exacerbation of asthma, which some people get quite often due to many, many different factors. Do you realize how difficult that is?
 
Not being able to breath is no big deal?
An egregious home environment would have to consist of more than just smoking cigarettes to justify removing children from the home. Like I said earlier, that, at MOST, would be considered a form of neglect and is FAR from the most serious kinds. You really should look into real physical/sexual abuse that children endure and how slow CPS are to move and how they fail a lot of children in their care. Then you would see how ridiculous it would be to overburden that system with parents who smoke.
 
Actually the case that broght the up, the child was removed. No one I know of denies cigarette smoke can cause an asthma attack. The kid comes in reeking of smoke and is turning blue, damn right the child should be taken from the parents. Sucks not being able to breath.
The PROBLEM is that you would have to prove that in court in order to have the child removed. You would have to prove that the cigarette smoke is the definitive CAUSE instead of just an exacerbation of asthma, which some people get quite often due to many, many different factors. Do you realize how difficult that is?
 
Not being able to breath is no big deal?

Obviously you are not understanding. You cannot take children from their parents here in America without some type of proof that there is intentional wrongdoing. Do you realize the can of worms you would be opening here? You cannot PROVE that an asthma exacerbation is due to a parent smoking in the home. This is NOT my personal opinion. These are facts. You can't take children away from parents without a DARN good reason and provable reason.
 
Actually the case that broght the up, the child was removed. No one I know of denies cigarette smoke can cause an asthma attack. The kid comes in reeking of smoke and is turning blue, damn right the child should be taken from the parents. Sucks not being able to breath.

Of course it can. I don't deny that either. I am saying that you cannot prove the cause of an asthma exacerbation. It could be caused by allergens.
 
Only if we stray hopelessly from the topic. Facts:

a)cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen with links to numerous health problems (including death)
b)opening a window does not actually prevent cigarette smoke from entering the entire vehicle, as any smoker or passenger already well knows.
c)children have extremely limited powers in preventing parents from smoking. Sure, they can ask the parent to stop smoking, but if the parent insists then the child is crap out of luck.

The rest of this thread has been amusing navel gazing, but the above is what's important. As I said earlier, we don't need to bring the slippery slope into this since the ban can be defended on its own merits.


Well, thank you for your opinion. I have mine, and it obviously differs from yours.
 
Well, thank you for your opinion. I have mine, and it obviously differs from yours.

None of what I said in that post was subjective and open to interpretation. That's why I called them "facts."
 
None of what I said in that post was subjective and open to interpretation. That's why I called them "facts."

I don't consider much of anything in your post to resemble facts. That's why I thanked you for your opinion. So, thanks for your opinion, again.
 
Of course it can. I don't deny that either. I am saying that you cannot prove the cause of an asthma exacerbation. It could be caused by allergens.

If a child displays health problems consistent with chronic cigarette smoke inhalation, reeks of cigarette smoke, the parents demonstrated being smokers and the home subsequently found to be outrageously filled with smoke, a court could likely dismiss allergens as a possible explanation for the child's health problems.
 
I don't consider much of anything in your post to resemble facts. That's why I thanked you for your opinion. So, thanks for your opinion, again.


a)cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen with links to numerous health problems (including death)

Not an opinion. The science settled this one a long time ago.

b)opening a window does not actually prevent cigarette smoke from entering the entire vehicle, as any smoker or passenger already well knows.

Not an opinion. I understand that it doesn't enter the rest of the vehicle from your perception, but no nonsmoking passenger in a car will support this. It's a smoker's fantasy and nothing more.

c)children have extremely limited powers in preventing parents from smoking. Sure, they can ask the parent to stop smoking, but if the parent insists then the child is crap out of luck.

Not an opinion. The parent makes the rules, feeds and clothes the child, provides the shelter, etc. That a child has limited decision making powers is not up for interpretation.
 
a)cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen with links to numerous health problems (including death)

Not an opinion. The science settled this one a long time ago.

b)opening a window does not actually prevent cigarette smoke from entering the entire vehicle, as any smoker or passenger already well knows.

Not an opinion. I understand that it doesn't enter the rest of the vehicle from your perception, but no nonsmoking passenger in a car will support this. It's a smoker's fantasy and nothing more.

c)children have extremely limited powers in preventing parents from smoking. Sure, they can ask the parent to stop smoking, but if the parent insists then the child is crap out of luck.

Not an opinion. The parent makes the rules, feeds and clothes the child, provides the shelter, etc. That a child has limited decision making powers is not up for interpretation.

It would seem a nerve has been struck. Interesting.
 
b)opening a window does not actually prevent cigarette smoke from entering the entire vehicle, as any smoker or passenger already well knows.

Not an opinion. I understand that it doesn't enter the rest of the vehicle from your perception, but no nonsmoking passenger in a car will support this. It's a smoker's fantasy and nothing more.

Except is lacks the proof of the smoke actually getting to the other person. It certainly might get there, but it doesn't always get to them. This is not an opinion.
 
why not outlaw smoking, texting, use of cell phone and dvd players while driving. There lots of things soccer moms practice that endanger the welfare of children
 
Except is lacks the proof of the smoke actually getting to the other person. It certainly might get there, but it doesn't always get to them. This is not an opinion.

But it can, or cannot, depending on the person.

Bubble Boy would be a cannot.
 
Except is lacks the proof of the smoke actually getting to the other person. It certainly might get there, but it doesn't always get to them. This is not an opinion.
Yes, for the sake of the child's health, he must cease breathing in the presence of smokers, particularly in an automobile.
 
Trying to defend the idea of making your kids breath smoke is so absurd I really cant see the need to discuss it. Perhaps the fact the discussion took place at all reflects on the mental health system of this country more than anything.
Yes, for the sake of the child's health, he must cease breathing in the presence of smokers, particularly in an automobile.
 
why not outlaw smoking, texting, use of cell phone and dvd players while driving. There lots of things soccer moms practice that endanger the welfare of children

IMO, smoking in a closed area with children, even others, is going over the line..
What we need is a better education and a better people.
Having a law against this is too difficult and costly to effectively enforce.
 
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.

It is just as enforceable as seatbelt and child safety seat laws. They work on the same principles. And the point really isn't massive enforcement. As I stated earlier in this thread, the point is deterrent because of the possibility of enforcement. It's basically to bring attention to stupid/ignorant parents that "hey, maybe you shouldn't smoke with your child in the car".

No laws completely prevent people from doing the thing that is illegal. But many act as a pretty good deterrent from the activity.
 
Nothing better than taking money from parents with small children?

Maybe if they didn't smoke they would have more. Or they could simply obey the law and not smoke while driving in their cars with children in them.
 
IMO, smoking in a closed area with children, even others, is going over the line..
What we need is a better education and a better people.
Having a law against this is too difficult and costly to effectively enforce.


Just curious. How do you define "enclosed space"? Would being in the same room qualify? What about different rooms of the same house?

smoking around kids is undoubtedly a bad idea. I'm not certain though that we need new laws to combat every bad idea out there.
 
Last edited:
So ban cigarettes?

Really. This constant beating around the bush they enjoy doing so much is annoying. Just get it over with already. ****.
 
How much of the objection to this is the whole "our government is becoming a dictatorship and overstepping their boundaries"

and how much is defending the act of smoking in a closely contained environment, like a car, with small children present?
 
Back
Top Bottom