Skip to comments.
NY SENATOR PROPOSES BAN ON SMOKING IN CARS
NYS Legislative Information ^
Posted on 09/23/2003 5:17:15 AM PDT by publius1
STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________
189
2003-2004 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
(Prefiled)
January 8, 2003 ___________
Introduced by Sens. HOFFMANN, MORAHAN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Health
AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation to restricting areas where smoking is permitted
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem- bly, do enact as follows:
1 Section 1. Section 1399-o of the public health law is amended by 2 adding a new subdivision 2-a to read as follows: 3 2-a. Smoking shall not be permitted and no person shall smoke in a 4 private passenger car, private passenger van or private passenger truck 5 where minors under sixteen years of age are passengers in any such vehi- 6 cle. 7 § 2. Subdivision 1 of section 1399-q of the public health law, as 8 added by chapter 244 of the laws of 1989, is amended to read as follows: 9 1. Private homes, private residences and private automobiles except as 10 provided in subdivision two-a of section thirteen hundred ninety-nine-o 11 of this article; 12 § 3. Section 1399-v of the public health law, as added by chapter 244 13 of the laws of 1989, is amended to read as follows: 14 § 1399-v. Penalties. 1. The commissioner may impose a civil penalty 15 for a violation of this article in an amount not to exceed that set 16 forth in subdivision one of section twelve of this chapter. Any other 17 enforcement officer may impose a civil penalty for a violation of this 18 article in an amount not to exceed that set forth in paragraph [f] (f) 19 of subdivision one of section three hundred nine of this chapter. 20 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision one of this section 21 any person who violates the provisions of subdivision two-a of section 22 thirteen hundred ninety-nine-o of this article shall be liable for a 23 civil penalty of five hundred dollars for a first offense, up to an 24 amount not to exceed one thousand dollars for a second offense, and up
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD02074-01-3
S. 189 2
1 to an amount not to exceed one thousand five hundred dollars and/or ten 2 days in jail for a third or subsequent violation. 3 § 4. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed- 4 ing the date on which it shall have become a law.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: pufflist; smokingban
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-262 next last
Thought my colleagues on the site might be interested in seeing what the next step in New York's anti-smoking crusade will look like. This is the justification provided by the Senator sponsoring the bill:
"It has been well documented as to the harmful effects second-hand smoke can have on people, especially children. Smoking is prohibited in many public places such as airplanes, shopping malls, and some restaurants. The dangers second-hand smoke can have on a child in such an enclosed area like a private passenger vehicle are severe. We currently provide protections for both children and drivers by mandating the use of car seats, seatbelts and padded dashboards in their private utomobile. This bill is an extension of those rotections by providing clean air that children can breathe."
In other words, we're doing it for the kids!
By the logic of this bill, the next step will be an outright ban--if 2nd hand smoke in cars is bad for kids, why is it okay for adults?
Notice the legislation doesn't say what happens if the 16-year old is smoking in the car!
1
posted on
09/23/2003 5:17:15 AM PDT
by
publius1
To: publius1
STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________
189
2003-2004 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
(Prefiled)
January 8, 2003 ___________
Introduced by Sens. HOFFMANN, MORAHAN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Health
AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation to restricting areas where smoking is permitted
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Section 1399-o of the public health law is amended by adding a new subdivision 2-a to read as follows:
2-a. Smoking shall not be permitted and no person shall smoke in a private passenger car, private passenger van or private passenger truck where minors under sixteen years of age are passengers in any such vehicle.
§ 2. Subdivision 1 of section 1399-q of the public health law, as added by chapter 244 of the laws of 1989, is amended to read as follows:
1. Private homes, private residences and private automobiles except as 10 provided in subdivision two-a of section thirteen hundred ninety-nine-o of this article;
§ 3. Section 1399-v of the public health law, as added by chapter 244 13 of the laws of 1989, is amended to read as follows:
§ 1399-v. Penalties. 1. The commissioner may impose a civil penalty for a violation of this article in an amount not to exceed that set forth in subdivision one of section twelve of this chapter. Any other enforcement officer may impose a civil penalty for a violation of this article in an amount not to exceed that set forth in paragraph [f] (f) of subdivision one of section three hundred nine of this chapter. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision one of this section 21 any person who violates the provisions of subdivision two-a of section 22 thirteen hundred ninety-nine-o of this article shall be liable for a 23 civil penalty of five hundred dollars for a first offense, up to an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars for a second offense, and up to an amount not to exceed one thousand five hundred dollars and/or ten days in jail for a third or subsequent violation.
§ 4. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeeding the date on which it shall have become a law.
There--that's a better, more readable approach. I'm sorry, I tried to include the line numbers in the previous post. I don't have the skills for that.
My own view, by the way, is that rather than continue this creeping prohibition, they should have the guts to just ban smoking outright.
2
posted on
09/23/2003 5:21:31 AM PDT
by
publius1
(Almost as if he likes it...)
To: publius1
Oh, goodie!
Let'sban walking down stairs with your shoelaces untied,too. If it saves just
Then, perhaps they can make MURDER illegal. Then, we'll all live happy together in a lovely socialistic utopia.
How did I EVER live to 41 without the goverments help? Must be lucky, I guess.
3
posted on
09/23/2003 5:24:15 AM PDT
by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it)
To: publius1
I never thought I'd live to see the day when blatant idiocy like this would happen. Seriously.
In this instance, I feel compelled to comment that this is insane. You'd think that wouldn't be necessary, that it was evident on the face of it that it was insane, but since it's out, in print, as an actual proposal, it's time to say it: this is insane.
Hoffman and Morahan are certifiable smokenazis, and this is clearly crazy. I've worked in the NeuroPsych Unit for some months now, and people who want to make other people follow nitpicky invasive personal madeup rules are routinely diagnosed and treated.
How come these "lawmakers" are running around in public, free? Because Hillarybots have decided to use the umbrella "for the children" to redefine child abuse as the scent of burning tobacco in the vicinity of a minor.
The smoking lamp is out.
I'm always amazed that the party that states it is "for the children" still supports the murder of millions of unborn children every year. Go figure.
To: Rocket1968
The entire issue should be taken off the books and the "unfair" tax should be abolished. It's a consumer product just like anything else.
6
posted on
09/23/2003 5:28:54 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: publius1
I'm not a smoker and honestly I can't stand to be around it, but this goes too far. How can you pass a law stating that you can't smoke in your car, hell lets go all the way and just make smoking illegal.
I do like the idea of having non-smoking bars, but I think there should also be some bars that you can smoke in.
7
posted on
09/23/2003 5:47:28 AM PDT
by
areeves79
(See, you just read this. Now don't you feel smart?)
To: publius1
This is absolutely going too far in this situation.
I will say, however, that it was very pleasant to sit in a Pizzaria Uno Bar in NYC recently, sipping a cold one and watching college football without gagging on cigarette smoke. Bar owners complain that they are losing business with the smoking ban, but they gained mine (and the 3 people with me). I would never have patronized that bar if it was full of cigarette smoke. It provided a great mid-afternoon respite from shopping and sight seeing.
8
posted on
09/23/2003 5:48:31 AM PDT
by
randita
Comment #9 Removed by Moderator
To: randita
Assuming that the "cold one" isn't a coke, good thing Prohibition aka "the other dirty male habit" didn't last. You'd be sitting in a soda shop with a bunch of kids.
10
posted on
09/23/2003 5:52:06 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: areeves79
How can you pass a law stating that you can't smoke in your car The law would ban smoking in a car where minors are present. I thought they already inhaled fumes down in those dirty mine shafts?
11
posted on
09/23/2003 5:52:36 AM PDT
by
Huck
To: Huck
I really don't think most people realize just how the "for the children" backlash is likely to materialize. Sometime in the not to distant future, people are going to start going to great lengths to NOT have children because of the power that having children gives the government over parents. This is already starting to appear in the large increase in the number of men avoiding marriage because for men, marriage has become a "risky scheme" thanks to no fault divorce laws and domestic relations courts that just outright hate men. A few more laws and policies like the one in this article and the only segment of the population that will be growing will be illegal aliens, as if that wasn't growing fast enough anyway.
12
posted on
09/23/2003 6:04:55 AM PDT
by
Orangedog
(Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
To: areeves79
If smoking is legal, it should be legal.
However, I don't know if smoking should be legal at all. To my mind, smoking is a drug delivery system that is most decidedly unsafe, and is therefore not permissable under existing regulations.
It should not be legal to market a product that dispenses an addictive drug in a way that leads to a high rate of disease and death. The fact that this is legal today is an historical anomoly that should be corrected forthwith.
If some bright young man invented cigarettes today, would he be permitted to sell them? Lets just ban the damn things and get it over with.
Either that or remove any shred of government protection from liability afforded to the tobacco companies and let nature take it's course.
13
posted on
09/23/2003 6:07:13 AM PDT
by
gridlock
(All I need to know about Islam I learned on 9/11/01)
To: Orangedog
I really don't think most people realize just how the "for the children" backlash is likely to materialize. It is the rationale for all sorts of "benevolence." Bill O'Reilly is the ideology's loudest cheerleader.
Sometime in the not to distant future, people are going to start going to great lengths to NOT have children because of the power that having children gives the government over parents. This is already starting to appear in the large increase in the number of men avoiding marriage because for men, marriage has become a "risky scheme" thanks to no fault divorce laws and domestic relations courts that just outright hate men.
True enough. It is risky business. Absent some spiritual or personal motive to procreate, what's the upside?
A few more laws and policies like the one in this article and the only segment of the population that will be growing will be illegal aliens, as if that wasn't growing fast enough anyway.
You tread heavily, but you speak the truth. Actually, as far as I know, urban negroes continue to breed like rabbits.
14
posted on
09/23/2003 6:10:32 AM PDT
by
Huck
To: areeves79
Tobacco reparations are due from Indians.
To: SheLion; Just another Joe
Look Here! They're crazy!
16
posted on
09/23/2003 6:24:31 AM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(I got "Treason" from the Library today-was bought 9/3- Think libs are ruling the book list?)
To: gridlock
Lets just ban the damn things and get it over with. I'd rather make it illegal for people to be overweight. Are you fat?
17
posted on
09/23/2003 6:27:10 AM PDT
by
per loin
Comment #18 Removed by Moderator
To: gridlock
Lets just ban the damn things and get it over with. Won't happen. Government is more addicted to the tax money than smokers are to the nicotine.
19
posted on
09/23/2003 6:31:31 AM PDT
by
Phantom Lord
(Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
To: Eric in the Ozarks
Tobacco reparations are due from Indians.And you can have the reparations, assuming you whites are still men enough to try and take it ;0)
20
posted on
09/23/2003 6:43:52 AM PDT
by
Chad Fairbanks
("People never grow up, they just learn how to act in public." - Bryan White)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-262 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson