Bill Would Ban Smoking In Car With Kids

koat ^

[Red Jones]

thanks for giving that info in #50.

[Red Jones]

In Hong Kong the adults smoke about 3 times as many cigarettes per capita as the americans do. Yet in Hong Kong people live longer than in the US. Maybe they don't worry so much about monitoring and regulating the activities of others, maybe that's why they live longer.

[Great Dane]

"We've got to start somewhere," he said.

What a comment.......... after 10 years of anti smokism.

[freedumb2003]

>>I'm a multiple threat: a doper, a pipe smoker, a pick-up truck driver<<

Do some people call you Maurice? Do you speak for the popotus of love?

[freeper12]

>>protect both the born and unborn children is the most consistent

A serious question to ask yourselves, and I can't say I have all the answers or a perfectly logical delination between right and wrong, but, as I said, many pro-life people have no problems passing laws to protect the unborne...just how far should those laws extend?

i.e., if a woman was obviously pregnant, and was caught smoking crack/shooting up, should she face any harsher charges than just a regular non-pregnant junkie?

How about excessive drinking? smoking? dangerous physical activities?

This is a serious question...if one is for laws outlawing abortion, than should it be illegal to engage in activities that are likely to cause a premature termination of a pregnancy or a likely detrimental health effects?

So, logically, if you are OK with passing some laws that say what a woman can or cannot do while she is pregnant, is it that far of a reach to extned those protections to the born child?

Not looking for a fight...just trying to figure out how far you all think the personal freedom rights extend.

To me its not completely black and white, right and wrong.

Just wondering....

[jaime1959]

Hard to tell the real news from The Onion these days.

[Max McGarrity]

No.

[Gabz]

This is a serious question...if one is for laws outlawing abortion, than should it be illegal to engage in activities that are likely to cause a premature termination of a pregnancy or a likely detrimental health effects?

You're right it is a serious question, one without a simple answer.

I know you're not trying to pick a fight and i'm not dodging your question, it is a question that does not deserve a flip answer. But it still goes with my premise regarding the legislating of common sense.

I have to leave at the moment but I will return and see If I can answer your question better.

[Max McGarrity]

Two bills like this have been introduced in New York state, along with one to ban smoking on beaches and in parks. Antis have their panties ALL in a wad...must be trying to get it all done before they lose all their funding.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Bill Would Ban Smoking In Car With Kids"

Tell Bill to Go to Hell...MUD

[Great Dane]

How about the freedom of kids to grow up without asthma or lung cancer from negligent parents?

Second hand smoke causes neither cancer or asthma.

[Max McGarrity]

I guess the next logical step will be to make it illegal to smoke in your home if you have children.

Already on the drawing board here in the People's Republik of Kookiefornia, and the EPA has floated trial balloons about it nationally. What's it going to take for folks to realize this isn't about smoking, it's about CONTROL?

[Max McGarrity]

If driver safety and concentration is your concern, I'd suggest we ban KIDS in cars. They're far more likely to distract the driver than any other single thing you mention. By the way, I've been smoking just slightly fewer years than I've been driving and have never caused an accident, had very few, and don't like the idea of being punished for other folks' poor driving ability.

[swarthyguy]

>>next logical step will be to make it illegal to smoke in your home if you have children.

Coming to a home near you soon.

It's for the children. Like Patriotism and religion, the last refuge of scoundrels.

[Max McGarrity]

they'll just use teachers, doctors, or any other convenient stooge to report to the authorities whenever some kid tells them their parents have been naughty

OR they'll install "anonymous snitch lines" for neighbors and other busybodies to call and tattle, just as they have in Tempe. Can you say "Hitler Youth," children? I thought you could.)

[JudgemAll]

ATLANTA -- Smoking in a car carrying a child would be illegal under a bill proposed Thursday in the Georgia House of Representatives.

Democrat Paul Smith proposed the bill to make it a misdemeanor to smoke in a vehicle where a child is restrained in a car seat. The misdemeanor would carry a fine and include cigars, cigarettes and pipes.

"This is just protecting the kids from secondhand smoke,"

No visible crime or harm has been comited and they want a misdeamenor? What is this? Fascist land? Talk about overkill and treating honorable worse than dangerous criminals.

Repeat after me: the government shall not have my time and spaces and goods management.

[wayoverontheright]

"This is just protecting the kids from secondhand smoke," Smith said. "It's damaging to adults and it's even more dangerous to children."

What study shows second-hand smoke to be more dangerous than "first-hand" smoke?

This is a LIE isn't it?

Of course, this is a DEMOCRAT isn't it?

And his lips were MOVING weren't they?

[JudgemAll]

next logical step will be to make it illegal to smoke in your home if you have children.

Coming to a home near you soon.

It's for the children. Like Patriotism and religion, the last refuge of scoundrels.

Nope, not if you are an undocumented uncooperating illegal alien, then there's not much they can do to you... (sarcasm)

[JudgemAll]

"We've got to start somewhere," he said.

Yep, and we got to start somewhere to with our rights to defend ourselves against lies with our lives. Hang him!

[Max McGarrity]

This isn't gonna win me any points here on FR, but this is one I am OK with...adults should be able to smoke...no problem. But there is defintely something wrong with seeing parents puffing away on cigaretts with a few tiny little kids in the back seat having no choice in the matter...to me that is a form of child abuse. No doubt about it.

Why do you consider it "child abuse"? Because you've been told over and over and over and over that the kids are harmed? Or because YOU personally don't like it? What if the kids--like millions of us who grew up in earlier times when EVERYONE smoked--are fine, is it still "abuse"? Then where do you draw the line? Just putting the kids in the car, driving to a (smokefree) restaurant, and letting them eat food prepared there is 450 TIMES MORE DANGEROUS than whatever smoke they may encounter in the car on the way there.

Does anyone really think that cigarettes don't cause health problems?

Smoking MAY cause health problems, environmental tobacco smoke does NOT HARM HEALTHY CHILDREN!