Bill to ban smoking in cars with small kids

[Cruentus]

I think it is a case of people not realizing that you can't legislate stupidity or bad behavior. If people are going to behave badly or stupidly, they are going to do so regardless of a "license" or "law" or "ordinance" that legislates otherwise.

I don't think it is a good idea to smoke around kids, given the info that we have out there of the likelyhood of kids picking up the habit when parents do it around them. But that doesn't mean that we need to make laws against it.

We need to stop legislating and start educating. We need to also work on our economy and worker protection so that people can have the time to think critically and parent well, vs. being run rampent and unable to sit down and have dinner or watch the news with family as it is today for many people.

But trying to create a law for every bit of undesirable behavior does nothing to help our society, and only makes us less free...

 

[Sapper6]

my first post in the study for a LONG while...i just couldn't pass this one up...

I think it's a ****ing ignorant law. government trying to govern private lives. and hell, all along i thought i was a conservative (not necessarily republican leaning).

my parents smoke(d) at least 1 1/2 packs a day growing up. then smoked when we drove around, they smoked at home, hell, they probably smoke when they slept. my point...i'm a 28 year old non-smoker, can run two miles in under 11 minutes, have two healthy girls, never succombed to major illness (not even a cavity), and i'm not in the least effected by the fact they decided to "burn one" on the way to grocery store.

less of a role model? not at all. they raised me well. both are well educated (bachelors and masters degrees). they provided me the tools i needed to succeed, and smoked while they did it. both of them still alive and living a great retired, smoke filled life.

to those who say this law "is a great way to get people away from killing themself"...that's just comical ignorance. let's get rid of Mc Donalds to save the fat people, eh?

too much legislation is bad for the people...who said that anyway...?

in closing, studid law.

 

[Andrew Green]

I like that, fine parents that give there kids Happy Meals. It could work.

 

[Dave Leverich]

Ok, I guess I should have been more specific. On the guns, at least in my state, you have a waiting period, fill out a form etc. On voting you have to register, be a US citizen etc. It was a joke that you have to register, get a license, or _some_ kind of stage-gate to do these things, yet any idiot can have a kid. That was the joke.

Do I think there should be a law? Heck no. Do i think people that smoke with their kids in enclosed spaces after knowing about what smoking does... should be slapped the hell out of? Yes.

I smoked for over half my life, but there's no way in hell that any intelligent human should force their kid to inhale while they do. My own dad has reduced lung capacity, and a few other lung conditions due to smoking... he hasn't ever lit a single cigarette.

There are just things that are common sense once we learn things. I don't think you can legislate common sense, but I will call someone a moron for it.

 

[CoryKS]

Jonah Goldberg has a good article today about doing things For The Children(tm). Child's Play

 

[Infinite]

The legislation proposed is at the local and state level. While there may still be lobbying at the state level, I doubt you find it at the city council level in Bangor.

References to the United States Senate are irrelevant to this legislation.

I beg to differ. You will find that US legislators often have counterparts at the state level for just such reasons. If you think for a moment that the big tobacco industries doesn't lobby against state wide smoking bands I think you are being a bit limited in your scope.

 

[morph4me]

They do realize that these are the same parents that smoke in their homes with the kids around, don't they?

 

[crushing]

Everyone ok with the 'do it for the children' law that requires parents to force their children into car seats/seat belts though? Other than it takes longer to see the effects of a carcinogen on the health of an exposed child than if the child were in an auto accident.

 

[michaeledward]

I beg to differ. You will find that US legislators often have counterparts at the state level for just such reasons. If you think for a moment that the big tobacco industries doesn't lobby against state wide smoking bands I think you are being a bit limited in your scope.

I'm wondering if you read the words that you quoted.

 

[Infinite]

I'm wondering if you read the words that you quoted.

Oh I did but one could make the next logical leap that some level of interference is happening at the city level if they are already saturating the state level.

I just can not confirm that as I am not in city level politics but I have known people who did run and they DID get invited to expensive dinners from people who worked for various companies. That sounds like lobbying to me.

Sorry I was at work and didn't expand my thoughts fully.

 

[jks9199]

Everyone ok with the 'do it for the children' law that requires parents to force their children into car seats/seat belts though? Other than it takes longer to see the effects of a carcinogen on the health of an exposed child than if the child were in an auto accident.

Car seats/safety belts are an entirely different question.

Very simply, the odds of receiving serious injuries in an auto accident, no matter who is at fault, are greatly increased without the safety seat/seat belt. The laws of physics don't treat anyone as being special...

I'm not in favor of a large amount of this smoking regulation; it's hard to enforce, and in some cases, has a notable economic effect when people go elsewhere to eat, etc. Smoking in cars is almost unenforceable; assuming it's a primary offense, how is an officer supposed to know on sight that a child falls into the age range? Beyond that -- you have no control over the behavior at home or elsewhere. So -- mom doesn't smoke in the car, but she does at home. And, now, since she knows she can't smoke in the car, she has one last cigarette at home before she leaves with the kid... Or she takes the kid to one of the few restaurants left with smoking areas which she might have avoided before.

Sorry -- this is feel good legislation with no actual positive benefit, in my opinion.

I'd rather see stricter laws on discarding cigarette butts on the highway. THAT's a greater problem, in my opinion!

 

[crushing]

Car seats/safety belts are an entirely different question.

Very simply, the odds of receiving serious injuries in an auto accident, no matter who is at fault, are greatly increased without the safety seat/seat belt. The laws of physics don't treat anyone as being special...

[...]

Sorry -- this is feel good legislation with no actual positive benefit, in my opinion.

I'd rather see stricter laws on discarding cigarette butts on the highway. THAT's a greater problem, in my opinion!

I don't think your comparison fits. Wouldn't a better comparison be between the odds of getting into an injurious auto accident and the odds of developing health problems related to cigarette smoke inhalation?

I'm not saying I agree with the proposed law. Maybe existing abuse and negligence laws already cover the willful exposure of children to known toxins? But what a slipperly slope into which that could turn.

 

[Haze]

Don't take this wrong.

As it was stated, the state are looking out for the childs welfare. But is it only for the child or is it also motivated by financial reasons that concern the state?

If children are healthier the costs that may be incurred by the state in assitance for medical procedures are less.

Healthy children are apt to learn at a more elovated rate just because they are absent from school less.

Better educated people tend to earn more $$ and pay more tax. They are considered to be better contribtors to society and less of a burden on society.

Now besides all that,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I feel it should be passed just for the simple fact that it is harming a childs health that has no choice in the matter.

If you don't love yourself enough to stop smoking maybe, just maybe, you love your kids enough to stop smoking. Or drinking in excess or the use of anything that may mess you up. If any of these things take your life and your child/children still live you have still taken something precious from them. You have taken one of their parents from them.

Just my oppinion for what it's worth.