No smoking in your car
 

BANGOR, MAINE, Jan. 19, 2007— The action by the Bangor City

Council to ban smoking in cars in which children under 18 are passengers is being hailed today by anti-smoking advocates as a new frontier in the fight against cigarettes. But libertarian groups have greeted it with howls of protest as another government intrusion into the lives of U.S. citizens

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2808626&page=1

I have mixed feelings about this.

Though, smoking in the car with children isn't very parent-like.

People should probably be allowed to kill their kids, yeah.

I was watching the history channel the other day and they called cigarettes 'cancer sticks'. It wasn't a show about cigarettes or cancer or anything. It was a show about sharp shooters and they said that one was going to shoot the ash off of a cancer stick.

Of course I'm against telling anyone what to do, and I enjoy smoking, but imho once someone has a child they should give up the cigarettes, just like they should give up hard partying or recreational drugs--at least until the kid's 18 and out of the house.

As a smoker, I don't see what everyone's so worked up about these last few years. I don't see what the point of being an anti-smoking advocate really is. My health or lack of it costs the world nothing, and I will quit smoking in my own time. The only motivator to quit I have at this time is a difficulty holding long notes.

What's the point of passing laws that no one could reasonably enforce?

Yay! (Sorry, I'm a hypocritical anti-smoking bastard.)

It's a pretty common slang term for cigarettes...

That's why cars have windows.

Yes, but on the history channel? It seems like some kind of official endorsement.

They were probably just trying to be "hip for the youngsters". Don't worry about it.

Mixed feelings here as well. I smoke, but I'm not a chain smoker or anything. I can leave them alone for whatever length of time that I need to. I use them mostly for stress relief, therefore, when I'm not stressed, I don't smoke much at all.

Now, about the topic... Of course, here in the US, your car is considered an 'extension' of your home by law. You can't tell someone that they can't smoke in their own home if they choose to do so. I don't see how this law (if passed) would be enforcable. Of course, I also think that it's not very good parenting to smoke around your kids (or anyone else's kids) until they're legally old enough to make that decision for themselves. But, like was said before... cars have windows.

And on the flip-side, if a child in the car complains about an adult's cigarette smoke, then the adult should respect that and put the cigarette out. As a smoker myself, I know that it won't fuckin' kill ya to leave the smokes alone until you get to where you're going. :rolleyes:

I saw that the first time. I'm expounding, if you don't mind.

Sounds like bizzarre cowboy/redneck-talk.
"Yep, I can even shoot the ashes offa that there cancer stick."

Not exactly, no. It has more protection than if you're just walking down the street, but not nearly as much as your home (though maybe it should).

I don't really see the problem with this law, presuming that second-hand smoke is actually a health concern (which, even as a semi-rabid-anti-smoking-person, I'm not convinced of).

It may not have an equal amount of protection, but it is considered an extension.

These types of shitty laws just makes it harder for law enforcement. Its enough that they have to concentrate on upholding speeders/cellphone drivers/Drunks/etc. BUT giving a ticket for smoking in the car is a bit much.

If cigarettes in the car = probable cause for stop & search, then in a way a dumb law like this can make some things easier for law enforcement, like pressuring their way into searching your car.

I think it's preposterous to think that anyone directly gets killed by second hand smoke. It usually takes 50 years to kill you first hand.

I actually don't think smoking around kids is a good idea. That's not because of the second hand smoke, it's because they might pick up the nasty habit.

Giving the cops another excuse to shake you down for some money is stupid. They have enough excuses.

And only a couple weeks for the initial negative health effects to kick in (if that).

Just because the human body is usually so very good at dealing with genetic damage doesn't mean I want to build my house on top of a uranium deposit.

No, cigarette smoke doesn't "directly" kill anyone, typically (with very rare exceptions). Fuck with the body long enough, and it's going to give out.

Sorry but this is awesome. I am an asthma sufferer and there are days when someone smoking in a car next to me at a light on a nice day is just like them coming over to my car and reaching in and choking me.

The problem here is that one's right should end where another's begin. End point.

I shouldn't HAVE to roll up my window and you shouldn't be told you can't smoke, unless it's affecting someone else. Oh damn...it is.

I would rather see smoking in bars than smoking in cars. How is that for a trade? Smoking in Bars instead of Smoking in cars.

When you go to a bar you need to be prepared for drinking and smoking. IT'S A BAR DUH!

But in your car when you are giving your kids cancer or causing someone else health issues? Nope.

Don't even go into the 'polution from your car is worse than smoking, blah blah blah' because people getting to and from work or going to the hospital or to see Aunt Nanna is not about one person's choice to suck down cancer.

They compare like apples and meteor showers.

.02

xzxzzx & rockouthippie :

Hi, I am your exception to the rule that second hand smoke doesn't kill anyone, nice to meet you. My wife smokes...second hand smoke is WORSE for me than first-hand smoke. In fact the smoke that gets caught in clothing is worse than standing right by it, because it's an allergic reaction and a concentrated dose is worse than a somewhat dilluted stream of smoke.

If I have an asthma attack that I can not correct I can die in a matter of minutes without medicine being handy. I might not even make it to the hospital to get a 'treatment'. I own a url=http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/nebulizer]nebulizer[/url] for this reason.

Even a shitty cloudy day with and inversion can make my asthma bad enough that I have to take steriods to function. Sometimes TYING my damn shoes is hard during an asthma attack. I am not some whimpy person like the kid in goonies who takes a puff on his 'breather' every five seconds either.

The ONLY way you can remotely understand how it is to have asthma is to use a straw the size of a pinhole ONLY to breath and run a 5 mile marathon underwater. Then MAYBE you will get it.

sgtfuzzbubble99 :
Problem with this is you can't zoom around the world in your home and emit toxic gas for other people to enjoy. Only Al Gore can zoom around the world in a jet causing mass polution and talk about how bad the environment is. HELLO! :D

P.S. I am not an 'anti-smoker' I am just an anti-air-rapist. If I COULD smoke I would probably smoke cigars or cloves...but I really can't unless I am medicated. Sucks to be me eh?

Early Devil :

I agree with you. If you aren't a parent, you will make a good one.


zootm :
You will make a fine parent as well. Bill Cosby makes a funny when he says 'I brought you into this world, I can take you out....'

(It's funnier if you are a parent by the way...)

I used to smoke cloves. They were always more expensive than normal cigarettes, but they kept raising the prices more and more, and I got tired of paying for them. I also got tired of the dirty looks and the "Ew, what the fuck is that smell?" that I'd get whenever I'd be in a bar or a restaraunt with smoking sections. They're no worse than anything else, but whatever.

I do occasionally smoke cigars, though.

On occasion, I smoke a pipe. Whenever I smoke it in a public setting, people always say to me, "Damn that thing smells good."

My health or lack of it costs the world nothing<<<

You're joking right? Any idea how many heart disease, emphysema, stroke and related cancer death and the resulting public costs to the health care system are related to smoking? Ever wonder why a weekend in the emergency room/hospital after you break your leg badly playing soccer may set you back $25k if you're not insured?

Frivolous Malpractice suits. (which is not smoking last I checked)

That's certainly a one facter, yet a small one when put up into the overal cost variables. And doesn't hold a candle nor diminish the effect of over 800,000 deaths a year related to smoking that weigh heavily on the health care system; the costs of which are mostly pushed back on the state, local provider and consumers.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_...es/mortali.htm

That's just bullshit. Smokers die quick. It's all the healthy people that are the problem. If you're dead, they don't have to pay your social security or medicare.

What about AIDS?. Tens of thousands of dollars a year to keep someone alive. What about climbing Mt. Hood?. 3 yuppies went up there and died. It cost the taxpayers millions.

What about Kim, who drove off the road and froze.... again millions to get his wife and kids out and to find out he was dead?.

I guess it's ok to fly helicopters at $10,000 an hour to find stupid people. It's fine to pay AIDS victims tens of thousands a year to stay alive....

But have a smoke?.

That's especially great because the tobacco companies settled. They settled to pay the government, not smokers claims.

Medical costs are high for one reason. The guys running hospitals are a bunch of greedy fucks.

The number one killer is still being fat. We'd be better off pulling you over for having a big mac in your hand.

60% of us are too fat, 25% of us smoke, 10% of us are alcoholics, 3% of us have AIDS.

It's funny how we pick out one thing to make illegal.

Smokers here pay extremely high cigarette taxes. That doesn't help them. It all goes into the general fund.

I think it's really weird that we'll pay millions to fly helicopters to search for dead guys who stupidly climbed a mountain in avalanche season, but have a smoke?.

Get real.

That's just bullshit. Smokers die quick. It's all the healthy people that are the problem. If you're dead, they don't have to pay your social security or medicare.

Godamm you one one insane mofo. Dumb as a bag of rocks with all the smart rocks removed, too. The best thing that can be said of you is that your ignorance on every single subject is remarkably consistent.

Why would "the costs be mostly pushed back on the state, local provider and consumers", exactly?
This isn't Canada.

I agree with ROH in this sense: It is amazing how some people think they can pick and choose what can and can't be legislated.

Quit giving your rights away

http://medicolegal.***********/pearl1938.htm

Here's the figures. Smoking takes 13.5 years off of men and 14.5 years off of women. That's 14 years that these people don't collect social security or need medicare.

Since most people exhaust all of the money that they ever paid into social security in ONE YEAR, I'd call that a savings.

Smoke em if you've got em'

Another thing, this is not a state expense. If you get lung cancer and don't have medical insurance, they aren't gonna do shit.

You'll get the bums rush at the emergency room and they'll call hospice.

Still, we need those taxes......gotta tax and hassle smokers more ........

Why would "the costs be mostly pushed back on the state, local provider and consumers", exactly?

Becuase of the estimated 50 million uninsured people who still get sick, get cancer and end up being treated gratis till they die by the healthcare system (we are still a fairly civilized nation). Those costs are what are returned to you and workmans comp and ssi, etc in $600 a day non-private hospital rooms and $450 to have a blood test and lab work and $75 for that plastic water pitcher you just bought without asking. I'm insured now, but four years ago, between jobs when I wasn't a broke my leg badly. The short weekend in emergency and an overnight stay was over $8,000 out of my own pccket as I'm one of the rare ones who pay. The vast majority of the uninsured just walk on the insane bills. Can't blame em, really.

Compare that to $126,000 that we save from them being dead and not on social security. That's not even counting medicare.

Is it smokers fault somehow that water pitchers cost $75?. I spent two days in the hospital last year with some pretty basic meds. $12,000.

The room wasn't as clean or as comfortable as a motel 6. You tell me?.

Whos your enemy?. The smoker or the yuppie getting paid $100 an hour to screech about smoking?. Or the cop making $50,000 a year that has nothing better to do than write smoking tickets.

Just watch, you see it happening already, they're trying to blame all the worlds ills on fat people.

What happens when it's something you do?.

I can just see Burger Mama spread eagle on the sidewalk while the cops pat her down for twinkies.

:rolleyes:

So, why blame smoking in particular?
Should we outlaw trans-fats next?
Soda?
Reenact prohibition?
Should we mandate exercise for everyone?

Where are you drawing the line and why draw it there?

I give up. you guys should be posting to the echo chamber on Freerepublic.com

So, why blame smoking in particular?

Didn't have the time to read the link to the statistics on smoking related deaths due to heart disease, stroke, emphasema, various cancers, etc? You quoted it in a post so I know you're aware of the link. And disreguard roh's BS that smokers die quick. He's an insane idiot. I know it's hard to be both, but he pulls it off pretty well.

Compared to what?. Long life?. Which costs the taxpayers more?. And is it any worst than being fat?. Or a combination of smoking and being fat?.

Only an idiot would suggest that it's a law enforcement job to enforce healthy lifestyles.

These days it's ok to be a walking STD epidemic, but have a smoke?.

I already know that smoking is bad for peoples health, what else am I supposed to draw form that link? It doesn't say anything about
people not having insurance or any of the other red herrings you've presented.

Insane idiot or not, at least ROH knows how to use the quote button.

Geez. I have never seen such a pissing contest. Play nice kiddies. Back to the main topic...smoking in cars...not 'health care reform or health care deformed'.

Hell next thing you know some canadian will be in here telling us how much the US Health Care system sucks ass and Canada has all the answers, and shitty doctors too.

Wow.

Urm, well, since I don't qualify for public health assistance (able-bodied male with no children), and I can't afford private insurance... if I wind up hospitalized there will be no-one stuck with a bill but me. If I don't pay a doctor bill, it doesn't get pawned off on the public but gets sent to a collection agency.

Maybe in a progressive state like CA it'd be paid by the public, not in a red state like TN. I have never been treated gratis in my life. In fact, I have a doctor turn me away when I requested testing for an unrelated matter, flat out telling me "you can't afford that."