Car smoking ban

Cookie_Monster · 27-06-2012 12:51am #1

What say you to this proposal?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0626/govt-approves-car-smoking-ban-draft-laws.html

Minister for Health James Reilly was given the go-ahead to draw up amendments to a Seanad Private Members Bill on the issue.

The Bill, introduced by Senators John Crown, Jillian van Turnhout and Mark Daly, advocated a ban on all smoking in cars when children are in the vehicle.

A step too far?

I can see this being just one more unenforced motoring law if it does get brought in. Can't really see the point of it either in the larger context, children can still be subject to smoke in their home etc where they spend much more time with their (smoker) parents. Is it really worth the effort to police in the grand scheme of things?

Cuddlesworth · 27-06-2012 12:53am

I wonder how many points you will get for it? Consider you can get 1 for driving down the wrong side of a motorway.

Nissan doctor · 27-06-2012 12:55am

Why would you want to fill your car with smoke when driving and destroy its interior etc with ash/smell/grime etc anyway?

IMO there is no difference between holding a cigarette and a phone/doing make up/eating food or whatever and the numerous ignorant people smoking in cars with children in the back is simply unacceptable.

drunkmonkey · 27-06-2012 1:01am

That's a bit rich from a fatty, maybe we shouldn't allow fatty's near children incase they sit on them or encourage them to be fat.

This is beyond stupid, somebody needs to tell FG/FF, 1984 is not an instruction manual.

CiniO · 27-06-2012 1:06am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What say you to this proposal?

I'm 100% in favour for this proposal to come into reality.

Pique · 27-06-2012 1:23am

Aside from the police state or nanny state arguments, can anyone really disagree with the motive behind this?

Ps. I'm a smoker with a baby.

carbon nanotube · 27-06-2012 1:46am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

What say you to this proposal?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0626/govt-approves-car-smoking-ban-draft-laws.html

A step too far?

I can see this being just one more unenforced motoring law if it does get brought in. Can't really see the point of it either in the larger context, children can still be subject to smoke in their home etc where they spend much more time with their (smoker) parents. Is it really worth the effort to police in the grand scheme of things?

smoking in cars is gross.

vile even..!

if someone wants to smoke in car and fill it up with fags thats fine, not in my car though.

Where To · 27-06-2012 3:00am

Love to see it happen but can't see how it could ever be enforced. Maybe it's my imagination, but I am beginning to notice that driving without tax and insurance and drink driving are becoming more socially acceptable once again, particularly in rural areas where lack of enforcement is a key factor.

Unfortunately I cant see this being a runner any time soon.

Senna · 27-06-2012 3:25am

I honestly cant see why people have a problem with this, if your stupid enough to smoke in a car with a child you deserve more than penalty points.

Its been proven with the 2004 smoking ban that law itself can be enough of a deterrence without wide scale checks and enforcement.

-Corkie- · 27-06-2012 4:33am

People smoking in cars with kids is disgusting imo.

I was in Dunnes recently and this unsavoury looking individual drove in with a fag in her mouth. She parked and took the child out whilst placing the teat of his bottle into her mouth full of smoke..:rolleyes:

djimi · 27-06-2012 7:31am

I would be completely in favour of such a law and have believed for years that it should be illegal to smoke in any confined area around children. Anyone who subjects their kids to cigarette smoke full stop is the absolute scum of the earth as far as Im concerned, but especially if they turn their car into gas chamber while their kids are in it.

Berty · 27-06-2012 7:35am

You could have a stream of Garda cars parked in an Industrial estate and not pull one Commercial driver who is smoking in his "workplace".

Likewise I cannot see them parked by a school waiting to stop somebody smoking near a child in their own car.

This government needs to back out of peoples lives.

senordingdong · 27-06-2012 8:10am

Beer Baron wrote: »

This government needs to back out of peoples lives.

The people of this country need to grow a few brain cells and be just a little less selfish, so that the government doesn't have to legislate common sense.

I'll bet there are countless morons up and down the entire country, belligerently refusing to obey this law because they think there is no harm in second hand smoke.

nympho · 27-06-2012 8:11am

Ban them fecking fags! 100% in favour of this.

cormie · 27-06-2012 8:17am

When I though it was an outright ban on smoking in cars - Disagreed in the name of freedom
When I saw it was around kids - Agreed

I don't have children and I don't smoke but to me it's probably only dealing with the surface of what's probably a general unhealthy environment for the children. At least in a moving car there's good ventilation with open windows. It's potentially much worse at home with some people's fear of "letting the cold in", keeping windows closed while the central heating is going. If you're going to enforce this, what about an anti junk food law too? No children under the age of 16 can be served in McDonalds etc, parents seen with their toddlers eating a pack of meanies or haribo can be prosecuted too. Along with logging the amount of tv and computer hours a child is exposed to in favour of exercise/social activities

I think the previous generations messed it up and this generation is continuing to mess it up. There should be and should have been education in schools on health. Take away any of the pointless compulsory subjects and classes and replace them with life lessons. How to eat well, drive, light a fire, deal with certain situations, why eating that chocolate bar will only make your acne riddled face worse etc. Things children can benefit from. After 12 years, I only know how to ask permission to go to the toilet in Irish, shouldn't even need to ask permission for such a thing!

What's the story with eating while driving by the way? I remember a story linked to here about a lady in Scotland who was fined for eating an apple while driving? Is there any such laws here and would eating an apple be ok while eating a salad with a fork not be?

ThisRegard · 27-06-2012 8:27am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I can see this being just one more unenforced motoring law if it does get brought in. Can't really see the point of it either in the larger context, children can still be subject to smoke in their home etc where they spend much more time with their (smoker) parents. Is it really worth the effort to police in the grand scheme of things?

Where To wrote: »

Love to see it happen but can't see how it could ever be enforced.

It's no more an effort to police than the mobile phone ban. Most people probably get away with it, but it's pretty easy for a passing garda to see if you're smoking with kids in the car.

I'm sure it will eventually become policed by the kids themselves anyway, as they did with seatbelts.

Cookie_Monster · 27-06-2012 8:29am

ThisRegard wrote: »

I'm sure it will eventually become policed by the kids themselves anyway, as they did with seatbelts.

didn't think of that actually, good point

Eggonyerface · 27-06-2012 8:31am

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Why would you want to fill your car with smoke when driving and destroy its interior etc with ash/smell/grime etc anyway?

IMO there is no difference between holding a cigarette and a phone/doing make up/eating food or whatever and the numerous ignorant people smoking in cars with children in the back is simply unacceptable.

IMO theres a huge difference. Taking a drag from a cigarette is no more distracting then scratching an itchy nose, or changing gear. Its an automatic thing, hardly thought about. I do however think people smoking with children in the car is unfair on the child

Jimdagym · 27-06-2012 8:34am

This is moronic. Bad parents are going to be bad parents. You can't protect the kids all the time. If the parents smoke in the car, they will smoke around them in the house in confined areas.
Obviously it's easy to just say that the kids should be protected so it's ok for the law to be passed, but this is just another intrusion into people's lives by a government who (just like the last) have shown no proof of ability to control that kind of power.

Jimdagym · 27-06-2012 8:35am

Eggonyerface wrote: »

IMO theres a huge difference. Taking a drag from a cigarette is no more distracting then scratching an itchy nose, or changing gear. Its an automatic thing, hardly thought about. I do however think people smoking with children in the car is unfair on the child

It's more than that though, to be fair. Lighting the smoke, extinguishing it, and getting rid of the ash all require breaks in concentration from driving.

cormie · 27-06-2012 8:45am

Jimdagym wrote: »

It's more than that though, to be fair. Lighting the smoke, extinguishing it, and getting rid of the ash all require breaks in concentration from driving.

I don't smoke, but I do eat a lot when driving, I don't find it distracting at all. I find I don't drive as well when I've people in the car and am engaged in conversation. I can't imagine this being tackled in the name of road safety. I think the smoking issue here is more on children's health than road safety though.

senordingdong · 27-06-2012 8:46am

Jimdagym wrote: »

This is moronic. Bad parents are going to be bad parents. You can't protect the kids all the time. If the parents smoke in the car, they will smoke around them in the house in confined areas.

Maybe so, but this is a good step, and in the right direction too.
And if the children start policing it themselves like was said above, it might well be brought home.

And just becuase you can't protect kids all the time doesn't mean you shouldn't try to protect them when you can.

Anan1 · 27-06-2012 8:58am

senordingdong wrote: »

And just because you can't protect kids all the time doesn't mean you shouldn't try to protect them when you can.

+1

MugMugs · 27-06-2012 9:00am

I smoke but don't have kids.

I'd never dream of smoking in MY car whilst my Niece or Nephew were in there with me.

They shouldn't have to suffer for my idiocy.

Yakuza · 27-06-2012 9:01am

Jimdagym wrote: »

This is moronic. Bad parents are going to be bad parents. You can't protect the kids all the time. If the parents smoke in the car, they will smoke around them in the house in confined areas.

You're probably right, in that smoking in the car is one visible symptom of selfish parents, and they will do it at home as well, but a car is a particularly confined area, and if the demister / fan is on, the smoke will circulate even more rapidly. So for that reason I'd be in favour of this.

Berty · 27-06-2012 9:12am

Next thing the CDC will tell the world that mothers cannot spit on a tissue and wipe a childs face for fear of an "outbreak".

Whilst I agree that people shouldn't smoke in the company of children it is NOT the states job to police stupidity.

Anan1 · 27-06-2012 9:21am

Beer Baron wrote: »

Whilst I agree that people shouldn't smoke in the company of children it is NOT the states job to police stupidity.

Is it the State's job to protect children?

biko · 27-06-2012 9:24am

I agree with a smoke ban in car if children are present. There's still, in 2012, many parents poisoning their kids in a cramped space.
And it doesn't seem to be a class issue either, I've seen it in both vans and up-scale Mercs.

I am a smoker and smoke in the car a lot but there is no way I'd smoke with kids in the back.

MetzgerMeister · 27-06-2012 10:40am

I'm a smoker but I don't smoke in my car nor my house. I don't think it's fair for non smokers to have to put up with my smoke so the only place I smoke is outside. I actually can't stand smoking inside because the room gets stuffy and it's a horrible place to be.

I am 100% in favour of this ban coming into effect. The problem is that with the smoking ban in pubs etc., if it happened, there was always someone there to witness it. This won't be the case for an in-car ban and you will most definitely have people doing it anyway.

Personally, I think cigarettes should be banned outright because I don't have the willpower just yet to give them up :pac:

27-06-2012 10:41am

I completely agree provided it only applies when children are in the car. I don't smoke (anymore) but if someone wants to smoke in their car alone or with other adults that's there decision and nothing to do with the government.

Anan1 · 27-06-2012 10:45am

MetzgerMeister wrote: »

Personally, I think cigarettes should be banned outright because I don't have the willpower just yet to give them up :pac:

What, so you could pay €50 a packet to a dealer?;)

MetzgerMeister · 27-06-2012 10:50am

Anan1 wrote: »

What, so you could pay €50 a packet to a dealer?;)

Nope, I wouldn't do that. The less available something like that is, the more of a chance I wouldn't bother with it.

You might say "oh shur they'll be readily available from any dealer" but that doesn't make a difference to me. Hash etc. is readily available but I don't bother with it.

dharn · 27-06-2012 10:51am

i totally agree with the idea but it will be unenforceable, the number of people you see on mobiles is astonishing, saw a guy drive an artic on aroundabout i wondered why he seemed to be doing such a bad job steering it ,when he came closer ..he was on the phone so im afraid with the number of guards we have it will be totally ignored

dr.fuzzenstein · 27-06-2012 10:53am

It's just something that should be common sense.
People who agree with this law would not smoke in a car with kids present anyway and the rest won't know or care about this law in the first place.
Next there will be a law outlawing eating chips in front of your kids, etc...
The government should concentrate on running the country, infrastructure, health and education.
Of course it is wrong to smoke in a car with kids, but we don't need a law telling us that.
And people who cheer for this law:
This is just to distract us from the real problems. The initial smoking ban was brought in by Micheal Martin because the health service was on the front page of every paper, every day and he desperately needed a distraction. And it worked, for a year or more, nothing else was talked about.
Of COURSE I won't smoke in a car with kids, but this is so annoying I am considering getting a child seat with a doll in it and drive around smoking cigars all day just to be obnoxious about it.

As for banning fags:
I buy all my tobacco abroad, I spend less than a hundred quid a year on my fags and I am proud to say that the Irish exchequer hasn't gotten a penny of me and never will, because I will not support that type of greedy robbery.
Banning fags is stupid, will not work and cannot work.
Consider Hash, Smack, Coke, Ecstasy and many other illegal substances. Give me 10 minutes in any city and I can have one of each.
Oh yeah, banning them really worked.

MetzgerMeister · 27-06-2012 10:53am

dharn wrote: »

i totally agree with the idea but it will be unenforceable, the number of people you see on mobiles is astonishing, saw a guy drive an artic on aroundabout i wondered why he seemed to be doing such a bad job steering it ,when he came closer ..he was on the phone so im afraid with the number of guards we have it will be totally ignored

True, I've seen a lot of people on mobiles while driving recently. I don't think anyone actually gives a crap,

Henry Ford III · 27-06-2012 11:45am

MetzgerMeister wrote: »

True, I've seen a lot of people on mobiles while driving recently. I don't think anyone actually gives a crap,

They should, as mobile use whilst driving has been shown to be dangerous.

pred racer · 27-06-2012 11:47am

My parents used to smoke in the car, and guess what........I'm not dead yet;)

Government has more important things it should be doing right now.

Anan1 · 27-06-2012 12:10pm

pred racer wrote: »

My parents used to smoke in the car, and guess what........I'm not dead yet;)

Mine never wore seat belts, and they're not dead yet either. And nor am I, in spite of having done 135mph on the N11. Are all these things safe, or is your reasoning flawed?

Reg'stoy · 27-06-2012 12:18pm

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

It's just something that should be common sense.
People who agree with this law would not smoke in a car with kids present anyway and the rest won't know or care about this law in the first place.
Next there will be a law outlawing eating chips in front of your kids, etc...
The government should concentrate on running the country, infrastructure, health and education.
Of course it is wrong to smoke in a car with kids, but we don't need a law telling us that.
And people who cheer for this law:
This is just to distract us from the real problems. The initial smoking ban was brought in by Micheal Martin because the health service was on the front page of every paper, every day and he desperately needed a distraction. And it worked, for a year or more, nothing else was talked about.
Of COURSE I won't smoke in a car with kids, but this is so annoying I am considering getting a child seat with a doll in it and drive around smoking cigars all day just to be obnoxious about it.

As for banning fags:
I buy all my tobacco abroad, I spend less than a hundred quid a year on my fags and I am proud to say that the Irish exchequer hasn't gotten a penny of me and never will, because I will not support that type of greedy robbery.
Banning fags is stupid, will not work and cannot work.
Consider Hash, Smack, Coke, Ecstasy and many other illegal substances. Give me 10 minutes in any city and I can have one of each.
Oh yeah, banning them really worked.

I like your duplicity in that you want the goverment to concentrate on doing all the things that require funding raised by taxation, as in education, health etc, yet proudly boast that you avoid same taxation because you deem it greedy. As for the smoking ban, well that is now pan-global and lauded as one of the most innovative pieces of legalisation after CAB to be brought in by any Irish government.

As for driving around with a doll (being facetious I would imagine, but then you never know) did you also go into mcdonalds when they began saying 'contents may be Hot' and start drinking your coffee dangerously.

The problem with expecting people to use common sense is that invariably "well no one told me that..." will be used as an excuse. Self regulation doesn't work be it on an individual level or corporate. There are some people who quite literally should not be allowed have kids, but do, not the childs fault, but some some safeguards be they what you might consider nanny stateish to basic human rights; need to be enforced.

Common sense would dictate many things, but people being people means we need rules and regulations and so by due process we elect our government to do this on our behalf. Just because you didn't vote at all or vote for the present government doesn't exclude you from the regulations.

Del2005 · 27-06-2012 12:39pm

It's a stupid law, that sounds good,but it won't change anything. Some parents never smoke with kids around some do. Making it illegal won't stop the people who smoke around kids and the ones who never did don't need the law.

Every time I'm out I see people driving on the phone or taxi drivers smoking(also van/truck drivers smoking but they aren't PSVs so I don't really care what they do to themselves). If every time I'm out I see this then Gardaí on patrol must see this and they do nothing about it. Go to any school and see the amount of dangerous parking when parents are collecting kids. We've plenty of parking laws but the Gardaí largely ignore illegal parking outside schools and churches.

We've plenty of laws which aren't enforced adding more won't make a difference.

dr.fuzzenstein · 27-06-2012 12:45pm

Reg'stoy wrote: »

I like your duplicity in that you want the goverment to concentrate on doing all the things that require funding raised by taxation, as in education, health etc, yet proudly boast that you avoid same taxation because you deem it greedy. As for the smoking ban, well that is now pan-global and lauded as one of the most innovative pieces of legalisation after CAB to be brought in by any Irish government.

As for driving around with a doll (being facetious I would imagine, but then you never know) did you also go into mcdonalds when they began saying 'contents may be Hot' and start drinking your coffee dangerously.

The problem with expecting people to use common sense is that invariably "well no one told me that..." will be used as an excuse. Self regulation doesn't work be it on an individual level or corporate. There are some people who quite literally should not be allowed have kids, but do, not the childs fault, but some some safeguards be they what you might consider nanny stateish to basic human rights; need to be enforced.

Common sense would dictate many things, but people being people means we need rules and regulations and so by due process we elect our government to do this on our behalf. Just because you didn't vote at all or vote for the present government doesn't exclude you from the regulations.

Well firstly my point was that we do not need a law for every single thing.
Too many people subscribe to the idiotic notion "If it's not compulsory by law, it's illegal". I do not want to have to consult with my solicitor if I accidentally mismatched the color of my socks, just in case some moron has decided to make it illegal. Taxation and funding are not central to my argument.

I simply cannot follow your "McDonalds" argument.
My point is that I will get a doll of a child and drive around smoking cigars simply to annoy and outrage.

My main point:
Most people will agree with the sentiment of this law but argue that it is simply a symbolic gesture. The Gardai will not set up anti smoking checkpoints.
Of course no sane people will smoke in a car with kids present.
And the ones that do, won't care either way.
So it's a good thought, but is along the lines of compulsory asparagus for breakfast by law.

Wetbench4 · 27-06-2012 1:07pm

This is over the top. You wouldn't be able to tell if a young child was strapped into their car-seat unless you pulled the car over and checked. There are sun blinds and window tints which also make it impossible to see any child young or old in the back. How will it be enforced, pull every smoking driver over to check? They should also ban diesel engines if they wanna go down this route. I gotta face full of dirty black diesel smoke yesterday because i had the windows open in the car.
I just get the feeling that politicians come up with these "ideas" to get their name remembered and try advance their career. The country is getting more and more controlled and restricted. Makes me wonder what it will be like in 20 or 30 years.

PS: I'm an ex-smoker

blastman · 27-06-2012 1:10pm

This is completely unenforceable nonsense done purely for show by a government that if it was seriously about being anti-smoking and had any balls at all, would ban smoking altogether and be done with it. But of course, that would kill a pretty handy revenue stream and they don't want to do that, especially given the depth of the hole we're currently in.

You can't legislate against being as thick as pig-sh!t, otherwise we'd all be in trouble at one time or another. As someone said, just because you can't protect kids all the time doesn't mean you shouldn't try to protect them when you can. Who gets to decide where the line is drawn? Is the next step outlawing smoking in the house with kids? How rigorously is that enforced? Can the gardaí kick in your door to check?

the culture of deference · 27-06-2012 1:24pm

Eggonyerface wrote: »

IMO theres a huge difference. Taking a drag from a cigarette is no more distracting then scratching an itchy nose, or changing gear.

What about taking it out of the box, getting a lighter, then lighting it,

dharn wrote: »

i totally agree with the idea but it will be unenforceable, the number of people you see on mobiles is astonishing, saw a guy drive an artic on a roundabout

The number of vehicles I have seen where the driver has the phone in one hand and fag in the other.

pred racer wrote: »

My parents used to smoke in the car, and guess what........I'm not dead yet;)

blastman wrote: »

This is completely unenforceable nonsense done purely for show by a government that if it was seriously about being anti-smoking and had any balls at all, would ban smoking altogether and be done with it.

Smoking in your car when you have kids in it makes you a selfish moron, but judging by the amount of pregnant women who smoke (when they know the risks to the baby), there are plenty of stupid people out there.

If you have children you should know not to smoke in your house or in your car. If this is beyond your level of comprehension then you will need to have government interference.

senordingdong · 27-06-2012 1:44pm

MetzgerMeister wrote: »

I am 100% in favour of this ban coming into effect. The problem is that with the smoking ban in pubs etc., if it happened, there was always someone there to witness it. This won't be the case for an in-car ban and you will most definitely have people doing it anyway.

Fair point but here's the catch. The pub rule was succesful because the responsibility was left unto the manager, and not the customer, with the manager/establishment enduring the fine/punishment. The pub owners had to police their own business which was a great success.

Meanwhile, there is no such policy of responsibilty on parents to fulfil their obligations as parents.

Tigger · 27-06-2012 1:46pm

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

As for banning fags:
I buy all my tobacco abroad, I spend less than a hundred quid a year on my fags and I am proud to say that the Irish exchequer hasn't gotten a penny of me and never will, because I will not support that type of greedy robbery.
Banning fags is stupid, will not work and cannot work.
Consider Hash, Smack, Coke, Ecstasy and many other illegal substances. Give me 10 minutes in any city and I can have one of each.
Oh yeah, banning them really worked.

you can get smack in 10 minutes in kilkenny?

i disagree

blastman · 27-06-2012 2:02pm

the culture of deference wrote: »

Smoking in your car when you have kids in it makes you a selfish moron, but judging by the amount of pregnant women who smoke (when they know the risks to the baby), there are plenty of stupid people out there.

If you have children you should know not to smoke in your house or in your car. If this is beyond your level of comprehension then you will need to have government interference.

So what's next, give pregnant women who smoke points on their driving licence? Force them have an abortion? Someone smokes in the car with their kids, why not just take the kids away from them? Surely that's the best way to protect them? Giving their ma a fine won't help their asthma.

Being stupid isn't illegal (not yet, anyway).

Reg'stoy · 27-06-2012 2:02pm

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well firstly my point was that we do not need a law for every single thing.
Too many people subscribe to the idiotic notion "If it's not compulsory by law, it's illegal". I do not want to have to consult with my solicitor if I accidentally mismatched the color of my socks, just in case some moron has decided to make it illegal. Taxation and funding are not central to my argument.

I simply cannot follow your "McDonalds" argument.
My point is that I will get a doll of a child and drive around smoking cigars simply to annoy and outrage.

My main point:
Most people will agree with the sentiment of this law but argue that it is simply a symbolic gesture. The Gardai will not set up anti smoking checkpoints.
Of course no sane people will smoke in a car with kids present.
And the ones that do, won't care either way.
So it's a good thought, but is along the lines of compulsory asparagus for breakfast by law.

Ah yes jump to the ludicrous, socks?, asparagus?. I mentioned Mc Donalds as most people use the 'Caution contents may be Hot' as an allegory for the nanny state gone mad.

The symbolic/impossible to police law arguement was first mooted when the smoking ban came in, yet here we are 10 years later and it's a law that's policed by the individual rather than to a huge extent the state.

I'm not saying that we should legistate for every eventuality, but to claim that a law would be difficult to police and should therefore not be created is taking the easy road.

The carrying of knives is against the law, but walk down any road and it is neigh on impossible to know if an individual is carrying one. The majority of us don't carry knives because, why would we! plus to a lesser degree it's illegal . Those who do carry them, do so for nefarious reasons, and in reality are only caught when stopped and searched (how often is this) or they have been caught after using one.

I use the analogy between carrying knifes and smoking in cars because both are in essence impossible to police by your logic. Thankfully common sense and deterrent stops 99% of us carrying knives and yes as you said hopefully common sense would stop people smoking in a car with a child present. Unfortunatly there will always be that 1% where not only a deterrent but punishment is required.

As for the arguement that if the government were serious about smoking they would ban it completely, well that arguement is disingenuous, as it is the individual who chooses to smoke; that choice is not afforded to the child in the back of the car.

username123 · 27-06-2012 2:04pm

the culture of deference wrote: »

Smoking in your car when you have kids in it makes you a selfish moron, but judging by the amount of pregnant women who smoke (when they know the risks to the baby), there are plenty of stupid people out there.

If you have children you should know not to smoke in your house or in your car. If this is beyond your level of comprehension then you will need to have government interference.

Smoking is an addiction. Stupidity has absolutely nothing to do with it. Many smokers are high achieving, highly intelligent individuals. My own GP only quit a few years ago - in her early 30s. Do you think a doctor is stupid? No, but she had an addiction.

Smoking in cars with children in them is bad for children, so is smoking in the home with children there, hitting children, using bad language around children, feeding children junk food, being drunk around children and bad parenting generally.

Would you wish for the government to intervene in all of these things? Personally I think people should have to have a license to breed at all because we live in a society where wasters breed dozens more wasters funded by the state. Stopping people smoking in cars is not going to address protection of children. But it might make the roads a little safer - if it was enforced, which it wont be.

MetzgerMeister · 27-06-2012 2:18pm

username123 wrote: »

Smoking is an addiction. Stupidity has absolutely nothing to do with it. Many smokers are high achieving, highly intelligent individuals. My own GP only quit a few years ago - in her early 30s. Do you think a doctor is stupid? No, but she had an addiction

Let's be honest, it takes a certain amount of stupidity for someone to start smoking when they know exactly what harm it's doing them.

blastman · 27-06-2012 2:22pm

Reg'stoy wrote: »

As for the arguement that if the government were serious about smoking they would ban it completely, well that arguement is disingenuous, as it is the individual who chooses to smoke; that choice is not afforded to the child in the back of the car.

And using limited and contradictory evidence regarding the actual dangers of second-hand smoke isn't disingenuous?

Car smoking ban

Comments