Law would ban smoking in cars with kids inside

[superconnected]

Source: Komo Staff

OLYMPIA -- A law being proposed to state legislators would ban smoking in a car if there are children inside.

State Representative Shay Schual-Berke compares it to drunk driving, saying you're injuring your children for life if you smoke with them in your car.

"Did you know that the poisons from secondhand smoke, which we know cause cancer in adults; we know cause asthma and bronchitis in children and adults, is also associated with sudden infant death syndrome?" she said. "I've seen people smoking and I've watched their children in the backseat coughing."

Some are all for the ban, including Christina Porter, who says she'd never smoke with kids inside.


Read more: http://www.komotv.com/news/13958692.html

[Mojambo]

1. Parents who smoke around their kids are douchebags.

Particularly in an enclosed space like that.

[BadgerKid]

5. I think it's sad parents who have kids smoke at all.

Statistically speaking, it's a risk factor that translates into there being less time that the parent will be alive for his/her adult child(ren). Then again, I realize smoking is a life enjoyment issue for some people.

[harmonicon]

19. yep, my Dad's a douchebag

Worked his ass off so we could have a nice house, took me on camping trips, taught me important lessons about life, paid for me to go to college, still helps me with money when I need it, calls just to talk.... does basically everything a good father ever could... oh, but he's been a smoker for 50+ years. Yep, must be a douchebag.

[Mojambo]

23. Your dad didn't have nearly the information that parents today do.

For the record, both my parents smoked around me and my brother when we were younger.

I don't hold it against them, but I'd hope they'd be smart enough given the information available today to not do it again.

Sorry I didn't make it clear that I was talking about parents TODAY.

[boricua79]

42. how are your lungs?

What does it matter that he gave you a nice house, took you camping, taught you important lessons, paid for college, helps with money, calls to talk, etc....if he's condemning you to a nice cancer death later in your life?

[harmonicon]

44. I'm condemning myself to a nice cancer death.

Most smokers don't get cancer. Plain and simple. Am I at higher risk of getting cancer because I smoke? Yeah. I'm also at higher risk of dying in a train derailment every time I ride in a train, but I'm not too worried about it - I'd rather just live my life the way I want and enjoy it while I can. I'm a smoker, my brother and sister aren't, so I don't think it's my parents' bad behaviour that turned me into one - they both tell me I should quit. Still, I'd rather die of cancer than red bus disease. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: the fact that people who are supposedly left wing support these laws is chilling. This is only one small part of the emerging fascist state - no different than telling women what they can do with their bodies, what people can do in the bedroom, etc. Should parents not be allowed to feed their children certain foods, because it's bad for them? Teach them about religion, philosophy, history? Should everything one does be dictated by government, and any deviance from that become criminal?

[ironrooster]

48. Um.., no...

You may just have a high tolerence for smoke and assume incorrectly that it isn't as much of a problem as it is.

I understand that you feel this is an invasion of privacy - but the data is in and secondhand smoke causes real problems. My father was a traveling salesman of sorts and we would go on long car trips out to west Texas and he always smoked in the car with the windows up mostly. If I asked him to roll it down he would barely crack it. I easily get respiratory infections and suffer from allergies and sinus problems to this day. They got so bad in college that I had to drop one semester. So please don't dismiss this - this is a public health issue. You and I pay collectively for the wasted working hours of adults and ER visits of children whose parents smoke and may not have health coverage. My father's smoking made me sick then and vunerable to illness probably for life and I would have welcomed a law prohibiting him from doing this.

I chafe at invasions of privacy as well - I'm a gun owning and 2nd ammendment supporting Dem. The trick is knowing where to draw the line. I think the evidence shows that second hand smoke has severe detrimental effects on people and the younger the more detrimental.

It's also a friggin red herring to throw out issues of philosphy/religion as those aren't a PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE.

[harmonicon]

58. I don't think it is a red herring

Some people are allowed to keep their kids from getting vaccines, keep them away from doctors when they're sick, poison their minds with ridiculous religious mumbo jumbo - I don't see how that's any different. I'm sorry that you have poor health, but to me your story illustrates how this is a decision for individuals and families to make - not government business. When I was a kid, my dad did smoke in the car, but always with the window rolled down - the only thing that bothered me about it was being cold if I was in the back seat. I don't like complete strangers calling my dad a douchebag because he is a smoker. He's a damn good father. People can say all they want about me, but when it comes to insulting my parents, it crosses a line with me.

If you think gun ownership is a right guaranteed under the 2nd amendment, that's fine by me. I don't have any hard figures here, but I would guess that kids who live in homes with guns in them are more likely to die or be injured from gun shots (likely accidental), or to harm others with guns. Does that mean that adults with children shouldn't be allowed to own guns? Or keep them in the same building as their children at any point in time?

[ironrooster]

79. Nope -

First: We only disagree.I'm not calling your dad a douchebag - that was possibly another poster and that's very rude and unkind. I'm glad your dad was wise enough to roll the window down - that says that he probably knew that it was bad to do that with the windows up. That's a tacit admission that even your dad then realized that second hand smoke was at the very least irritating - but now we know it's more than that.

Second: "More likely" isn't the issue legally... you are confusing with something a person is caught doing (smoking in a car w/kids) with what might happen (might leave a gun unsecured).

There really isn't a debate about the effects of second hand smoke - it's bad. It might not kill you but it sure degrades health and in some cases very seriously. Smoking in an enclosed space is a special case. It would be no different if you were to purchase a crate - put your kid in it - and blow smoke through a hole in the side. It is a public health issue.

Now if a person leaves a gun where a child can access it - that's criminal neglect and should be punished perhaps by even revoking that person's right to own a gun. The state has historically weighed in on issues of the public health and will continue to do so.

[harmonicon]

81. however....

adults are still allowed to smoke in their houses or apartments with kids in them - I don't see how that's all that much different. It seems to me that the real purpose of these laws is to white-wash an ugly world that people would rather not live in. As opposed to making a real change, this is just a cosmetic change. There are so many changes that could be made that would have a positive impact on humanity as a whole.... this isn't one of them.

[ironrooster]

87. I think it has a purpose - but...

If you are talking "big picture" yes, there are other more pressing issues:

white collar crime, destruction of the environment, economy tanking, genocide...

but I'm talking the "small picture" like that of a child having to ride with a parent who wasn't as reasonable as yours.

Even in the big picture though, this invasion of privacy is minor compared to say, widespread wiretaps - and the orchestrated theft of credit card and other personal data.

You talked about food and religion - what if a parent basically malnourishes their child by feeding him/her only potato chips and the child's teeth start to fall out - do the authorities have a compelling interest in that child's welfare? Has it become a public health issue then?

If secondhand smoke weren't known to be harmful you might have a point - and
I understand that you feel it is probably an invasion of your privacy - but in certain circumstances the law may permit invasion our privacy for what it is perceived as a public good - this is one of those instances.

Having said that - it probably would not be on my short list of new laws to enact - but the kids will be better for it.

[harmonicon]

88. I just think, even for the people who are for these laws, these are just band-aids

they aren't real solutions. A lot could be done by having better education for all, through the college level, better urban planning (which would make these car rides unnecessary), real public healthcare, strict pollution laws, etc. I think these kind of little things are only here to distract from the real problems. For instance, whatever people think of abortion, what (not counting sex ed) is really done to stop unwanted pregnancies? What could be done to have people live healthier lives in general? I would like to think that we don't have to legislate common sense. We're still going to have some disagreements on what "common sense" is, but if these more fundamental problems were tackled maybe people could have some time and energy to think about what's best for themselves and their families instead of just struggling day in and day out to make ends meet and keep everything running as smoothly as possible.

[CreekDog]

95. not in Belmont, California they aren't!

Also, go ahead and put yourself in danger with smoking, don't contaminate your children's lungs on an extracurricular and unnecessary activity that does them no good whatsoever.

[JeanGrey]

126. Not for long.

[boricua79]

55. Do what you want to yourself

shoot up a drug, cut yourself, play with yourself, do whatever you want.

I draw the line when you're activity endangers me or someone else. And I feel there is enough evidence that proves second-hand smoke raises the risk of others getting cancer. I'm not going to suffer a higher risk of cancer to support your sucking and puffing fixation. Find another hobby or do it in your home with closed doors.

[harmonicon]

57. have you even noticed what this discussion is about?

or did you just come here to say mean things about smokers?

[boricua79]

60. the discussion is about a law to ban smoking in the presence of children in cars

And my contention, and the contention of those against smoking inside cars, is that is HUGELY irresponsible to subject kids to the dangers of second-hand smoking inside closed cars with no ventilation.

I also discount any argument based on libertarian/anti-government grounds on the basis that you shouldn't have the right to condemn your children to health problems in their lives because you wanted to suck on your little addictive toy.

Part of living in a society is restricting personal behavior when such behavior harms others. I can't kill someone, even if I wanted to. I can't hurt others, even if I wanted to. I can't violate others, even if I wanted to. I can't drive drunk, even if I wanted to.

Why? Because all of those behaviors harm others...or have the potential risk of harming others. Thus, society has agreed to ban such behavior for the benefit of protecting the innocent who haven't engaged in that behavior.

Light up when you're completely alone, or don't light up at all. WE, the innocent...the non-smokers...will not tolerate your disgusting habit...especially if it harms us.

[harmonicon]

70. so, should the government regulate what parents can feed their children as well?

what sports they can play?

[Igel]

75. Apparently.

And how they dress them, and the ideas and beliefs they're exposed to.

Round them up, put them in camps, and let the all-wise technocrats raise them. After all, the technocrats are perfect. Why, they probably even love my child more than I do.

Just like the Soviet creches were perfect environments run by the perfect Bolsheviks who had nothing but love for the people.

One additional advantage--then the parents can live in barracks, and there's no 'I have to take care of the kids' excuse for anybody not to work.

[boricua79]

91. guys...

not everytime that the government suggests something does it mean they wish to turn the situation into a 1984-style situation.

If we didn't ban smoking around kids, a lot of irresponsible parents would condemn their children to suffering health deterioration, to the detriment of the kids involved, and to the detriment to the taxpayers who will be paying for the increased costs of unhealthy living habits.

I'm a teacher. I work in an underpriviliged neighborhood. You won't believe the insane and totally irresponsible things parents do around kids, to kids, etc. Sometimes, the parents are WORSE than the kids.

In those situations, yes, people with more education and a little more sense should get involved.

Lines have to be drawn SOMEWHERE, and sometimes the lines won't be to your liking.

[boricua79]

90. We do

We don't allow our kids to engage in steroid use in sports. If a kid is morbidly obese, schools can contact child protection services and notify the parent that the child is "at-risk". These are some of the "gray areas", because, in many cases, the law sides more with the freedom of the parent to raise their children as they see fit. However, there are places in both feeding kids and in the pursuit of sports in which society has imposed regulations and rules.

So sure, yes, that too.

[harmonicon]

97. No, it's not the same

In these cases, if something seems wrong, the law may become involved - that's very different from legislating how people can run their own lives.

[boricua79]

110. Exposing your kid to unhealthy, and cancer-provoking second-hand smoke

is "something that seems wrong". Hence, the reason that the law was considered.

Again, I"m not in favor of legislating how your run your life...provided that "how you run your life" doesn't affect others. If you're "running your life" has hazardous consequences for others, you need to change "how you run your life". Get it?

[harmonicon]

113. no, I don't "get it"

you seem to think you are the ultimate "decider" on what tolerances will be allowed when considering what is "hazardous". LIFE is hazardous. Should it be illegal to feed kids french fries, because they aren't healthy? Should they not be allowed to read, because reading hurts the eyes?

[boricua79]

116. take it up with the Legislature

the majority has spoken. Now you have civil disobedience or obedience at your disposal. Choose your path.

[piedmont]

118. We ALREADY regulate what you can feed to your kids. It is illegal to feed them cyanide, strychnine..

cow manure, etc. If society can tell you that you can't poison your kids' food, why can't we say that you can't poison their air?

[JeanGrey]

127. In other words, your ability to swing your arm ends

at the end of my nose.

[LanternWaste]

68. As a smoker

As a smoker (pack a day since '84), I really can't perceive anything being said as mean. Just truthful.

Face it, we're addicts, we cost the health care system, we cost ourselves, we stink up ourselves, and our addiction is a health risk to those around us-- it's not mean, it's just the truth.

[harmonicon]

72. we don't cost the health care system - there is no health care system

and smokers pay higher premiums to insurance companies. Smoking may be a small (I mean, tiny) risk to those exposed to it, but it's nothing compared to the harm caused by automobiles and probably a million other things.

[LanternWaste]

73. Purpose of an automobile

And those smokers who have no health insurance...?

Purpose of an automobile: myriad and practical. A positive cost-benefit ration.

purpose of a cigarette: a nicotine delivery system.

Comparing the two is absurd at best-- unless and until a cigarette can get me to work on 55mpg.

Stop trying to defend it-- it comes off as silly. We're addicts, regardless of how we try to justify or spin it, that's all we are-- addicts lacking the willpower to quit. Nothing more, nothing less...

[harmonicon]

80. I don't know if I lack the will power to quit - I just don't want to.

automobiles are not a necessity. People could live in cities, but they choose to live in suburbs. If people refused to buy or rent suburban homes the urban landscape could change radically. I do understand your point though. I know I'm an addict. I also eat cheese burgers and drink whisky and do other things that aren't so good for me. It just amazes me that people get so bent out of shape about it - there are loads of things that lots of people do that I can't stand and have a negative impact on my life, but I don't go around constantly bitching about it.

[LanternWaste]

85. The same line spoken by every addictat one time or another.

" I don't know if I lack the will power to quit - I just don't want to."
The same line spoken by every addict at one time or another (including me)

If your wife had asthma, I doubt you'd consider the risk we put her at with our smoking as "constantly bitching about it".


And the cheeseburgers we eat? They don't cause asthma attacks in those around us. Regardless of how we justify it, there is absolute zero good in smoking-- it can't be defended nor justified.

And we should be damned thankful that it's merely tolerated in the privacy of our own homes...

[boricua79]

92. so smoke yourself to death

and spare the rest of us.

Frankly, you get a pass here on DU because it's an online forum. If this were in real life, you wouldn't be able to smoke in many public places, and you know it. Non-smokers will not die for you to light up your phallic symbol.

[harmonicon]

98. get a life

Phallic symbol?! you're really clutching at straws here. I think you do come around just to say mean things to smokers.

[boricua79]

109. "get a life"

from the person who has to huddle in cold corners with the rest of the smokers every 20 minutes or so.

Knock, knock, knock...

Oops...I think your master is calling...go outside and have a smoke. he's calling.

[harmonicon]

112. yeah..... have to go outside to smoke...

because people like you tell others how to run their businesses and their lives - man, wouldn't life be better if everyone would just fall in line?

[boricua79]

115. hey, better you outside than me with black lungs NT

[harmonicon]

117. or, you could just not go to places where people are smoking.....

...like a no smoking restaurant or bar (they have both in Michigan, for instance). But that's just too hard.... the world should be made in your image, huh?

[boricua79]

120. I've never really had a problem

finding places with non-smokers. But, in the event that a smoker and a non-smoker meet at the same place, the smoker is the one with the problem/addiction, not the non-smoker. So THEY have to put it out.

Honestly, it never has been that much of a problem. Either the smoker turns its off, or I get someone in the joint to remove the smoker, or I tell the manager of the joint that he's lost my business because he does not control smoke issues in his establishment.

One way or the other, the smoker goes.

[toopers]

137. Like work . . .

I remember when a much larger part of the population smoked, and I would have to sit through meetings with my boss who smoked. Until the smoking ban in public places I did not have a place to go.

[toopers]

138. They try to negate the affects of automobile accidents . . .

by requiring children to be in child safety seats, requiring adults to wear seat belts.

[JeanGrey]

125. Chilling? Are you kidding? These are innocent children

who are being abused by parents who trap them in tiny cars and fill the air with cancer causing elements. I'm sorry, but I'm glad they are doing this and SHOULD do it everywhere!

[happyslug]

34. My father smoked all the time when I was in the Car with him...

But that was before he ever had a car with A/C, thus the windows were often DOWN, except in winter, when I rarely traveled with him (I was in School). Maybe the problem is NOT smoking but permitting smokers to operate cars with A/C in them.

[Lorien]

82. My dad did that when we were kids, and he'll be the first to admit

that he was a douchebag for doing so. He knew the risks-he just didn't care at the time. Thankfully, he's a non-douchbag today!

Yes, I think the law is a good idea.

[MarkInLA]

2. It's already the law in California - went into effect January 1 (n/t)

[keepCAblue]

62. Disappointed with California law...pretty much worthless

Because it is classed as a secondary offense, an officer cannot pull a car over for this violation alone. And if someone DOES get pulled over on some other violation and subsequently charged with smoking in a car with a minor present, the punishment is only a nominal fine (up to $100, meaning a fine much less than $100 can and likely will be imposed)

[keepCAblue]

63. An estimated 35,000 deaths each year in the U.S...

..due to second-hand smoke.

It is inarguable that second-hand smoke is harmful. I have asthma and have had severe attacks due to other people's smoking. For all those who blather on about 'smokers' rights'...fine, smoke all you want but not where it can harm other people (kids included). Otherwise, be prepared to pay my E.R. bill.

[calico1]

3. What responsible parent would think of

smoking in an enclosed place with their children present? I don't get it.

[Kittycat]

4. Sadly too many. :(

[NashVegas]

6. Stuff Like This Keeps Pushing Me Into the Libertarian Column

And I don't smoke.

[karlrschneider]

7. You and I both. I smoked for 47 years and quit last year cold turkey...

because I wanted/decided to not because some fucking bureaucracy mandated it.

[NashVegas]

9. Same Here

And I never smoked in the car w/the windows up, never knew anyone who did (unless they were smoking dope).

This is just feel-good legislation, IMO.

[karlrschneider]

12. I would smoke with windows up if I was by myself or another smoker,

otherwise no.

[NashVegas]

13. Ewwwwwwww

Even if it were -20 outside, I couldn't do that.

[karlrschneider]

96. Well, neither could I, ...... now.

:D

[ixion]

8. yep, it's just as bad as the GOP crap, IMO

I don't need the government telling me how to live.

[harmonicon]

20. I agree

I can't believe that supposedly left-leaning people support these erosions of personal liberties while bemoaning the loss of civil liberties. Totally fucking backwards.

[winter999]

47. Ahhhh, the sound of reason!

Though we all know this is a loosing battle. I already see what the next scapegoat is after they kill the monster that is Tobacco. Better hide your twinkies and french fries. The tobacco police will be redesignated the food police soon. Don't believe me, just ask a NYC resident who's diet has been shaped by the government. That's one reason I'm leary about communal healthcare. The community (e.g. government) will be able to tell you what to eat, how much to eat, what exercise, how much exercise, etc. in order to keep "healthcare costs down".

Big Brother is not what Democrats are about.

[ironrooster]

50. sound of BS if you ask me -

Hey - why don't you just get a crate and place your kid in it and blow smoke through a hole in the side?

You folks never had a father who smoked in the car all the time and would not roll the fucking windows down even as I pleaded with him to do so. I have respiratory issues to this day. It's a Public Health Issue.

You are an idiot if you don't see that the gov. has a stake in regulating this. What if someone wanted to burn "leaded" incense in their car for their pleasure - would you do something then? It's the confines of the car that create the problem.

I understand the concern about Big Brother overreaching - but best vented on subjects such as wire tapping etc.

Smoking in cars HURTS children - is that so difficult to understand?

[depakid]

28. Just the sort of attitude that's caused America's decline

Individual (or corporate) entitlement to do whatever they want- no matter what the consequences may be to others- and no matter how small the inconvenience to thier "rights."

Frankly, I find this sort of deal quite childish- both in logic and in legislation.

[boricua79]

43. that's right!

I'm so libertarian that I want the right to condemn my kids to lung destruction and cancer.

Keep your hands off my kids lungs, Government!

As for the kid's rights...ehh...well, they have none.

[winter999]

49. And how many kids have died from lung cancer caused by second-hand smoke???

I believe the tally is.... 0!

That's right, not one single proven instance of childhood cancer caused by second-hand smoke.

[boricua79]

54. My grandmother has black lungs

because of my grandfather's smoking. She never smoked in her life.

But you know...not a single proven instance of cancer caused by second-hand smoke!

[AngryOldDem]

89. No, it never happens.

Just a sheer coincidence, I guess, that my former husband's grandmother, a nonsmoker, died of lung cancer after living with her husband and son, who smoked like the proverbial stacks for years and years.

[rAVES]

10. The Anti-GOP strikes again!

[onehandle]

11. Good.

If you have kids, you shouldn't smoke period.

[harmonicon]

21. who the fuck are you to say?

You know what - I posted about this above - my father is a smoker, and he raised 3 healthy, bright, successful kids. I can't believe you would criticize someone for a (largely harmless - oh no! the truth!! most smokers don't get cancer, and their kids sure as hell don't because Dad had a smoke) habit. Are you okay with other laws telling people what they can and can not ingest? These laws are so fucking contrary to what I, and many others, feel is the basis of this country, the fact that US citizens support them (along with things like abortion bans) blows my fucking mind.

[onehandle]

24. Ingest is the key word. You don't just ingest when you are smoking...

You're forcing the world around you to ingest. And teaching them too if they're kids.

Smoking around kids is child abuse. Pure and simple.

Smoking is a dirty addictive habit and the vast majority of people view it that way. Even most smokers look down on smokers.



And cancer? If only it was only cancer.



Fact Sheet
Health Effects of Cigarette Smoking

Smoking harms nearly every organ of the body; causing many diseases and reducing the health of smokers in general.1 The adverse health effects from cigarette smoking account for an estimated 438,000 deaths, or nearly 1 of every 5 deaths, each year in the United States. More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined.
Cancer

* Cancer is the second leading cause of death and was among the first diseases causually linked to smoking.
* Smoking causes about 90% of lung cancer deaths in women and almost 80% of lung cancer deaths in men. The risk of dying from lung cancer is more than 23 times higher among men who smoke cigarettes, and about 13 times higher among women who smoke cigarettes compared with never smokers.
* Smoking causes cancers of the bladder, oral cavity, pharynx, larynx (voice box), esophagus, cervix, kidney, lung, pancreas, and stomach, and causes acute myeloid leukemia.
* Rates of cancers related to cigarette smoking vary widely among members of racial/ethnic groups, but are generally highest in African-American men.

Cardiovascular Disease (Heart and Circulatory System)

* Smoking causes coronary heart disease, the leading cause of death in the United States. Cigarette smokers are 2–4 times more likely to develop coronary heart disease than nonsmokers.
* Cigarette smoking approximately doubles a person's risk for stroke.
* Cigarette smoking causes reduced circulation by narrowing the blood vessels (arteries). Smokers are more than 10 times as likely as nonsmokers to develop peripheral vascular disease.
* Smoking causes abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Respiratory Disease and Other Effects

* Cigarette smoking is associated with a tenfold increase in the risk of dying from chronic obstructive lung disease. About 90% of all deaths from chronic obstructive lung diseases are attributable to cigarette smoking.
* Cigarette smoking has many adverse reproductive and early childhood effects, including an increased risk for infertility, preterm delivery, stillbirth, low birth weight, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
* Postmenopausal women who smoke have lower bone density than women who never smoked. Women who smoke have an increased risk for hip fracture than never smokers.

[nebenaube]

27. yep.....

and the background radiation increase due to subsequent fallout from nuking the southwest 300+ times since the bomb's first test has had zero impact on cancer rates in this country. :sarcasm:

[harmonicon]

30. no, you know what, smoking around kids isn't child abuse

Have you ever actually known abused kids? They'd give a fucking arm and leg to have a good parent, and could give a fuck if that parent smoked around them. Saying shit like that is saying bad things about my parents who are fucking great parents. Your opinion about what is an is not child abuse does not law make. Get a fucking life.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

31. Smoking around kids is child abuse. Pure and simple?

What about all those poor children at school, waiting in line to get in their bus. every day. Who is responsible? The teacher? The school? The parent?
Second hand smoke "MIGHT" be bad if you look at the the other nasty things in the air we breath or the water we drink.

[onehandle]

32. The local elementary school has a sign out front that says...

"Please do not idle. Little lungs at work."

Would you like to protest this? I'll make you a sign.

Nice try.

[harmonicon]

40. a suggestion for slightly more healthy behavior doesn't turn not practicing that behavior...

...into child abuse. I think a lot more harm is done to children when their parents take them to church (which my parents also did), but I wouldn't go out and label in child abuse.

[Tesha]

39. No, most smokers just get heart disease and emphysema.

No, most smokers just get heart disease (and other vascular
diseases) and emphysema and lose 2.5 to 10 years off their
expected lifetimes.

o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_and_health

o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lung_cancer



o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_disease

o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emphysema


Tesha

[varkam]

14. State Representative Shay Schual-Berke is a fan of hyperbole.

Smoking in a car with children is not equivalent to drunk driving, regardless of your feelings towards smoking or the issue of second-hand smoke.

[pleah]

15. I am sick to fucking death of these stupid laws! Soon will have a fucking law to tell us when to

SHIT!

[Exultant Democracy]

16. only if people start to s**t in their children's lungs, get some perspective.

[MadMaddie]

17. Creep, Creep....and the state dictates to you what you

should and should not do.

We all would hope that parents would have common sense not to smoke with their kids in the car.

In the state of WA I think the infrastructure and Meth problem has a higher priority at this time..

(Don't get me wrong I want all kids protected the best they can be but is it really the states place to make this law?)...

[NashVegas]

37. And People Don't Understand Why We've Had 7 Years of George W. Fucking Bush

..

[ohio2007]

18. hey, just ban tobacco farms. end of problem. nt

[harmonicon]

22. farmers, industry.... who needs 'em?! huh?

[ohio2007]

25. The tobacco cash crop isn't a PC commodity anymore. neither party enjoys taking

money from them.......


But then TAX talk on such a commodity as tobacco is always waiting in the wings as the favorite cash crop inside the beltway.

You willing to poney up $10 a pack as the best incentive to quit?

[Paladin]

26. Why Don't You Libertarians Go Pound Sand?

Immediately after you turn in your Democratic credentials; might as well make it official.

You're exhibiting the same backwards state of mind that has been blindly against virtually every social improvement in recent history: child labor laws, Social Security, minimum wage, seat belts, flame-resistant infant clothing, fluorinated water, hate crime laws--the list goes on and on. You may regard prohibiting smoking in child-bearing vehicles to be a rape of your freedoms by the evil nanny state, but nobody with an ounce of common sense agrees with you....

[Feron]

33. Stop with the logical fallacies.

If you don't like smoking, that's perfectly fine. I hate smoking myself.

However a lot of anti-smoking rhetoric is exactly the same as the anti-drug rhetoric. Instead of the phony concern for the children, why not do something that will benefit all by passing laws cleaning up car and factory exhaust along with smog?! Those targets are conveniently ignored while the self-proclaimed clean air activists go exclusively after smokers. It's all such bullshit.

The law isn't about helping children, it's about prohibitionists outlawing cigarettes step by step because they don't like them. Don't be fooled by the "for the children" line.

As long as a window is rolled down, I don't see what the big deal is unless the child is severely allergic.

I'm actually for the banning of smoking in certain public places like offices and malls, but not in others like bars. Common sense, not zealotry, should rule the day. But unfortunately the temperance movement is alive and well in this country.

The problem with broad brushes like yours is that they are sloppy.

[NashVegas]

38. Child Labor Laws vs Seat Belts

To compare the two is to trivialize the situation children were placed in, in factories, and the working conditions they were subjected to and the horrific greed of the industrialists.

I wouldn't call laws re: seat belts, flame resistant infant clothing (which involves chemicals), and many other additions since 1978 aren't for the benefit of society, in the long term, as it turns citizens into freaking 12 year olds who don't know how to think for themselves.

[Big Blue Marble]

29. I am so in agreement.

My first husband smoked in the care when our children were growing up. I would at least insist that he open the sunroof
or the window. It was always a battle to get him to protect our kids this way.

[Sin]

35. Exactaly how..

Are they going to tell that you were smokeing in the car with a kid ...?
So its just a law so spitefull devorced people to have so one can complain about the other?

because I dont think a cop is going to see me smokeing at 55 miles and hour and if he did it would be out the window before he pulled me over.

[mikelgb]

56. then he'd get you for littering too

and if it is a wildfire area... ouch

[Sin]

76. Well.

First when I dispute the fine in court he would have to present clear evidence I was smokeing in my car at the time he saw me.
So.. with out haveing really really clear video evidence basicly the pig in blue can suck a fat one :)

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. Good...it's child abuse...and I'm a smoker

I don't smoke in my house. I don't smoke in my car. I don't smoke inside at all, really.

And I live in fucking CHICAGO.

If somebody was smoking in a car with my two year old I'd throw 'em a beating.

[boricua79]

41. Good. No one has the right condemn his child to future cancer deaths. NT

[AngryOldDem]

45. It's sad that a law is even needed, but the lack of common sense/ courtesy dictates it.

Cigarette smoke, to most nonsmokers, is an irritant. Sorry, but it is.

Almost all of my smoking friends realize this, and always ask if I mind that they smoke, and that if their smoke becomes a bother to me, I am to tell them so. If I'm in an area where I can easily remove myself from the smoke, I do. I don't make an issue of smoking because it is a personal decision and I have no right to criticize such. Moreover, if I ride in a car with a smoker, they usually wait until we get wherever we're going to light up, or they make sure there is adequate ventilation as we ride. What underscores all of this is just basic common sense and common courtesy. My friends realize that I should not have to tolerate something that physically irritates me.

Parents who don't show the same regard toward their kids have made this law possible. Forcing a nonsmoker to breathe cigarette smoke in a confined environment such as a car, especially someone who cannot effectively speak up for himself, isn't so much abuse as it is just plain boorishness and selfishness on the part of the smoker. (And I think a relatively sound case has been made in the past of health problems of children who grow up in households whose members smoke, so I think it becomes even more of an issue as it concerns kids.)

Do I like the thought of the law? No. But it's not such a leap to consider that -- in some minds -- what common sense fails to dictate, government most certainly will.

[ironrooster]

51. Angry old Dem

please see my first post - in response to harmonium.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

46. For all you who decry another attempt at the "nanny state"...

with this law, I am here to say I wish the hell it had been around 40 years ago. :cry:

My Mom smoked in the car. In the summer, in the winter, on long drives and on short jaunts to the grocery store. All. The fucking. Time.

My favorites were the five hour drives to Tahoe in the winter to visit my sister. In a 1972 Ford Pinto. The drives where I had to literally beg my Mom to crack a vent a tiny bit so I could get some fresh air. The drives during I would get so sick I felt like I had no air and was suffocating to death. The drives that were pure torture for me.

As a young adult, I had become so sensitive to smoke I had to leave restaurants, clubs, and theatres to get a few gulps of fresh air because I could not stand the smoke one more second.

Now, my sensitivity is so great just a whiff of smoke will set my allergies off.

My Mom was a wonderful mother, who took good care of me and tried to do right by all her children. But she really fucked up with her smoking around us, badly. This all happened back in the day, before the notion that second-hand smoke could be harmful. Today, a parent who would subject their child to their smoke in such a confined place should be considered a danger to that child. Sorry, but that's the cold truth. :shrug:

If this law saves kids from what I experienced, all I can say is "good".

[ironrooster]

52. Damn right -

My father did the same thing to me on long business trips through west Texas. I suffer as you do to this day from allergies and easily get respiratory illnesses. If there ever is another flu pandemic I'll be one of the first to go. Harmonim sounds like someone in denial as my father was - I would have loved for my dad to have been "pulled over" for this crap.

[K8-EEE]

61. Children should not be driven around in smokey cars

Sheesh what is wrong with a law like that? Why hurt the kids because they have dumb parents?

[harmonicon]

99. see, you've now brought up the real problem:

dumb parents. Roll down the damn window - case solved! Or, if it bothers your kid, and they ask you to stop, fucking stop. Unfortunately, there's no good way to keep idiots from having children.

[AngryOldDem]

124. There's the whole crux of the problem.

If people are too stupid, or selfish, to do what is right, don't be surprised when others get fed up with the stupidity or selfishness and decide to take things to the next level.

And most kids, especially babies, toddlers, and younger kids, can't speak up for themselves. Some older kids are that way, too -- they don't dare question Mom or Dad, and accept Mom or Dad's habits as a fact of life. I know I did when my dad took me on errands as an excuse to light up because my mom wouldn't allow him to smoke in the house.

I don't necessarily agree with this jihad against smokers, but as a nonsmoker, I don't think I should have to put up with the habit. I wrote a post to that effect upthread; not going to repeat it here.

ON EDIT: FWIW, I also find the description of such smokers as being "douchebags" offensive, as you did; to that end I can appreciate your outrage on this thread -- but that doesn't mean I necessarily agree with all you're saying.

[harmonicon]

136. I'm more than happy to have a discussion about this

but, as you've said, this is something like a jihad against smokers. People have what I think is an irrational hatred of smokers, and most of them are using this issue to lash out at them, which is why my reaction is so extreme (especially when someone would describe my parents as abusers for smoking. Trust me, I was never abused). They'll say, "think of the children!", when they could really care less. If we really want children to have better health and a better future, step one would be to make cars that pollute less and for people to drive less - that's what I find to be so ironic about this: while you're tooling around destroying the planet, please don't smoke. I understand your position, and I'm glad you want to be rational about this. I think our response should be trying to fix the root of the problem, not the symptoms, and that's where we disagree. Not that you don't want to get to the heart of it, but think it's worth doing a little to treat the symptoms when we can - am I accurately describing your position here? I think our disagreement (not counting very real differences we may have about smoking) is over that - I think it's wasted time and money that could be going into positive environmental change and education.

[JerseygirlCT]

133. Rolling down the window doesn't really help

And children aren't always capable of telling the parent to stop.

Any caring parent, knowing what we know now, would not smoke with a child in the car, period.

[Lorien]

83. I had exactly the same experience. Only it was both my dad and stepmom

who kept us in the car for hours on long cross country drives, both chain smoking all the way. I remember begging them to crack a window or please, PLEASE not to light up again for a little while. I would beg with tears streaming down my cheeks, but they always pretended that they couldn't hear me. I have the same reaction to cigarette smoke today that you do. I even had to switch seats in a plane not long ago because a person sitting nearby had clothes that smelled like cigarette smoke and it set my allergies off in a big way. My father and stepmom were doctors, so they had no excuses. My father fully acknowledges that he was being a self centered prick back then, and says things like "I was one hell of a shitty dad, wasn't I"? Well, he's not now and would never smoke in a car with a non-smoker present. We ALL know better now. Every child should be spared from going through what you and I have gone through, and the life long effects it caused.

[truthisfreedom]

53. LONG overdue. Smoke is poison. Poisoning your kids is abuse.

Plain and simple. Flame on, poisoners.

[harmonicon]

100. so, what can kids eat? how many calories? broken down into what?

how should their drinking water be filtered? can they eat fish? '1984' wasn't about a future utopia, you know?

[truthisfreedom]

105. Stop smoking in front of your kids.

[harmonicon]

107. I don't have kids!

god, I don't even smoke in front of my parents (who are seniors), because it makes me feel like a 15 year old breaking the rules (which is a little funny, because I'd never even had a cigarette until I was in college and didn't live at home).

[Political Heretic]

121. Fast food is poision. Poisoning your kids is abuse.

If you've taken your kids to a fast food restaurants you are an abusive parent.

Pleas turn yourself into child services.

[zanne]

59. But parents can still buy guns without trigger locks.

This is a sad, sad country.

[keepCAblue]

64. 2nd-hand smoke kills more in the U.S. each year than do guns. n/t

[zanne]

67. LMAO! nt

[keepCAblue]

78. Odd that you find statistics so funny.

American Cancer Society reports 35,000 deaths annually in the U.S. due to second-hand smoke

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Secondhand_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp

Secondhand smoke is classified as a "known human carcinogen" (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.

Tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 chemical compounds. More than 60 of these are known or suspected to cause cancer.

Secondhand smoke can be harmful in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

* an estimated 35,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers
* about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults
* other breathing problems in non-smokers, including coughing, mucus, chest discomfort, and reduced lung function
* 150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations
* increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma
* more than 750,000 middle ear infections in children

Pregnant women exposed to secondhand smoke are also at increased risk of having low birth weight babies.

Estimated number of deaths annually in the U.S. due to firearms (stats from the CDC): 30,694 (2005)

[Political Heretic]

122. OMFG... can I get a SOURCE for that claim please?

No.... I can't because its bullshit.

[ironrooster]

65. that is a dumb comparison -

edit: this is directed to "zanne"

a proper comparison would be "and parents can still purchase cigarettes"

it's what they DO with the cigarettes that makes the difference and creates the hazard.

if they smoke in a car w/children that is wrong.

if they place the gun where a child can access it - then that is wrong.

both actions are stupid - one destroys the child's health slowly - and the other may kill the child outright...

however,

parents can legally smoke outside and legally shoot outside where it is permitted - ie: NOT WITHIN CITY LIMITS.

jeebus. is that too hard for folks to get???

[zanne]

69. If they're stupid, that is wrong,

But still legal! Why is that too hard for YOU to get?

[ironrooster]

77. Nope - it isn't legal to store a handgun where a -

child can access it - it's "criminally negligent" and can be prosecuted.

EDIT:

You are confusing what a person is DOING (smoking in a car with kids) and what they MIGHT DO

(leaving a loaded weapon out where a youngster can access).

why is the LAW so hard for U2 get?

[zanne]

104. oh please--When was the last time anyone was prosecuted

For not locking up their guns BEFORE a tragedy happens? And trigger locks aren't mandated; that's the bigger tragedy.

[boricua79]

93. yes, because not having trigger locks guarantees

that your kid will grab the gun and shoot his brains out.

But smoking...nah...nothing bad will come from it. Have a Lucky Strike!

[Snarkturian Clone]

66. I have 2013 in the betting pool of when smoking will be banned

completely. Anyone else?


edited to add:

The kind of person who would smoke in a car with children is the same person who would break that law in defiance of it.

[onehandle]

71. Not as long as someone can make a buck off of it.

Public smoking will be banned pretty soon almost everywhere. I will celebrate the day I can walk down a city sidewalk and not be accosted by strolling smokers.

But private smoking on/in your own property will be around for a long time.

[superconnected]

74. It's also the kind of person who doesn't care what their second hand smoke does to others.

Sort of like these people here defending unleashing it on others.

Forget cancer, just having the right for others to breathe clean air is a reason to impose this law.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zanne]

106. I have to admit there's quite a bit of hypocrisy here...

I don't smoke anymore, but I'd never tell someone to put out their cigarette if it was just me in the vicinity. For small kids, I agree that it's a good idea not to smoke around them; their bodies are so susceptible to everything. But a ban on smoking altogether? That's absurd. It'd be like another Prohibition period and tobacco would become part of drug smuggling.
I'm glad I've quit smoking and I'm glad alot of other people have too, but in a way it bothers me that it's being used as a straw man for big-time polluters. (Heard about the steroid investigations?)

[superconnected]

129. For those of us who happily have never smoked, breathing the smoke

filled air is often a horrendous experience. I want CLEANER air than smelling that horrendous oder. I think kids deserve it too.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LanternWaste]

86. I don't think we're enlightened enough to completely ban

I don't think we're enlightened enough to completely ban it for years to come.

We as a nation will need to grow up and mature quite a bit more before we end up calling for a sane law like that...

[harmonicon]

102. yeah.... I can't wait until we're as 'mature' as Hitler's Nazi party - that'll be sweet

I'll really like it when we're enlightened enough to round up those filthy gypsies as well.

[superconnected]

130. Well you certianly have the personality down for it.

[harmonicon]

132. yes, my personality

my personality that makes me stand up to hypocrites, bullies and injustice. Yeah, I'd fit right in.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boricua79]

108. 40 years from now, we'll see whose healthier

I eat right, exercise regularly, don't drink alcohol, don't smoke, and maintain a balanced life of work, hobbies, and self-development.

I don't spend much time worrying about smokers, so I don't get the "vicious hatred". It really isn't that vicious. I'm just hoping that someone develops a more efficient way to disappear the smokers without disappearing the non-smokers.

And if my destiny is to die in a stroke, so be it. I'm just going to do my best to avoid that.

Good day.

[harmonicon]

111. I could care less who's healthier - how about who's happier?

I could live my life in a way that would make me as healthy as possible, or has happy as possible. I like smoking, drinking, and eating things like pizza and fried chicken. Shit, I might pull a muscle during sex, but that's not going to stop me from doing it. I could care less if people smoke or not, but I really don't like people wishing death upon smokers because they don't fit in with your ideal world - in fact, it's really creepy.

[boricua79]

114. i'm happy enough

I like my job, I like my side hobbies, I like my side-profession, I have a wonderful girlfriend. I like family. I don't smoke, I don't drink alcohol, and I'm over-all healthy. I eat pizza and friend chicken to, though I've never pulled a muscle during sex.

What's creepy is looking into the eyes of a smoker who hasn't had his fix. THAT's creepy.

[onager]

119. Non-smokers should avoid Egypt

I've lived here for nearly 3 years (in Alexandria). Generally, the only place you'll find a non-smoking area is in the restaurant of an American chain hotel--maybe. And that's just a separate area of the dining room, not a different room altogether. In most public places smoking is still allowed anywhere.

Transportation will also be a problem.

Alex has about 5 million totally unregulated shitbox taxicabs running around, many of them antique Russian Ladas. The windows are often stuck in the up position and most of the drivers chain-smoke. You'll still get plenty of ventilation, thanks to the rusted-out floorboards.

To whine about it you will usually need to speak Arabic, and even then the drivers would just ignore you. (Unless you are an American or European female. Then they will ask if you are married, if you have kids, if not why not??? And end the conversation by proposing marriage to you.)

And the "protect the children" crowd will just HATE it here.

Summers in Alexandria, the population increases by a million people on weekends, as Egyptian families pour in to visit the beaches. This leads to massive traffic jams on the Corniche, the beautiful drive along the Mediterranean. (Which is conveniently located right behind my apartment, if any of you plan to drop in anytime soon.)

Families cruising the Corniche often raise the trunk of the car and stuff all the rug-rats into it. The kids make all the noise they want while holding up the trunk. Usually. Potholes, of which there are many, can be tricky.

Then there's the whole animal-sacrifice thing. You mostly see this during Eid al-Adha (Feast of the Sacrifice). As an atheist and infidel, I was once honored with an invite to watch a village butcher ritually slaughter a goat. (I live in Alexandria but my job site is out near the Nile Delta, past a bunch of little farm villages. Many of the people in those villages know me by now. In a running joke, some of them call me "omda"--the mayor.)

The butcher cut the goat's throat, and a whole gaggle of laughing little kids suddenly showed up. The little angels dipped their hands in the blood, then went around smearing bloody handprints on walls, poles, and each other.

It's a fun and interesting place.

This is Thursday night here, the start of my weekend. Despite various warnings, I'm going out to have a huge green salad. (No, they won't kill you. I've never gotten sick from the greens here.) Followed by a big ol' steak, some red wine after my pre-pranidal double Jack Daniels, and I'll probably finish up with a cognac or 5 and coffee. And yes, I will be smoking.

[Broken_Hero]

84. A law like this exists in Arkansas all ready....

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/151141/

[Political Heretic]

123. The more smoking is popularized into the "it" thing to be against, the more I smoke.

It's so fucking ridiculous how "hip" it has become. Go over to Europe and the laugh at us and ask for a light.

[JerseygirlCT]

134. There you go - that'll show them! Kill yourself slowly with lung

cancer -- that'll get them.

Your reasoning here is pretty childish to say the least.

If you're addicted, I'm sorry for you. But there's nothing admirable about smoking. And children should never be exposed to its noxious effects.

[Telly Savalas]

131. Give me the freedom to emit noxious fumes in a small enclosed space occupied by a defenseless child

or give me death.

[Zhade]

135. Good. It should be banned.

Selfish smokers don't get to give their kids cancer. Sorry. Live with it.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

139. I have scar tissue in my lungs from second-hand smoke.

It looks like dandruff in the linings of the bronchioles (tubes) in the lungs, on an X ray.
My folks smoked when I was a little kid and quit when I was in elementary school. They quit when the first reports of cancer connected to smoking came out from the Ochsner Clinic in New Orleans.

I still have allergic asthma, exercised induced asthma, allergies and sinus problems. I cannot be friends with a smoker, because my respiratory system will be inflamed from being around their smoke, and 48 hours later I will have a sinus infection or a bronchitis infection, always bacterial. And have to go to the doc for a shot of powerful antibiotic and a shot of cortisone and antihistamine.


Back in the late 80s and early 90s, my immune system went to hell, because of a shitty marriage and the stress, and I had bacterial pneumonia that refused to break up and come up. My doctor had to rinse my lungs out four times under general anesthetic to save my life, so the stuff would start to break up and I wouldn't drown from pus-filled lungs. That was over a period of five years. The respiratory techs were stupid. They kept asking me if I smoked, and I said "I'm not that stupid". They looked dumbstruck when I said that. They couldn't understand how my immune system could be so compromised that normal flora would cause bacterial infection. Every time they cultured my bacteria, they always came back in the lab report as "normal flora" or "non-pathogenic".


I used to not go to bars or concerts because I couldn't stand the smell of smoke in my clothes and hair, and if I did go someplace where people smoked, I took off my clothes & washed them, took a shower and washed my hair immediately upon getting home.


Allergy medicines, and especially Advair inhalers, are damned expensive (about $200 a month). And I don't have a job or any insurance.


Thanks a lot, smokers, for making large chunks of my life a living hell. :sarcasm:

[onyxred]

140. Kids shouldn't be at elevated risk of cancer

I agree with the measure.

[TankLV]

141. Ever been in a care with someone that smokes and you don't - NOT good at all...

I support this law - the seemingly insensitivity and unconcern that SOME - NOT ALL - smokers have towards others is appalling...

Of course, in my daily dealings with all of the smokers I personally know, NOT ONE fits the above insensitive asshole description - and each one is VERY concerned if it's "OK" for them to smoke in my or others' presence...