NJ Proposes Banning Smoking While Driving

[genieroze]

NJ Proposes Banning Smoking While Driving

Jul 24, 2005 11:01 am US/Eastern
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) Ashtrays have been disappearing in cars like fins on Cadillacs, and so could smoking while driving in New Jersey, under a measure introduced in the Legislature.

Although the measure faces long odds, it still has smokers incensed and tearing into the idea as a Big Brother intrusion that threatens to take away one of the few places they can enjoy their habit.

“The day a politician wants to tell me I can’t smoke in my car, that’s the day he takes over my lease payments,” said John Cito, a financial planner from Hackensack with a taste for $20 cigars.

Those cigars, pipes and cigarettes would become no-nos for drivers. Offenders would be stung with a fine of up to $250, under the measure, whose sponsor said it’s designed more to improve highway safety than protect health


http://kyw.com/Local%20News/local_story_205134803.html

[kliljedahl]

1. Do they have the same rules for cell phones?

Keith’s Barbeque Central

[genieroze]

3. Yup they do, you have to use a hands free but even that is more

distracting than smoking. So is eating in the car and the biggest cause for accidents of distraction is changing the radio station.

Here is a good editorial about Nicotine Nazis.
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/living/12166204.htm

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. I saw a woman putting on makeup

in rush hour. So I guess we better ban Mary Kay while driving.

[Al-CIAda]

13. There we go, better ban radios from cars too, you know, to be safe.

Damn, what are we becoming?

[Momgonepostal]

2. I'm no fan of smoking, but that seems over the top

The author of the legislation says smoking is too much of a distraction while driving, but then says only about 1 percent of accidents are due to smoking.

I just can't agree that this kind of ban is the right thing to do.

[5thGenDemocrat]

9. Heck, Mom, they don't care about public safety

That's just a convenient excuse. The real reason is to generate big bucks for the Liquor and Prostitute Fund at the state capitol (Trenton in this case, Lansing in mine).
I know a guy who just got popped for a DUI (@.08 in Michigan). He got $1200 in fines, another $1000 to get his license back -- but no community service and no jail time. So, like I said, it isn't about the public safety -- it's about a slush fund.
John
It really doesn't make that much difference if your local politician is a Repub or a Dem -- they're still politicians and, so, are out for themselves first.

[MindPilot]

20. Agreed 110%!

Most of these laws are about either revenue generation or giving LE more "tools"--the polite euphemism for "excuse to pull you over"--to fight "unsafe drivers".

[NorCalDem]

19. Zero percent of accidents are due to smoking

1% of accidents are caused by people who were smoking at the time of their accident.

[BrklynLiberal]

4. They cannot even enforce the no cell phone while driving law. I'd

like to see them try something like this.

Just once before I die, I would like to see one of those people who talk on the phone while driving stopped by a police officer and given a ticket.

I was almost rammed by a woman yesterday who was pulling out of parking spot while talking on the phone. When I screeched to a halt and honked my horn, I expected her to stop and let me pass. She did not even put down the phone, but kept on talking, and squealed out of the spot in front me and sped away.
If I did not have to get to work, I would have followed her and .... I don't know what I would have done then...but I could not believe the nerve of her.

[jojo54]

6. Actually, you have to be pulled over for another reason,

like no seat belt. Trivial, I know. I'm a smoker and this ban would really piss me off. Simply because, talking on a cell phone while driving IS a big distraction, making that person a risk. Lighting up takes 2 seconds (I know, I know it's still 2 seconds), a phone coversation takes at least 30 seconds if you get voice mail.

[MindPilot]

23. That's only a matter of time

Seatbelt laws were "secondary" when they were first introduced; you had to be pulled over for something else. Now of course they are "primary" in many jurisdictions so you can be stopped just for not wearing your seatbelt. Of course once you're stopped, you're fair game for search, interrogation, proof of ID, a good godly tazing or anything else the officer deems necessary to maintain an orderly society.

It probably won't be long before you can be pulled over for smoking and held while they roll a mobile xray lab whose technicians will in turn notify your employer and health care provider that you are not properly maintaining your health in accordance with federal standards.

[Old and In the Way]

7. Better limit car to a driver only. People, especially kids, are a real

distraction to the driver...

[OrlandoGator]

8. I would say no smoking in a car with children inside.

And I never could understand why throwing butts on the street isn't classified as littering.

[genieroze]

10. It is in NJ, ask a cop.

[NorCalDem]

21. Throwing you butt on the street

is a $1000 fine in CA, or more, depending upon the risk of fire hazards.

[jojo54]

11. I just finished reading the article and I've come to the conclusion

that this is just another kiss ass attitude to cover up for the highest insurance rates in the nation. I hate the posturing that these idiots do just because of some personal vendetta or to appease someone else.

[genieroze]

12. Get this they raised my insurance rates 300.00 more a year because

they looked at my credit history and said it's because I have a gas card.

[jojo54]

14. I've noticed they're doing that with everybody.

IMHO, my credit history is none of their damn business! Sorry, this is a very sore subject with me lately.

[genieroze]

15. I hear you, I just got a new black mark on my history because my one

credit card sold my account to another card without telling me. I paid the one card but they didn't cash my check or forward it to the other one. So now I have a late payment. I paid them in full to. So I had to cancel the check and rewrite it to the new card who jacked up my interest to 33% because of the late payment.

[jojo54]

16. check you PM.

[jojo54]

17. Sorry. You've disabled it.

If you have high premiums, try Capacity Coverage Corp., Group, something like that. Had them for about 8 years altogether (in N.H. for 18 months in that 8 yrs). I know they weren't taking new policies about 9, 10 months ago, but they might be now. They're the lowest we've found, besides Farmer's but, like the name you have to be associated with farming to get that insurance.

Good luck. I know the insurance sucks here in Jersey.

[Indy Lurker]

18. Hey, why not?

We already let them mandate seatbelts for our "own good."

How is this any different?

[LeftNYC]

22. No donut eating in cars...

that would be struck down quicker than 1...2...3...1% of all car accidents are caused by people smoking. What about people trying to read maps or drinking coffee or eating tuna fish sandwhiches? As a smoker(american spirits, dont support big tobacco), who doesnt smoke with kids in the car or my gf or anyone else who objects) this is ridiculous. Soon I wont be able to smoke in my home.

[MindPilot]

24. "As a smoker (american spirits, don't support big tobacco)"

It's a very sad statement that you feel you have to preemptively defend yourself.

[LeftNYC]

25. It just might be. I dont feel I need to "preemptively" defend

anything. I don't and won't support Phillip Morris because of their lobbying practices. I, however, will defend my right to smoke.