[Doofy]

Ban smoking in cars to save children, say doctors | Mail Online

Smoking should be banned in all cars to save children from the health dangers caused by passive inhalation, says a report from the Royal College of Physicians.

...

Richard Ashcroft, a professor of bioethics at Queen Mary, University of London - who contributed to the report - said even parked drivers who never have child passengers should get out of their cars before lighting up

Fascism or sensible?

[OldManMac]

Very sensible. Children shouldn't be made to suffer because their parents hate themselves. Your right to smoke ends with my right to breathe clean air.

[The Final Dakar]

Sounds like a Bittersweet Symphony for smoking.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Your right to smoke ends with my right to breathe clean air.

But you're not allowed in my car. And neither are children.

[nonhuman]

I am entirely in favor of laws that place stronger restrictions on actions where they relate to children. I think smoking should be entirely legal, but have no problem with an exception to that being where children are present. I think driving without a seatbelt should be legal, but have no problem with an exemption for children.

I also think that where a child is harmed or killed through the action or lack thereof of their parents/guardians those parents/guardians should be held legally responsible. Children do not have the full set of rights that adults have, instead their well being is given over to their caretakers. As such responsibility for those children is also given over to those caretakers even to the extend that it might sometimes violate their otherwise inalienable rights. (This is clearly a very general statement, specific situations may require more detailed consideration.)

Of course as Doofy points out, this ridiculous law has nothing to actually do with children; any benefit children get from it is purely a side effect. As such, I am against it.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Your right to smoke ends with my right to breathe clean air.

Guess we should ban anything that pollutes the air then, might be a long list.

My right to do what I want in a vehicle I bought and paid for supersedes what the nanny-state thinks is best for me.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Guess we should ban anything that pollutes the air then, might be a long list.

My right to do what I want in a vehicle I bought and paid for supersedes what the nanny-state thinks is best for me.

SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO MURDER IN YOUR CAR LOL allcaps

[sek929]

As long as the corpses fit in my trunk I don't see a problem.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

But you're not allowed in my car. And neither are children.

Am I allowed in your car?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Am I allowed in your car?

As long as I can blow smoke up yer ass.

[besson3c]

That's not all you can put in my ass...

[Doofy]

Dude! No Canuckistani hijinks in my vehicles, thanks.

[besson3c]

Fine then, we'll have to crank up some Miles Davis then if you aren't going to put out, hippy!

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

I am entirely in favor of laws that place stronger restrictions on actions where they relate to children. I think smoking should be entirely legal, but have no problem with an exception to that being where children are present. I think driving without a seatbelt should be legal, but have no problem with an exemption for children.

Replace ‘children’ with ‘other people’, and I agree.

I happen to be one of those people whose throat constricts to the point of barely being able to breathe if I’m in a smoky room. Even walking past a smoker outside causes me some discomfort, but I’m easily able to ignore that, and don’t believe smoking outdoors should be prohibited (duh).

Banning smoking from all vehicles is ridiculous. They could make it an offence instead to smoke in confined spaces (vehicular or not) if children are present, if they want to make it about children. Whether daddy smokes in the car with little Johnny in the back seat, or he smokes in the living room with little Johnny next to him on the couch makes little, if any, difference.

I’d love a bit more anti-smoking fascism over here, though. Like basically just having anywhere caring just a bit about the smoking ban in public bars/clubs. Or a proper smoking ban that doesn’t give practically anyone who wants it a way out of not honouring it. Or just people who didn’t bite your head off and start arguing when you nicely ask them if they couldn’t please put out the cigarettes as the law requires and go into the smoking room to smoke. Maybe that way I’d be able to actually go to some of the good places this city has to offer.

[/rant]

[gradient]

This stuff drives me nuts. Smoking in an enclosed area with children shouldn't be legal, no question, but not being able to smoke in a privately owned space ALONE? Stupid. In Vancouver, as a smoker it's already excessive enough.

I can't smoke in my apartment (fairly standard building rules).
I can't smoke on my balcony (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in the workplace (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in any stores, restaurants, bars, etc. (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of ANY openable doorway or window to a public place (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of a public service area, such as restaurant patios (city bylaw)
I can't smoke at bus stops (deemed a public place, city bylaw)

When you add that up, damned near the only places that I'm legally allowed to smoke, considering that I live in the downtown core where just about everywhere is within 6 meters (20 feet, basically) of some kind of window or door, is out in the middle of a parking lot, a park (ironic, because parks are supposed to be about getting some fresh air), and IN MY CAR.

And with all that, the government is more then happy to rake in the massive taxes levied on tobacco sales hand over fist.

In some ways, I'd prefer that they just go all the way and make tobacco illegal - at least it would simplify things.

[Wiskedjak]

People should be allowed to smoke in their car.
People *should not* be allowed smoke in a car with children.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by gradient 

This stuff drives me nuts. Smoking in an enclosed area with children shouldn't be legal, no question, but not being able to smoke in a privately owned space ALONE? Stupid. In Vancouver, as a smoker it's already excessive enough.

I can't smoke in my apartment (fairly standard building rules).
I can't smoke on my balcony (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in the workplace (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in any stores, restaurants, bars, etc. (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of ANY openable doorway or window to a public place (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of a public service area, such as restaurant patios (city bylaw)
I can't smoke at bus stops (deemed a public place, city bylaw)

When you add that up, damned near the only places that I'm legally allowed to smoke, considering that I live in the downtown core where just about everywhere is within 6 meters (20 feet, basically) of some kind of window or door, is out in the middle of a parking lot, a park (ironic, because parks are supposed to be about getting some fresh air), and IN MY CAR.

And with all that, the government is more then happy to rake in the massive taxes levied on tobacco sales hand over fist.

In some ways, I'd prefer that they just go all the way and make tobacco illegal - at least it would simplify things.

Why do you smoke?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

People should be allowed to smoke in their car.

The phrasing of that bothers me, somehow. Like as if we're only "allowed" to do what the government "allows" us to do, or something.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

The phrasing of that bothers me, somehow. Like as if we're only "allowed" to do what the government "allows" us to do, or something.

Fair enough. People should not be prevented from smoking in their cars unless children are present.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by gradient 

I can't smoke within 6 meters of ANY openable doorway or window to a public place (city bylaw)

...

When you add that up, damned near the only places that I'm legally allowed to smoke, considering that I live in the downtown core where just about everywhere is within 6 meters (20 feet, basically) of some kind of window or door, is out in the middle of a parking lot, a park (ironic, because parks are supposed to be about getting some fresh air), and IN MY CAR.

So you've either got a really big car, or it has no functioning doors or windows? How do you get in and out?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

So you've either got a really big car, or it has no functioning doors or windows? How do you get in and out?

Uhhh... my car isn't a public place. Regardless, this is the exact wording of our city legislation, as I was paraphrasing in my previous post:

[No smoking] within six metres of an entryway, openable window or air intake of a building and the perimeter of a customer service area.

... which is actually more restrictive then my paraphrased version as it's not just public places, but buildings of all varieties, though I believe the spirit of the law means that it wouldn't be enforced on private property.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by gradient 

This stuff drives me nuts. Smoking in an enclosed area with children shouldn't be legal, no question, but not being able to smoke in a privately owned space ALONE? Stupid. In Vancouver, as a smoker it's already excessive enough.

I can't smoke in my apartment (fairly standard building rules).
I can't smoke on my balcony (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in the workplace (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in any stores, restaurants, bars, etc. (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of ANY openable doorway or window to a public place (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of a public service area, such as restaurant patios (city bylaw)
I can't smoke at bus stops (deemed a public place, city bylaw)

When you add that up, damned near the only places that I'm legally allowed to smoke, considering that I live in the downtown core where just about everywhere is within 6 meters (20 feet, basically) of some kind of window or door, is out in the middle of a parking lot, a park (ironic, because parks are supposed to be about getting some fresh air), and IN MY CAR.

And with all that, the government is more then happy to rake in the massive taxes levied on tobacco sales hand over fist.

In some ways, I'd prefer that they just go all the way and make tobacco illegal - at least it would simplify things.

The government should be happy to rake in the massive taxes. Why? Because it's 1) discouraging to those who are foolish enough to smoke and 2) takes advantage of an addiction. It's rather brilliant. Since many people refuse to stop smoking just as much as people refuse to stop driving a few blocks to work, why shouldn't they tax cigarettes and gas? Tobacco tax has the added benefit of encouraging people to stop for at least financial reasons if they fail to realize health implications.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Why do you smoke?

That's a damned good question and one that I've asked myself more then a few times, trust me.

The truth of the matter is that I just plain love smoking. I do. I'm very selective with the types of tobacco that I smoke, for that matter, too. I prefer Dunhill as my pre-packaged convenience variety (the Canadian version, mind you, not the American ones; when I was a France a couple years ago I enjoyed their Dunhill brand as well), Drum (mild) when I'm at home or in a similarly relaxed atmosphere and have a nice pipe that I stuff with a few varieties of boutique tobacco.

I love the flavour.
I love the satisfaction of a really good smoke, like having a great cup of coffee (better yet, have them together; cliches be damned).
I love that they can increase my intoxication level, meaning I don't feel the need that last beer of the night.
I love the sense of calm as I exhale and the smoke ripples through my beard.

One of these days I will have to quit, I know, but it's a difficult thing to give up.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

The government should be happy to rake in the massive taxes. Why? Because it's 1) discouraging to those who are foolish enough to smoke and 2) takes advantage of an addiction. It's rather brilliant. Since many people refuse to stop smoking just as much as people refuse to stop driving a few blocks to work, why shouldn't they tax cigarettes and gas? Tobacco tax has the added benefit of encouraging people to stop for at least financial reasons if they fail to realize health implications.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by gradient 

That's a damned good question and one that I've asked myself more then a few times, trust me.

The truth of the matter is that I just plain love smoking. I do. I'm very selective with the types of tobacco that I smoke, for that matter, too. I prefer Dunhill as my pre-packaged convenience variety (the Canadian version, mind you, not the American ones; when I was a France a couple years ago I enjoyed their Dunhill brand as well), Drum (mild) when I'm at home or in a similarly relaxed atmosphere and have a nice pipe that I stuff with a few varieties of boutique tobacco.

I love the flavour.
I love the satisfaction of a really good smoke, like having a great cup of coffee (better yet, have them together; cliches be damned).
I love that they can increase my intoxication level, meaning I don't feel the need that last beer of the night.
I love the sense of calm as I exhale and the smoke ripples through my beard.

One of these days I will have to quit, I know, but it's a difficult thing to give up.

I used to delude myself with those reasons and excuses as well, as do most smokers who are in denial.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by gradient 

One of these days I will have to quit, I know, but it's a difficult thing to give up.

This is what I don't understand. If you enjoy it so much, why will you have to quit some day?

[Andy8]

What about pets in cars while people smoke?

The pets suffer just the same as children do.

[Wiskedjak]

I wonder how many pro-lifers think that protecting children from cigarette smoke is foolish ...?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

I used to delude myself with those reasons and excuses as well, as do most smokers who are in denial.

You lost me. What are you saying that I'm in denial about? I have no delusions about how bad smoking is or what the long term effects are. I enjoy smoking, plain and simple.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

This is what I don't understand. If you enjoy it so much, why will you have to quit some day?

I know that I'll have to quit because I'm not an ignorant person. Like I said to OldManMac, I know what the long term effects are of tobacco use. As much as I enjoy smoking, I know that in all likelihood it will lead to significant medical problems if I don't knock it off at a certain point. Having grown up with four parents (two step-parents) who all smoked full time, I also know the impact it has on children. I expect to start having children myself in the next 2-5 years so my plan is to stop smoking at that point and enjoy it while it lasts.

[Face Ache]

You don't love smoking. You're addicted.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by gradient 

I have no delusions about how bad smoking is or what the long term effects are.

So, then you understand why your city has restrictions your ability to smoke in places where it might affect other people?

[ghporter]

I would prefer that nobody smoked. Period. But if they do, I do not want to be subjected to their smoke, as it irritates my sinuses and makes me cough. Part of this cough is from my childhood, wherein both of my parents smoked and I was exposed to second hand smoke for 18 years. My bronchitis cleared up pretty quickly after I left home, and since then, I've become more and more sensitive to smoke of all kinds, but especially tobacco smoke.

Kids have no say in what happens around them, and if parents/caregivers don't recognize that their smoke is harmful to the kids, maybe it is "sensible" to rule that those adults should not be allowed to smoke in a car that has kids in it.

On the other hand, Doofy, you're looking at how a government regulation will be applied and enforced, seeing the absurdity of how that will happen, and you're surprised? Regulations don't have to make sense-they are just there. The motivation and essential part of this particular item does make worlds of sense to me. The details like "you can't smoke alone in your car," are quite another matter, and you are 100% correct that these bits are inane and stupid.

Now please just stay downwind of me while you smoke, 'k?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

On the other hand, Doofy, you're looking at how a government regulation will be applied and enforced, seeing the absurdity of how that will happen, and you're surprised?

Of course not.

Originally Posted by ghporter 

The details like "you can't smoke alone in your car," are quite another matter, and you are 100% correct that these bits are inane and stupid.

Now please just stay downwind of me while you smoke, 'k?

I've actually almost given up. And not through any fascist cajoling either - but rather because I simply got bored with it.

However, if these fascists keep demanding stupid laws like this, then I'm going to have to push for a public ugliness ordinance - all fat and/or ugly people can only come out of their houses after sundown. It's only fair.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

However, if these fascists keep demanding stupid laws like this, then I'm going to have to push for a public ugliness ordinance - all fat and/or ugly people can only come out of their houses after sundown. It's only fair.

Lucky thing you have socialized medicine... they can all just get mandatory liposuction for free!

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Face Ache 

You don't love smoking. You're addicted.

Wow, that's a condescending response. Of course I'm addicted, and I love it. How come that's hard to understand?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

So, then you understand why your city has restrictions your ability to smoke in places where it might affect other people?

Definitely. I actually support all of the local efforts to curb smoking, with a one minor exception (balconies) that I still understand the reason for.

What I don't support, is someone not being allowed to smoke in an enclosed space that they own while they are alone, which is what this thread is about.

[gradient]

Haha, looks like I managed to kill this thread nice and good. Go Smoking!!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Fascism or sensible?

I fail to see the dichotomy.

Sensible Fascism goes along with passionate Conservatism

-t

[DrTacoMD]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Lucky thing you have socialized medicine... they can all just get mandatory liposuction for free!

Brilliant! But sadly, I'm pretty sure that the mandatory lipo was in the House bill, not the Senate version. England wins again!

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by gradient 

This stuff drives me nuts. Smoking in an enclosed area with children shouldn't be legal, no question, but not being able to smoke in a privately owned space ALONE? Stupid. In Vancouver, as a smoker it's already excessive enough.

I can't smoke in my apartment (fairly standard building rules).
I can't smoke on my balcony (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in the workplace (city bylaw)
I can't smoke in any stores, restaurants, bars, etc. (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of ANY openable doorway or window to a public place (city bylaw)
I can't smoke within 6 meters of a public service area, such as restaurant patios (city bylaw)
I can't smoke at bus stops (deemed a public place, city bylaw)

When you add that up, damned near the only places that I'm legally allowed to smoke, considering that I live in the downtown core where just about everywhere is within 6 meters (20 feet, basically) of some kind of window or door, is out in the middle of a parking lot, a park (ironic, because parks are supposed to be about getting some fresh air), and IN MY CAR.

And with all that, the government is more then happy to rake in the massive taxes levied on tobacco sales hand over fist.

In some ways, I'd prefer that they just go all the way and make tobacco illegal - at least it would simplify things.

Strangely, those same restrictions applies to my ability to BBQ.

Can't BBQ in my apartment. Some sort of fire hazard.
Can't BBQ in the workplace. Said it was some sort of insurance policy reason.
Can't BBQ at the bus stop. Don't know why. What not BBQ up some spare ribs while waiting for the bus.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by gradient 

Wow, that's a condescending response. Of course I'm addicted, and I love it. How come that's hard to understand?

See my statement above about denial; you're in it.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

See my statement above about denial; you're in it.

What's being denied? He isn't claiming that smoking is good for him.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

What's being denied? He isn't claiming that smoking is good for him.

I don't think that he understands that there is more to smoking then just the addiction. I'm not sure why it's hard to understand, though.

Maybe a better way of explaining it for OldManMac would be to compare it to eating. They are similar situations in some ways. We have to eat, it is a necessity (you could almost say that we humans are addicted to food), yet the type of foods we chose to eat, the places we eat them in, and the people we surround ourselves with while having a meal are all a significant part of the experience.

Smoking differs only in the completely opposite nature of the consequences.

[Oisín]

Smoking differs only in the completely opposite nature of the consequences.

… and the fact that we don’t need to eat to begin with; it’s not something we have to initially force ourselves to do. It also doesn’t have a negative impact on those we eat around (unless we’re really messy eaters).

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

It also doesn’t have a negative impact on those we eat around (unless we’re really messy eaters).

You forgot farting and belching.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

… and the fact that we don’t need to eat to begin with; it’s not something we have to initially force ourselves to do. It also doesn’t have a negative impact on those we eat around (unless we’re really messy eaters).

True, though the part of my post that you quote was intended to infer your second point.

To be clear, I'm not arguing in favour of smoking, I was just trying explain that that there are reasons beyond addiction that make smoking a difficult thing to give up for some people, including myself. I don't for one second expect that all people (or even all smokers) would have the same affinity for those reasons, but they do exist.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Strangely, those same restrictions applies to my ability to BBQ.

Can't BBQ in my apartment. Some sort of fire hazard.
Can't BBQ in the workplace. Said it was some sort of insurance policy reason.
Can't BBQ at the bus stop. Don't know why. What not BBQ up some spare ribs while waiting for the bus.

Totally. Again, though, I don't actually disagree any of those rules.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Face Ache 

You don't love smoking. You're addicted.

I love to smoke and I'm not addicted. Of course, I can smoke half a pack, throw the rest away, and not smoke again for a few months (or ever again, if I so desire). Wasn't always like this, I habitually smoked 1-2 packs /day, but then I decided that I wanted to change and that *I* control what I do.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

What's being denied? He isn't claiming that smoking is good for him.

Any one who claims they love and enjoy smoking is in denial of the consequences and uses that as a reason not to quit. People don't walk around hitting themselves in the head with a hammer, because they know that is dangerous to one's health, yet people who claim they love smoking use that as an excuse to engage in very damaging self-destruction.