Smoking in the car with kids

[Cassiopeia]

The post from Dravin that you quoted does no such thing. To what are you referring? If you have a real issue with someone's post, then report it.

I was talking about the OP not dravin.

And if I have a real issue with someone's post and it's not breaking any rules, I most certainly will speak out about it.

[Dravin]

I was talking about the OP not dravin.

You didn't quote her or otherwise indicate it was the OP in your original post, thus the confusion.

[WillowTheWhisp]

MOE didn't say that--go back and re-read what he said. He is opposed to legislating it. As am I.

If we begin to legislate when/where adults can smoke, even on/in personal property, where would that end? Can they then say that they shouldn't smoke in the home unless there are no children under 18? How will they enforce that? Cameras in the home/car?

I suppose I see it differently because here in England we do have some legislation against smoking in enclosed public places and I am glad that we do because it benefits the many non-smokers who no longer have to suffer from passive smoking and the stink which lingers in clothes and hair. I can now enjoy going out for an evening and/or for a meal without having to endure other people smoking. The ban also covers people in their own cars if those cars are used to tranport other people. It also covers some private rented homes if other people such as council employees need to enter them on business.

Edited March 6, 2010 by WillowTheWhisp

[marts1]

I wasn't aware the states didn't have any types of these laws

[Moksha]

But, we find that more and more people don't want to be bothered to govern themselves they become "omnipotent moral busybodies" imposing their views on others through legislation.

... first thought - LET'S BAN IT! Give the power to the government!

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.

Let's leave Proposition #8 out of this.

[marts1]

Where would you rather live? A place where there is no laws, no penaltys whatsoever, or in a place that had every good law you can think of with penaltys for each one broken? One extreme or the other. I know where some of those in jail might choose.

[aharon]

You know what the problem with this thread is? It is not second-hand smoke and kids... it is the ignorance of Americans in the function of government.

The 9th and 10th ammendments to the Constitution specifically states that any power that is not handed over to the government remains with the people. But, we find that more and more people don't want to be bothered to govern themselves they become "omnipotent moral busybodies" imposing their views on others through legislation.

So, somebody sees a parent smoking in the car with 3 kids... first thought - LET'S BAN IT! Give the power to the government!

Your first thought should have been - how can I promote education on the perils of smoking around children so that the parent will know not to smoke around children?

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

-C.S. Lewis

Agreed! Government will not solve our problems, only a virtuous and moral people will. Our freedoms depend on the virtue of each and every one of us. We need to focus on how to keep each other virtuous (and ourselves) rather than forcing others to comply.

[marts1]

Why are you using the word force. Governments force no one.

[john doe]

Why are you using the word force. Governments force no one.

Really????

[marts1]

Unless I don't understand what force means exactly. To me if you are givin a choice to live a law or go to jail, it is not forcing someone to live that law. There is perhaps different meanings to the word. I could compare the gospel to the laws of the land. God says do this or suffer consequences. Law of the land does the same thing pretty much. God does not force us to be obedient, nor in like manner does the government....Was force the word used when Satans plan was revealed that would have givin us no choice but to be good?

Edited March 7, 2010 by marts1

[aharon]

out of all institutions, the government has the most power. True, one can resist, but the end result is very nasty... jail or in the extreme sense, death. That is what I mean by force. It is true though that people can still choose to not obey.

I am just in the philosophy that the less government the better, because of how much power it has. I take more of a libertarian approach (but I do think there has to be some regulation in the market) where the government should be limited in its powers of protecting human rights and defense of the nation. As far as social ills, we should look to other institutions to solve them, rather than the government.

Anyways, just my thoughts :

[Guest]

Let's leave Proposition #8 out of this.

Yeah. We should. Dunno why you mentioned it.

[Guest]

Unless I don't understand what force means exactly. To me if you are givin a choice to live a law or go to jail, it is not forcing someone to live that law. There is perhaps different meanings to the word. I could compare the gospel to the laws of the land. God says do this or suffer consequences. Law of the land does the same thing pretty much. God does not force us to be obedient, nor in like manner does the government....Was force the word used when Satans plan was revealed that would have givin us no choice but to be good?

Okay, I see your point marts1. I think I know where you are coming from.

But look at it this way - I want to pee on your front door. So, you open your front door, put a gun to my head and say - pee or die. Yep, I got a choice. But, is it really?

[Wingnut]

Okay, I see your point marts1. I think I know where you are coming from.

But look at it this way - I want to pee on your front door. So, you open your front door, put a gun to my head and say - pee or die. Yep, I got a choice. But, is it really?

Huh? If you want to pee on the door, why would a gun to your head be necessary?

(I can't believe I'm actually even asking that question.)

[Wisc]

Huh? If you want to pee on the door, why would a gun to your head be necessary?

(I can't believe I'm actually even asking that question.)

**Runs and tackles WingNut** Dont fall for this!! ITS A TRICK QUESTION

Think about it man! If you gotta pee sooo bad you're willing to go on someone's door and then suddenly you gotta gun to you- thats gonna startle you so much you involuntarily wet yourself.

A situation like this reqires preplanning. First pee into a container. Then walk up to the door with it. When "Given the choice" simply throw the container at the person with the gun while at the SAME TIME ducking before running as FAST as you can!! (which will be easier done on an empty bladder so arent you glad you planned ahead?!)

[Wingnut]

Ah, but the gun-wielder didn't specify where the pee had to go. Thus, peeing in one's pants would fulfill the demand.

[Guest Alana]

It is illegal in california to smoke in a car with kids present. I dont' support this law. Of course it's a bad thing to smoke with your kids in your car. Then again, just because something is bad, I dont' think they should make a law against it. The reason California was able to pass this law isnt' because it cares about children more than other states, it's because more people allow for the government to get into their personal lives, dictate how they raise their children or what foods we eat (trans fats are banned in restaurants here... my favorite carne asada nachoes taste gross now). It's like saying pot is a gateway drug, this kind of law is a gate way law to allow more government control in our personal lives... and similarly this idea of a 'gate way' is seen as paranoid or sound depending on who you talk to.

[Guest]

They just passed something in Florida where you can't text while driving...

So... you can't text while you drive but you can eat a dripping big bean burrito using one hand, and holding your drink with the other and driving with your knees on the wheel. Yep, completely legal.

Sigh.

But then, Florida is the only state where you can't put a pregnant pig in a pen.

Oh, and riding a motorcycle on the freeway without a helmet is fine, but not wearing your seatbelt is a ticket.

I will never begin to make sense of how the Florida Congress think. Never in a million years.

[hordak]

It is illegal in california to smoke in a car with kids present. I dont' support this law. Of course it's a bad thing to smoke with your kids in your car. Then again, just because something is bad, I dont' think they should make a law against it. The reason California was able to pass this law isnt' because it cares about children more than other states, it's because more people allow for the government to get into their personal lives, dictate how they raise their children or what foods we eat (trans fats are banned in restaurants here... my favorite carne asada nachoes taste gross now). It's like saying pot is a gateway drug, this kind of law is a gate way law to allow more government control in our personal lives... and similarly this idea of a 'gate way' is seen as paranoid or sound depending on who you talk to.

Haha. My favorite, when i was living there was that lady, with NO kids,who wanted to outlaw spanking

[hordak]

They just passed something in Florida where you can't text while driving...

So... you can't text while you drive but you can eat a dripping big bean burrito using one hand, and holding your drink with the other and driving with your knees on the wheel. Yep, completely legal.

Sigh.

But then, Florida is the only state where you can't put a pregnant pig in a pen.

Oh, and riding a motorcycle on the freeway without a helmet is fine, but not wearing your seatbelt is a ticket.

I will never begin to make sense of how the Florida Congress think. Never in a million years.

Don't you ever speak ill of Florida:mad:.

Texting while driving posses an immediate threat to other drivers. I would imagine they addressed that and not the burrito thing based on the recent popularity of texting.

Besides

People have had years to perfect the eating;)

[Wingnut]

They just passed something in Florida where you can't text while driving...

So... you can't text while you drive but you can eat a dripping big bean burrito using one hand, and holding your drink with the other and driving with your knees on the wheel. Yep, completely legal.

Sigh.

Connecticut was one of the first states (the 4th, I think?) to pass a law prohibiting the use of a cell phone while driving, unless the cell phone was hands-free. The same law prohibited drivers from eating or reading while driving.

Oh, and riding a motorcycle on the freeway without a helmet is fine...

People who do that don't have much to protect anyway.

[marts1]

I resent that. lol

[Guest]

Don't you ever speak ill of Florida:mad:.

Texting while driving posses an immediate threat to other drivers. I would imagine they addressed that and not the burrito thing based on the recent popularity of texting.

Besides

People have had years to perfect the eating;)

That's why they should keep texting and driving legal! So that they can perfect it sooner!

< I text and drive. I drive 2 hours to work, usually late night, and I found texting while driving keeps me very well awake. I guess it's back to strong coffee for me and the funny looks the sisters give me when they see a cup of coffee in my cup holder. >

[aharon]

They just passed something in Florida where you can't text while driving...

So... you can't text while you drive but you can eat a dripping big bean burrito using one hand, and holding your drink with the other and driving with your knees on the wheel. Yep, completely legal.

Sigh.

But then, Florida is the only state where you can't put a pregnant pig in a pen.

Oh, and riding a motorcycle on the freeway without a helmet is fine, but not wearing your seatbelt is a ticket.

I will never begin to make sense of how the Florida Congress think. Never in a million years.

Actually the cops can get you for inattentive driving if they so feel it justifies. I know this from personal experience.... said in the voice of Homer Simpson... DOH!