Nanny Laws – Should Smoking in Cars Be Against The Law?
‘Nanny laws’, or bills that dictate how you raise your children, were being considered by California State lawmakers on a controversial bill — A ban on smoking in cars with kids.
Some health experts say second hand smoke in cars is ten times more deadly than at home. Democratic Senator Jenny Oropeza’s bill would fine a person $100 who smokes a cigarette, cigar or pipe in a car with anyone under 18. More >>>
As a former smoker and as a parent who make the conscious decision to never smoke in the car with my kids, I believe it should be against the law.
I know, even as a cigarette addict that anyone can wait for the next smoke.
If people would rather smoke when they want to – then don’t have kids! It’s that simple!
Anyone agree? Disagree?
Be sure to vote in our Poll in the sidebar
Tags: nanny laws, smoking, smoking ban, second hand smoke
If a car window is lowered an inch, every trace of smoke and smell is sucked outside. So the purpose of this tyranny is purely to harass smokers.
That’s OK with anyone who doesn’t smoke, but the deceit of the tobacco war is a model for totalitarianism. Good luck, suckers!
As a former smoker who has been the passenger in a car of a smoking driver who cracked their window, I can tell you it does NOT take all the smoke and smell out the window.
I used to believe the same thing – it’s a safe place of denial for every smoker, but that’s about all it is, denial.
Gayla, what I said is a fact, not a belief. It can be easily demonstrated by anyone who has a car and a cigarette.
In any case many unimpeachable sources — Congressional Research Service , OSHA, Oak Ridge National Laboratory et al have declared secondhand smoke to be harmless. Find something else besides the Fraud of the Century to be fanatical about.
Ed, we could debate this forever, but as a parent of two with asthma and as a former smoker, I’m pretty sure I have enough experience with secondhand smoke and it’s effect that I am very glad I’m a former smoker.
I’m all for a persons right to smoke, but I think they should do it when it’s not intruding on anyone else’s space and air.
Even if it were proven that secondhand smoke were not unhealthy, it still stinks, period!
If you’re a smoker, you can’t imagine how bad you smell until you quit. Believe me! I can smell a smoker from a 100 yards away.
OK. one more time: You can say a rose stinks if you wish. but I can remember when they sold cologne that smelled like tobacco.
Complaining about an innocuous smell is no reason to deny smokers their freedom and pave the way for a police state. It’s one of a thousand smells and better than most.
Ed, do you have children?
I have a grown son who breathed my two pack a day smoke in house, car and yard for 18 years and is healthy as a horse–as am I, despite my advanced age.
To try to justify a tyrannical proposal on the grounds that “it’s for the benefit of children” is Orwellian. Children in an urban environment typically breathe a couple pounds of automotive and industrial pollution per day, It’s all too dilute to be of any consequence, the Surgeon General’s BS notwithstanding.
You’re right, we could do this forever without anyone’s prejudice being changed,so I’m stopping right here. Gotta have a cigarette.
I have a grown son who breathed my two pack a day smoke in house, car and yard for 18 years and is healthy as a horse–as am I, despite my advanced age.
To try to justify a tyrannical proposal on the grounds that “it’s for the protection of children” is Orwellian. Children in an urban environment typically breathe a couple pounds of automotive and industrial pollution per day. It’s all too dilute to be of any consequence, the Surgeon General’s BS notwithstanding.
You’re right, we could do this forever without anyone’s prejudice being changed,so I’m stopping right here. Gotta have a cigarette.
Gayla ~
He’s in denial.
It’s like talking to the wall.
He’ll die of lung cancer just like the rest of them.
I read denial, power, political freedoms being crossed, Orwellian societies being formed, advice thrown back and fourth if second-hand smoke really causes any real harm, etc etc etc. Not a parent myself, nor sufferer of asthma or any breathing difficulties, I agree infants and very young children should probably not be subjected to any ‘additional carcinogens’ other than the ones they breathe already present in most air, urban or country. Ever heard of phyto-environmentalestrogens that are airbourne–far more toxic than the unfiltered stream leaving a burning cigarette only to be quickly dispelled into the air and neutralized by all the darn free radicals floating around.
Take away the pleasure of a cigarette in your car during traffic jams even if the kids are in the car is asking alot. Children who get asthma are prone more likely because of DNA inheritance, genetic pulmonary subtle anomalies, and weak immune systems because they were formula fed instead of given the breast. To blame the asthma in infants due to second-hand smoke is far-fetching and veering from real identifiable causes right their in the childs blood type.
For example, I eat what my blood type is able to convert into proper energy and serve as building blocks for my immune system. The healthier the components of the building block, the stronger my foundation. A three-pack a day smoker who drinks plenty of water, exercises regularly, eats a diet their blood type is formulated to tolerate and nurtures a postive frame of mind shedding stress off their shoulders is more likely to die from old age instead of cancer or COPD. The dangers evident in carcinogenic material found in cigarettes is bad for you, but lets face it so is that canned formula, that bottled water, or that processed baby food your wonderful BeechNut or carnation or Gerber is bound to sell you for real cheap. We can go on and on about what parents should not do or give or say around their children, but as soon as those kids leave a parents sight, that child is susceptible to natures threats, which could be more lethal than just a simple 15 minutes of inhaling second-hand smoke.
Banning it and ticketing one for it, is violating rights, civil and human, but taper the needs for wanting a cigarette when the kids are in the car and just be aware they have a right to breathe fresh air should be warning enough !
you need to get a reality check…you are most certainly “out there”. I think too many of you would most certainly scare me. You need to read an informative book-perhaps try going to the library, it could prove to be quite liberating. That whole blood thing is just a hoax-a way for someone to make a quick buck. How could you possibly compare the two topics? How many drinks have you had today????