Smoking in Cars Carrying Children

samsmoot

scaredofdebt wrote: »

Indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Killed_on_British_Roads.png

Fallen from around 8,000 deaths per year in the late 1960s to under 2,000 today, despite much greater vehicle use.

Thanks largely to government intervention.

The graph on Wikipedia doesn't tell the whole story. Road accidents in 2011 resulted in 203,950 casualties and 22,783 [edit: versus around 12,000 10 years or so ago] deaths or serious injuries, says the government:


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-main-results-2011


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9066/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-main-results-2011.pdf


I'm apparently the only one who thinks the above figures are a cause for concern. The issue under discussion in this thread seems rather trivial in comparison.

scaredofdebt

I didn't say the casualty figures weren't cause for concern, merely that the government has consistently taken action to reduce the numbers of deaths and casualties.

Robisere

As has been said before, a car is a sealed metal box. Those smokers who open a window and drive whilst smoking, just draw in the smoke to the rear, where their children are likely to be. This takes their attention away from where it should be and leaves just one hand on the wheel. Then there are the ones who flick their spent, still burning ciggies out of the window. I once saw this happen during a drought, in an area which had suffered burning forest. The same people will smoke in the house where their children are, and make the excuse that there is plenty of room for the smoke to go. Well, there is not. And there is even less in a car.

I criticised one (obese) woman for smoking whilst obviously pregnant, and received the gobsmacking comment "Well, I could get run over by a bus!" I kid you not! "Oh," said I, "And will you pay the driver to kill you then?"

Saying daft things like that, and like the stupid assertion that smokers are paying £billions in tax revenue, just proves how demented and self-illusionist these addicts are. Yes, addicts! That is exactly what you are, just as much as any alcoholic or Junkie.

And yes, I smoked, at a time when it was considered macho and cool. Nowadays we know - and have known for years - how much health damage is caused by the smoker and those who have to breathe in the second hand fumes: which, incidentally, are full of much more harmful carcinogens than the inhaled stuff, which itself is bad enough.

The fact is that if you give up smoking, you stand more chance of protecting your health. Your taste buds improve, so does your sense of smell. And there is another link, which states that it is also harmful to the sight.

I have lost, at various times to lung cancer, my granddad, dad, big brother, favourite nephew, favourite uncle, and father-in-law. All smoked.

In conclusion: a non-smoker finds the breath and smell of a smoker, revolting. To quote an old friend who has never smoked - Kissing a smoker is like snogging a dirty, full ashtray.

samsmoot

scaredofdebt wrote: »

I didn't say the casualty figures weren't cause for concern, merely that the government has consistently taken action to reduce the numbers of deaths and casualties.

I was really referring to people I talk to generally. I just find it all a bit shocking and have to say so.

Kite2010

Labour just getting ready to bring in more and more laws when they return back to power next year.

Only an idiot would smoke with kids in the car, would the new law stop them?

Nope

Making new laws up is one thing, enforcing them is another.

System

fivetide wrote: »

Challenge away but when you use language like "what rational person...." that's aggressive.

Also, when you fail to understand the point after several explanations and then come back with aggression then there is no point contunuing the deabte.

However, last chance, from your own link - "not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer"

Quite right - my issue is with those who do smoke getting it and it being classed as 'smoking related' when it might have been nothing to do with that at all.

My grandad died of lung cancer and smoked

The type of cancer he died from wasn't caused by smoking so the medical reports said

At the time I wished it had been as I'd have had something to blame

pstuart

If you read the papers today about lung transplants from smoker donors it may change some peoples opinions.

redmike123

Whilst I agree that smoking in a car with children present is a bad idea, I really don't think its the role of Government to interfere in peoples lives to this extent.

kaya

Even if you choose to ignore all the cancer causing second hand smoke stuff there is a simple fact that nicotine which is present in all cigarettes is extremley addictive and also extremely toxic, so toxic that its usefull as an insecticide . I smoked 20 a day for 25 years and also smoked in the car , however since giving up 5 years ago I would never dream of doing that now and see it as morally wrong to inflict on others especially children . Anybody fancy arguing the toss about the toxicity and addictivness of nicotine? No? Thought not , the new ecigs are just as Nasty as they are also full of nicotine . It's all subjective like everything in life , ask any non or ex smoker and they will say its disgusting and wrong, ask a smoker and they will have a different opinion, life's like that

Chickabiddybex

Couldn't smoking and driving technically already be classed as illegal because it is driving without due care and attention? Because if you have a burning cig in one hand and have to do a difficult manoeuvre it's possible you could cause an accident because you didn't grab something properly or dropped the cig.

I drove on a couple of occasions while smoking and I felt that I was not fully in control of the car when doing this so stopped.
When on long journeys I'd stop at a service station.

(I've now actually quit smoking anyway )