Smoking in Cars Carrying Children

sniffles

photome wrote: »

Hope it is enforcable. the more places that smoking is banned the better as far as i am concerned

Do you mean my living room photome? Interesting discussion if you do.

polomints

Ban it but only for the under threes, not that I think over threes should be subjected to it though.
I think a ban for babies would help to make smoking in the cars with older children and especially infants over three much less socially acceptable, while protecting children at their most vulnerable and not being too statist. At the moment I presume there isn't even a ban for new borns, what is the age limit on this ban, I assume it's either 13 or 16?

sniffles

polomints wrote: »

Ban it but only for the under threes, not that I think over threes should be subjected to it though.
I think a ban for babies would help to make smoking in the cars with older children and especially infants over three much less socially acceptable, while protecting children at their most vulnerable and not being too statist. At the moment I presume there isn't even a ban for new borns, what is the age limit on this ban, I assume it's either 13 or 16?

I was going to pursue the Stalanist ideology with you, but I agree with what you say. We really don't need to smoke in cars, but let us be wise and take our habit out of doors. I think most of us do, and as for the others..legislation will just annoy them, so leave it be.

Iceweasel

Some people will not be able to drive very far without the need to stop and have a cigarette outside the vehicle.

It never ceases to amaze me just how badly hooked some folks are on these legal drugs.

You just need to visit a hospital (in my case Foresterhill in Aberdeen) at any time of day to see and negotiate your way to the door past a sizeable group of patients - some even in wheelchairs, clad in pyjamas with a thin blanket over their knees, with a drip on a pole gizmo with castors, coughing and spluttering as they partake of their habit.

Not even driving snow can deter them - and certainly not the signs saying "No Smoking near the entrance doors."

I have no idea how this smoking in cars ban, when/if it passes into law, will be enforced.

Joe_Horner

Iceweasel wrote: »

Some people will not be able to drive very far without the need to stop and have a cigarette outside the vehicle.

It never ceases to amaze me just how badly hooked some folks are on these legal drugs. [...]

Yep, and there lies a potential problem.

Regardless of what all the "flog the smokers" brigade may think, it IS a physical addiction and it IS legal. Denying smokers access to cigarettes also tends to make them edgy, irritable and tense.

All qualities that I'm sure we really want in the fast lane of the M1, or locked in city traffic for hour, as they try to get to the next stop to satisfy their very real, and very physical, need.

Tiddlywinks

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Yep, and there lies a potential problem.

Regardless of what all the "flog the smokers" brigade may think, it IS a physical addiction and it IS legal. Denying smokers access to cigarettes also tends to make them edgy, irritable and tense.

All qualities that I'm sure we really want in the fast lane of the M1, or locked in city traffic for hour, as they try to get to the next stop to satisfy their very real, and very physical, need.

The change in legislation will NOT deny drivers access to their drug of choice... it will simply mean they have to pull over and step out of the car or use nicotine substitutes for longer journeys.

There is no denying that second hand smoke does kill... parents who smoke in confined spaces where their children inhale the fumes should be ashamed of themselves.

They choose to smoke - their children don't have the luxury of choice... they just have the carcinogens forced upon them.

[Deleted User]

Quiet_Spark wrote: »

Who's going to cover the £11 BILLION the government makes every year from the duty on tobacco if smoking is outlawed?

They would save more than 11 Billion if no one smoked (or used other forms of tobacco)

Iceweasel

Domino9 wrote: »

They would save more than 11 Billion if no one smoked (or used other forms of tobacco)

Oh my God - I've just remembered years ago when I worked with a group of Americans - two of whom chewed tobacco and SPAT dark-brown stinking juice all the time - into a plastic drinks cup.

Yeugh!

polomints

I said statist not Stalinist. The trouble is too many people can't get over that something can be wrong or bad and yet still be legal. I get the impression that if you're against this ban that many people think you must think that smoking with kids in the car is either acceptable or not bad at all.

sniffles

I apologise for suggesting that your opinion was Stalinist. It was a Freudian slip on my part.