Bangor Makes It Illegal to Smoke in Cars

[southcitymom]

How about this?

I have a relative who is dying from emphysema. They can't walk from the couch to the bathroom without having what best resembles an ashtma attack. They are tethered to an oxygen tank permanently for the rest of their life. They can't spend any quality time with their kids or grandkids. They can barely talk because they can't breathe and talk at the same time.

Smokers counter that they are only hurting themselves. That's a bunch of crap. They hurt everyone who loves them and has to watch them suffocate to death.

Good enough?

Cal

Not good enough for me, though I am so sorry that is going on in your family. I know what it's like to watch someone die. I think many of us have that experience whether the dying person is a smoker or not.

I'm not being callous or flippant here, but I would absolutely check out if I got to the point where I couldn't walk or talk or live. And I'm comfortable with that.

I'm not saying I might not one day find a convincing reason to quit smoking, but today I am healthy, I can exercise, I have lots of energy, etc...and I like to smoke.

 

[calus_3]

Why not tax the uninsured smokers who do not pay for insurance like the rest of us do? Ha! THAT will never happen!

Just make sure candy, ice cream and french fries are taxed too! Or maybe we should have people weigh in and present a medical exam summary and a medical insurance card before they can order a Whopper - or have kids, to whom they will pass their predispositions.

I can see that laws about food are coming. Because the thinking on "healthy" changes so much, laws on food could change constantly. And don't forget religious and cultural beliefs could be an issue with food, too!

I have smoked at times and I haven't at times. I never subjected my kids to it (but my parents certainly did). There should be non-smoking places available and if people want them so much they will prosper. What's the problem? Why does the government have to get in on it?! The marketplace should take care of it.

BTST, smoking is legal and consenting adults should have places to partonize too. No one could make you go there or work there. You should be able to smoke in your home and certainly in your yard. In cars with kids? Common sense says no but Keep Uncle Sam out of it!

Pretty soon they'll be legislating which toys we can have in our homes for our children (don't laugh - lots of people think certain toys and games cause violent behavior harmful to society), which politically incorrect books have to go, what movies we can watch, what kind of art we have on our walls, what music we listen to...on and on and on.

I'm with Miimaa and 2sisters. All of you who want these laws, be careful what you wish for - you'll feel differently when your ox is gored.

Eve

This is nonsense......we need the government involved, through the legal system, to patrol people who won't patrol themselves. You people act like there are two parties here....the smoker and the government. The government isn't telling you that you cannot smoke. The government is stepping in to protect those of you who won't exercise the personal discretion to protect your own offspring refuse to acknowledge...the CHILDREN. Again, you being the smokers who do this crap...not necessarily you personally.

The marketplace cannot make irresponsible breeders put their kids first. That is where the legislative process needs to take over. This from someone who hates the government in our lives.

The difference between the food regulation and taxation argument is that in a resonable diet there are healthy levels of candy, ice cream, etc. that you can eat and still be healthy. There are NO healthy levels of tobacco use of any kind. Plus, your argument is flawed. For us to be comparing apple to apples, the parents would have to be sitting on top of their kids, holding their mouths open, and shoving these bad foods down their throats many times a day.

Sometimes people are so dumb and selfish that they must be controlled by laws.

Cal

 

[eve]

How about this?

I have a relative who is dying from emphysema. They can't walk from the couch to the bathroom without having what best resembles an ashtma attack. They are tethered to an oxygen tank permanently for the rest of their life. They can't spend any quality time with their kids or grandkids. They can barely talk because they can't breathe and talk at the same time.

Smokers counter that they are only hurting themselves. That's a bunch of crap. They hurt everyone who loves them and has to watch them suffocate to death.
Good enough?

Cal

So does everyone who doesn't take perfect care of themselves, doesn't eat properly, doesn't use good judgement about sex and gets AIDS, doesn't exercise, doesn't deal well with stress, doesn't address mental health issues, and on and on and on. The place for pressure is within the family e.g. "Mom, I can't stand to see you doing this to yourself." Or, if it is an addiction, do an intervention of some sort. But to have the government messing with adult's legal rights and playing Big Brother is a slippery slope and in the end, we'll all fall down.

Eve

 

[calus_3]

Not good enough for me, though I am so sorry that is going on in your family. I know what it's like to watch someone die. I think many of us have that experience whether the dying person is a smoker or not.

I'm not being callous or flippant here, but I would absolutely check out if I got to the point where I couldn't walk or talk or live. And I'm comfortable with that.

I'm not saying I might not one day find a convincing reason to quit smoking, but today I am healthy, I can exercise, I have lots of energy, etc...and I like to smoke.

Well, I hope you never find out but I imagine your perspective might change someday. I hope you quit sooner rather than later.

Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Heck, some women think it should be illegal to feed a baby formula. Breast milk is best but does that mean the government can step in and fine you for bottle feeding one day? If you really think you will come up with a ton of thing that can be harmful to you or kids but that give the feds no right to come in my home and infringe on my rights. Should all guns be confisacted? Knifes? Lighters?

You want to compare deadly, toxic, second-hand smoke to breast milk versus formula?

 

[southcitymom]

This is nonsense......we need the government involved, through the legal system, to patrol people who won't patrol themselves. You people act like there are two parties here....the smoker and the government. The government isn't telling you that you cannot smoke. The government is stepping in to protect those of you who won't exercise the personal discretion to protect your own offspring refuse to acknowledge...the CHILDREN. Again, you being the smokers who do this crap...not necessarily you personally.

The marketplace cannot make irresponsible breeders put their kids first. That is where the legislative process needs to take over. This from someone who hates the government in our lives.

The difference between the food regulation and taxation argument is that in a resonable diet there are healthy levels of candy, ice cream, etc. that you can eat and still be healthy. There are NO healthy levels of tobacco use of any kind. Plus, your argument is flawed. For us to be comparing apple to apples, the parents would have to be sitting on top of their kids, holding their mouths open, and shoving these bad foods down their throats many times a day.

Sometimes people are so dumb and selfish that they must be controlled by laws.

Cal

There is a vocal contingent who believes that the government should outlaw male circumcision to protect the children. Most people don't agree with their stance, but it is indeed a slippery slope...who's to say that won't be the "issue du jour" in the future?

 

[calus_3]

So does everyone who doesn't eat properly, gets an STD like AIDS from unprotected sex, doesn't exercise, doesn't deal well with stress, doesn't address mental health issues, and on and on and on. The place for pressure is within the familye.g. "Mom, I can't stand to see you doing this to yourself." Or, if it is an addiction, do an intervention of some sort. But to have the government messing with adult's legal rights and playing Big Brother is a slippery slope and in the end, we'll all fall down.

Eve

Well, AGAIN, the government isn't messing with the rights of the smoker. They are protecting the children of the careless from the careless.

Cal

 

[southcitymom]

Well, I hope you never find out but I imagine your perspective might change someday. I hope you quit sooner rather than later.

Cal

I appreciate your sentiments! And your concern.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

There is a vocal contingent who believes that the government should outlaw male circumcision to protect the children. Most people don't agree with their stance, but it is indeed a slippery slope...who's to say that won't be the "issue du jour" in the future?

But there you have controverting evidence that male circumcision may actually be a health benefit. There is no controverting evidence that smoking is such, so your argument fails.

 

[calus_3]

There is a vocal contingent who believes that the government should outlaw male circumcision to protect the children. Most people don't agree with their stance, but it is indeed a slippery slope...who's to say that won't be the "issue du jour" in the future?

Well, I agree with your general point that we should be careful.

But putting my hands out like a scale. On one side, I have completely selfish, careless, idiotic people who shouldn't have ever been able to breed in the first place putting their kid's health at risk to satisfy their own selfish desires versus the children's right to grow up healthy and bronchitis and cancer free. Not even close.

Cal

 

[calus_3]

I appreciate your sentiments! And your concern.

Well, I hope you do know I was being sincere...not my normal, semi-banned, smart arsed self!

Cal

 

[calus_3]

You want to compare deadly, toxic, second-hand smoke to breast milk versus formula?

I vote for Breast Milk over the cigarettes....I like the delivery mechanisms much better!

Cal

 

[eve]

Well, AGAIN, the government isn't messing with the rights of the smoker. They are protecting the children of the careless from the careless.

Cal

You'd find some restaurant and bar owners and patrons who seriously disagree with that assertion about the government. Children aren't allowed in bars so childen have nothing to do with it in those cases.

Eve

 

[southcitymom]

But there you have controverting evidence that male circumcision may actually be a health benefit. There is no controverting evidence that smoking is such, so your argument fails.

There are valid scientific studies that say second-hand smoke is bad for your health and there are valid scientific studies that say second-hand smoke has no effect on your health either way. I have read a great many of them because for many years I was involved in the tobacco states legislation.

Yes, there are no studies that say it gives your health a boost, so in that regard it is different from the male circumcision argument.

But I still think it's a slippery slope!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

I vote for Breast Milk over the cigarettes....I like the delivery mechanisms much better!

Cal

Cheeky monkey!

 

[southcitymom]

Well, I hope you do know I was being sincere...not my normal, semi-banned, smart arsed self!

Cal

I know you were, Cal and I was too! :blowkiss:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

There are valid scientific studies that say second-hand smoke is bad for your health and there are valid scientific studies that say second-hand smoke has no effect on your health either way. I have read a great many of them because for many years I was involved in the tobacco states legislation.

Yes, there are no studies that say it gives your health a boost, so in that regard it is different from the male circumcision argument.

But I still think it's a slippery slope!

I'd like to see that scientific study that says second hand smoke doesn't affect one's health because this is the first time I've ever heard that.

 

[j2mirish]

The law in Louisiana has put an age limit on it. 12 and under only. After that, free game.

I smoke but not in my car or home and the changes haven't had an impact on me at all. It's MY habit, not my childrens.

I am a smoker too- in my car if alone, but never in my house

 

[calus_3]

You'd find some restaurant and bar owners and patrons who seriously disagree with that assertion about the government. Children aren't allowed in bars so childen have nothing to do with it in those cases.

Eve

Well, I am not going to be able to argue the merits of all smoking laws but this one is a good one.

If there are places that smokers want to congregate, bars and lounges and such so be it. I can choose not to go there. But with respect to the children, they can't switch cars becase mom and/or dad are irresponsible. I don't care that people want to smoke....that's your choice. I choose to scarf down the Mexican restaurant's cheese dip and salsa and chips...that's my vice.

I live in Ga and recently made a trek to Virginia for a funeral. Through North Carolina, smoking was EVERYWHERE. Go into McDonalds...30 people smoking. Inside gas stations. Etc. I came home and my wife thought I took up smoking.

Cal

 

[southcitymom]

I'd like to see that scientific study that says second hand smoke doesn't affect one's health because this is the first time I've ever heard that.

There are actually a number, Jeana. The firm I worked with rep[resented the tobacco companies. They had their own research of course (which I am sure was highly skewed and no one would by) but it was bolstered by a fair number of independent studies that said second-hand smoke did not effect people's health. These studies were even accepted as valid by the States attorneys.

I'll see if I can uncover any on the internet tonight and post some links. I'm going to get my kids now.