Smoking in vehicles with children - Page 2

I hate when people smoke arround me! I didn't quit smoking for my baby's health to be stuck breething in 2nd hand smoke. You can ask your MIL not so smoke in front of you. It may hurt her feelings, but you are trying to protect the health of your unborn child. You have the right and the ability to ask poeple who are smoking in an inclosed area to not smoke arround you. If the smoker is inconceridert (witch most are) they will probally make a rude comment to you. Just walk away.


You are right poeple do not behave appropiately, but passing laws will not stop people from behaving the way they want to.

I don't even see how this law is going to be regulated. It says "chirlden under 16". What are cops going to do pull over ever car with someone smoking in it and ask how old their teenager is?

Now don't get me wrong smoking is a gross habit. I wanted to quit long before I did. It is very adctive and a very hard habbit to break. I just don't think it is the goverments place to step in here.

I'm sure we all agree with this, BUT.

Obviously, a lot of parents AREN'T protecting their children. So who will? Make it a law, and more children will be protected.

There is no excuse anymore for parents or any adult to smoke around children in a small enclosed space. Children exposed to this type of secondhand smoke are endangered and can't speak for themselves so it is very good to have a law that protects them!

not necessarily. after all, there are plenty of things which are illegal that people choose to do, anyway.
this will make such an act punishable - but only if enforced. how many speeders do y'all see, & no one's enforcing that law? i'd think high-speed auto accidents kill more people [adults and children] than second-hand smoke does.
no data on this, just sounds right for some reason...

I'm sure she'd be happy to oblige if I asked but we don't see them often, it is her house, and I do have the option of leaving the room/house and often do when she starts smoking.

I agree with the law, most states here have the same law.

Not necessarily. Likely they'll end up with more people breaking the law, which doesn't do a darn thing.

I wear my seat belt all the time now. I hardly wore it at all before it was a law.

not me. i've worn mine for the last 20+ years. my sister's SIL was killed because her car was too old to have one. she'd bought one to have installed, but it hadn't been installed yet. she was thrown from her car... at the time, she was in her mid-20s.

My dad was a smoker when I was growing up and often smoked in the car, especially on long trips to my grandparents'. He always cracked the window, but then I was in the back seat freezing while he finished his smoke. He's since quit smoking, and there is much more education about second hand smoke than there was 15 years ago. I don't know that he'd be doing the same stuff he was a smoker with a young child now (I know I can't imagine him smoking with my niece in the car).

I have no problem with this law. I don't know that it will do much as a law, but there is a lot of publicity/promotion going along with it ("Campaign for a Smoke-Free Ride), which I think may make some people stop and think. For others, it won't matter, and hopefully sooner or later, they get a fine.

Really, I think it should be illegal to smoke even in the same room as a child. It seems like it would be common sense, but there are A LOT of people who do not have common sense. A couple years ago, I was at my parents' friends' place and their daughter was drinking a cooler, then breastfed her 3 month old son, and then held him while she smoked her cigerette.

The difference between legislating something like smoking and legislating poor eating habits is that smoking DIRECTLY effects the children around you....they are forced to breathe in that air. Once that air is breathed in, there is no way to reverse the effect of that second-hand smoke on the person's lungs. Even if they get older and choose not to smoke, the effects of that second hand smoke will stay with them.

Unhealthy eating, on the other hand, mainly affects the health of the person doing the unhealthy eating. There's no "second hand fat." Now, I can't say I have the best eating habits, and I attribute to it PARTIALLY to the fact that my house growing up was full of junk food and my family ate large portions. I, however, think that effect is much more indirect than second hand smoke. Even if I picked up poor eating habits from my family and was a little overweight as a child, I have received education since Kindergarten about healthy eating. I can make good eating choices or exercise to lose weight or become a healthier person in general. However, that second hand smoke from when I was a kid in the car? It will still be there.

So, I do know that it is a slippery slop, but I think it was a decent decision on the government's part. It may seem like they are getting too far involved in peoples' personal habits, but I'm all for that when it comes to protecting children who are not yet able to protect themselves. As a teacher, I know all to well, that there are parents out there who do not do that on their own, without the government getting involved. And there's just not enough CAS workers out there to reach every child who has a slightly moronic, but not completely unfit parents.

Maybe Nancy Pelosi's plan to curb the population was her idea of protecting children.