- Joined
- Apr 25, 2011
- Messages
- 25,803
- Reaction score
- 20,579
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I doubt you know all liberals, so it's possible.I don't know any liberals that support marijuana legalization who also advocate driving while high on marijuana because it's "safe."
Quit baiting.The children should be taken away and given to a liberal family that smokes pot in their car. Pot is safe.
I doubt you know all liberals, so it's possible.
Doesn't the same apply to exhaust fumes? Or pesticides you decide to spray on your hedges by the roadside? Or the sugar-laden, trans-fat-laden, salt-laden foods you feed your kids? Unless you can prove that secondary smoking is THE most noxious and dangerous activity you can perform in the company of others you are opening yourself up to claims that you are being tokenistic for purely modish, moralistic reasons.There's an old saying: You have the right to swing your fist at my nose...up to the point just before making contact. After that you've infringed on my rights. Same goes with cigarette smoke.
Personally, this bandjumping wagon of going after smokers is getting old. Maybe more effort should be laws about showing young guys that are dorky getting the pretty cheerleader chicks if they pull out a case of Bud Light.
This, I also think it should also apply to Axe commercials.
I like you anyway, Temporal.
Love,
Smoker-that-smokes-in-the-car-but-never-with-a-kid-in-there.
Doesn't the same apply to exhaust fumes? Or pesticides you decide to spray on your hedges by the roadside? Or the sugar-laden, trans-fat-laden, salt-laden foods you feed your kids? Unless you can prove that secondary smoking is THE most noxious and dangerous activity you can perform in the company of others you are opening yourself up to claims that you are being tokenistic for purely modish, moralistic reasons.
Proof please.Yes, second hand smoke is dangerous and can be deadly to kids and adults.
Proof please. Proof that specifically relates to children and cars. The average car journey is something like 17 minutes, I believe. If you are calling for a ban on secondary smoking in cars, why not in private house where exposure is going to be far higher?Uhhhh, where have you been over the last decade Andalublue? The secret is out, dude. I don't have to prove anything. But a lot of folks have. In fact, there are so many links on the subject that my computer almost came to a screeching halt when plugging the topic in. Yes, won lawsuits out the wahzoo...over second hand smoke.
And, once again, my point is avoided. There are plenty and more serious harms inflicted on kids by parents that are not legislated against. How about ensuring that no one under 18 is allowed to buy or consume a super-size fast food meal. The 20 minutes or so that such a meal takes to consume will do immeasurably more damage to a kid's health than a 20-minute car ride with a smoker. Two of those every working day (commensurate with 2x20 minute smoky school runs) will probably result in Type-2 diabetes before the age of 25. What is the clear and present danger of 2x20-minute smoky school runs? Peer-reviewed evidence please.Again, kids can't defend themselves from harms way imposed (or exposed to) by parents. Somebody...namely parents are responsible to protect their lives and health...regardless of the potential cause.
Proof please.
Proof please. Proof that specifically relates to children and cars. The average car journey is something like 17 minutes, I believe. If you are calling for a ban on secondary smoking in cars, why not in private house where exposure is going to be far higher?
And, once again, my point is avoided. There are plenty and more serious harms inflicted on kids by parents that are not legislated against. How about ensuring that no one under 18 is allowed to buy or consume a super-size fast food meal. The 20 minutes or so that such a meal takes to consume will do immeasurably more damage to a kid's health that a 20-minute car ride with a smoker. Two of those every working day (commensurate with 2x20 minute smoky school runs) will probably result in Type-2 diabetes before the age of 25.
The real task here for trigger-happy, behavioural legislators is to identify a list of the greatest health risks and start at the top and work down. Only once such research has been done can one begin to take these passive smoking obsessionists seriously.
Nothing should be done by you or by the government. My car, my kids, my problem. Not yours. Mind your own business. That's what I say.
I was warned by admin about making personal attacks, so I will just leave it at this -. Live and let live. No one is looking to you to be the moral arbiters of morality, health or ethics. In fact, many might think it quite appropriate if you could limit your judgements to yourselves on these matters. I would suggest you'd me doing the rest of us a favor by sparing us your self-righteousness. Thank you.
Earlier today I heard a conversation about Arkansas, and the illegality of smoking in cars with the windows up. According to them, it's illegal to smoke in a car with children that are, iirc, 6 years of age or younger? I don't know which law this is, and have beeb searching for it to find out exactly what the law entails.
I have this link that seems to support the conversation I heard: Law on smoking in car with children could change Arkansas - The Debate Team - BabyCenter
Assuming this is true, I have no problem with the law.
In fact, I'd like to see smoking in cars with the windows up completely banned, because I've heard 2nd/3rd-hand smoke is pretty dangerous.
Would you like to see this law applied for the whole country? What do you think?
What's the danger? Is it more harmful than say, feeding their kids too much fast food?
Nothing, mind your own business.
Due to the restrictions of this site, my response must be muted, yet at the same time in context my contempt cannot be denied. A slew of adjectives would normally follow, but in light of the situation I can only express my contempt once again.
Smoker's denial...clearly. I don't have to prove anything. Proof is on any search engine. Its everywhere.
Doesn't the same apply to exhaust fumes? Or pesticides you decide to spray on your hedges by the roadside? Or the sugar-laden, trans-fat-laden, salt-laden foods you feed your kids? Unless you can prove that secondary smoking is THE most noxious and dangerous activity you can perform in the company of others you are opening yourself up to claims that you are being tokenistic for purely modish, moralistic reasons.
Proof please. Proof that specifically relates to children and cars. The average car journey is something like 17 minutes, I believe. If you are calling for a ban on secondary smoking in cars, why not in private house where exposure is going to be far higher?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?