cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ
Between this and the idiotic proposal earlier this month to reward voters by offering to automatically enter them in a million dollar lottery simply for casting a ballot, the state is in desperate need of some real leadership. Not to mention the tire tax, increased sales tax, etc., etc. This will be just another reason for the police to stop you (like seatbelt laws, child safety seat laws). Like police have nothing better to do. What a waste of resources.

Check this out: (From Newsday)

TRENTON, N.J. -- During a recent drive, Sen. Ray Lesniak caught a glimpse of the driver in the next lane. She was puffing on a cigarette, windows rolled up, two kids in the car, enveloped in a smoke cloud so thick he could see it from his car.

The sight led Lesniak, a Union County Democrat, to propose legislation that would prohibit smoking in a car with a child under 16.

The bill dovetails with a movement nationally to limit children's exposure to secondhand smoke. It is scheduled to be introduced in the Senate on Monday.

"Many parents who are smokers have the presence of mind not to expose their children to the dangerous toxins associated with secondhand smoke," said Lesniak.

"I know that such reckless behavior is more the exception than the rule and that many parents put the health of their kids on a pedestal. But we need strong penalties, and a strong message, that endangering your kids with secondhand smoke cannot be tolerated," Lesniak said.

If approved by both houses of the Legislature and signed into law by the governor, the bill would make smoking in a car with a minor a disorderly persons offense. It would be punishable by a maximum jail term of 30 days and a $500 fine for a first offense with stiffer penalties for subsequent offenses.

Anti-smoking advocates say protecting minors from secondhand smoke is their next frontier, both because the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke are well-documented and children don't have a choice when someone lights up in a car.

"This is good news for kids who are getting sick in cars from people smoking around them," Regina Carlson, executive director of NJ GASP, or Group Against Smoking Pollution, said of the proposed law.

Besides the obvious health benefits to children, Carlson said the law would benefit vehicle passengers by lessening the number of accidents caused by smoking while driving.

Louisiana, Arkansas, Puerto Rico and Bangor, Maine, have recently enacted laws banning smoking in cars when children are present, according to Matt Barry, director of policy research for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a Washington-based advocacy group.

* I wonder if this will exclude casino owners or anyone else who's part of the corrupt Democratic machine in NJ.
* I'm not a big avocate of smoking around kids, but they're not my kid so if the parent decide's they want to do that, let them..
**End of Transmission **
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6987
Yes, because child welfare isn't partially a government responsibility.....................
Fen321
Member
+54|6923|Singularity
It seems that the government doesn't believe individuals, in this case parents, cannot raise their children as they see fit. Smoking is legal....having children is legal.....smoking around YOUR children hence forth should be legal. It seems that the person didn't like watching the parent chose to do something HE would not do therefore he believes he is acting in the children's best interest but in reality its his.

To be honest i feel bad for smokers since they have been sorta placed as a second class citizen simply because they sport a hobby that kills (hehe being alive kills you) regardless this should not be a reason to continue taking their rights especially when its not harming someone else that they have no legal responsibility over.
Ganko_06
Laughter with an S
+167|7070|Camoran's Paradise
I'm from Arkansas and yes there have been a lot of anti-smoking laws passed recently.  Another recent state law here bans smoking inside of public restaurants and bars.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6987

Fen321 wrote:

Smoking is legal....having children is legal.....smoking around YOUR children hence forth should be legal.
Having sex is legal.  Children are legal.  Therefore having sex with YOUR children should be legal.

Wait, there's something wrong there.....................

Fen321 wrote:

It seems that the person didn't like watching the parent chose to do something HE would not do therefore he believes he is acting in the children's best interest but in reality its his.
Yeah, and who gives police the right to prevent people being stabbed.  Just because they wouldn't do it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

Fen321 wrote:

To be honest i feel bad for smokers since they have been sorta placed as a second class citizen simply because they sport a hobby that kills
Which they choose to partake in.  If they don't like the consequences they can quit.  Meanwhile, the harsher they're treated the less likely others are to start.

Fen321 wrote:

regardless this should not be a reason to continue taking their rights especially when its not harming someone else that they have no legal responsibility over.
Yes, second hand smoke is a fantastical work from the imaginations of the liberal media.  Just like global warming, or the theory that the Earth is a sphere and not flat.
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6968|Texas - Bigger than France

Bubbalo wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

Smoking is legal....having children is legal.....smoking around YOUR children hence forth should be legal.
Having sex is legal.  Children are legal.  Therefore having sex with YOUR children should be legal.

Wait, there's something wrong there.....................
Yes, you changed "around" to "with", which changes the entire meaning.

Bubs wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

It seems that the person didn't like watching the parent chose to do something HE would not do therefore he believes he is acting in the children's best interest but in reality its his.
Yeah, and who gives police the right to prevent people being stabbed.  Just because they wouldn't do it doesn't mean others shouldn't.
So you're comparing smoking around your kids to a felony?
ncc6206
=BIG= BAD AND UGLY
+36|6905
Okay here is the problem.  Government believes that the masses cannot make the right decisions for themselves therefore they enact laws to protect the citizens from themselves.  Unfortunately, society does things that prove that point. Case in point, smoking with the kids in the car.  Common sense dicates kids should not be exposed to smoking and parents should be smart enough to refrain from doing so. Unfortunately that is not the case. As for the arguement that its is not my kids so I shouldnt be involved is wrong. When these kids end up with cancer and they do not have adequate insurance to cover them then our tax dollars are being used when they go on medicaid all because of a very preventable situation.  So we have this problem: Government continously gets involved in the day to day lives of its citizens to protect themselves against themselves and society continuallys does things to prove that they need this kind of government interference. Believe me, I am not for big government but until I am allowed to slap stupid parents around without being jailed I guess I will have to settle for government legislation to do the dirty work for me.
sfarrar33
Halogenoalkane
+57|7044|InGerLand

Pug wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

Smoking is legal....having children is legal.....smoking around YOUR children hence forth should be legal.
Having sex is legal.  Children are legal.  Therefore having sex with YOUR children should be legal.

Wait, there's something wrong there.....................
Yes, you changed "around" to "with", which changes the entire meaning.
i'm not sure if thats better
ew...
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6987

Pug wrote:

Bubs wrote:

Fen321 wrote:

It seems that the person didn't like watching the parent chose to do something HE would not do therefore he believes he is acting in the children's best interest but in reality its his.
Yeah, and who gives police the right to prevent people being stabbed.  Just because they wouldn't do it doesn't mean others shouldn't.
So you're comparing smoking around your kids to a felony?
I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ
But isn't the Government made up of Citizens who are less then perfect? There can not be commen sense laws on the books, because that violates peoples civil right?

Ok a 500 dollar fine and no more then 30 days in jail for this.. Ok so if parents smoke in the car with there kid the kid might get Cancer(chances are the kids going to grow up to be a smoker anyway). So to prevent this from happening we'll fine the parents 500 dollars take food and goods away from the Child and possible take there parent away from them for a small time?
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ

Bubbalo wrote:

Pug wrote:

Bubs wrote:


Yeah, and who gives police the right to prevent people being stabbed.  Just because they wouldn't do it doesn't mean others shouldn't.
So you're comparing smoking around your kids to a felony?
I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
Mcdonalds probably causes more harm then Smoking so where's the legislation on that. Why doesn't the Mighty "government" give out food vouchers so people can only buy McyD's once a year?
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6987

cpt.fass1 wrote:

But isn't the Government made up of Citizens who are less then perfect?
Your point?  They can be charged just the same.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

There can not be commen sense laws on the books, because that violates peoples civil right?
Is this a question or a statement?

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Ok a 500 dollar fine and no more then 30 days in jail for this.. Ok so if parents smoke in the car with there kid the kid might get Cancer(chances are the kids going to grow up to be a smoker anyway).
Possibly as a result of their parents smoking................

cpt.fass1 wrote:

So to prevent this from happening we'll fine the parents 500 dollars take food and goods away from the Child and possible take there parent away from them for a small time?
So, the $500 that gets taken away was earmarked for the child, was it?  The government will take action to encourage the adult to act appropriately.  That failing, they will remove them from the situation.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6987

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Pug wrote:

So you're comparing smoking around your kids to a felony?
I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
Mcdonalds probably causes more harm then Smoking so where's the legislation on that. Why doesn't the Mighty "government" give out food vouchers so people can only buy McyD's once a year?
McDonalds causes cancer?  Why has nobody told anyone?
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ

Bubbalo wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

But isn't the Government made up of Citizens who are less then perfect?
Your point?  They can be charged just the same.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

There can not be commen sense laws on the books, because that violates peoples civil right?
Is this a question or a statement?

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Ok a 500 dollar fine and no more then 30 days in jail for this.. Ok so if parents smoke in the car with there kid the kid might get Cancer(chances are the kids going to grow up to be a smoker anyway).
Possibly as a result of their parents smoking................

cpt.fass1 wrote:

So to prevent this from happening we'll fine the parents 500 dollars take food and goods away from the Child and possible take there parent away from them for a small time?
So, the $500 that gets taken away was earmarked for the child, was it?  The government will take action to encourage the adult to act appropriately.  That failing, they will remove them from the situation.
They sure can but it's a difference in Social Status when they are, politicians are generally from and are people with money so ludicris laws like this don't affect them as it would a lower/middle class citizen.

It's both..

Yeah and Possibly start smoking crack because they saw it once on T.V. we shouldn't deal with Possiblites in Laws.

Who defines acting appropriatly and why is it your decision to do so?
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ

Bubbalo wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
Mcdonalds probably causes more harm then Smoking so where's the legislation on that. Why doesn't the Mighty "government" give out food vouchers so people can only buy McyD's once a year?
McDonalds causes cancer?  Why has nobody told anyone?
Do you relise how bad McDonalds is for you? It's probably alot worse then smoking.. And the sun causes cancer, so lets get rid of that.

Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2007-01-19 09:13:12)

Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6968|Texas - Bigger than France

Bubbalo wrote:

Pug wrote:

Bubs wrote:


Yeah, and who gives police the right to prevent people being stabbed.  Just because they wouldn't do it doesn't mean others shouldn't.
So you're comparing smoking around your kids to a felony?
I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
Sure I agree with that, but what I'm torn about is:
Our current laws state that your car is an extension of your home.  Proper search & seizure rules apply.  The gov't is therefore telling you what you can and can't do in private.

So the question is: How long until the gov't bans smoking in your own home?  And do we want the gov't controlling what happens in the home?

I don't smoke, second hand smoke blows, and smoking around kids blows...but this is a conflict between freedom of domicle and the child's rights...yuck.

And lastly, I don't see what the problem is in this case - the air in New Jersey is probably more deadly than second hand smoke LOL.
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6968|Texas - Bigger than France

Bubbalo wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:


I'm saying that it's something which causes harm and which, therefore, should be legislated.
Mcdonalds probably causes more harm then Smoking so where's the legislation on that. Why doesn't the Mighty "government" give out food vouchers so people can only buy McyD's once a year?
McDonalds causes cancer?  Why has nobody told anyone?
Yes, please give the Bacon McCancer meal with a diet Coke...super size me.
ncc6206
=BIG= BAD AND UGLY
+36|6905
There are more pyramids on this post than in all of Egypt!!!!

Last edited by ncc6206 (2007-01-19 09:40:52)

UON
Junglist Massive
+223|7079
So they only get a $500 dollar fine for what amounts to child abuse... at least there's an easy way to pay it: Stop smoking
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|7121|NJ
Can't fight with that logic from UON.. Also on top of that drinking is bad for you so stop doing that.
Driving is bad for the enviroment so we should probably stop that as well.
Having sex could lead to STD's which is bad for children lets stop doing that too.
Life really shouldn't be made of choices because we know what is good and bad for people, so we need to start living better lives by control and enforcement of the government...
Fen321
Member
+54|6923|Singularity
I'll def have to agree with you pug, this could be the entry path into banning smoking at home.

I'm on the side that consenting adults should not be restricted in their actions no matter if they are harming themselves or not, once you start factoring harm to other individuals then this may become an issue.

I can understand if someone is in a public restaurant or an enclosed area why they would protest against having smokers around, but in the open or in their own car then your are starting to infringe on the adults rights. It is NOT illegal to smoke with your children at home therefore why should it now be illegal to smoke in the car with a child but still be legal at home doesn't really work out. If you cannot ban the house smoking for right infringements then the car should be no different.
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7162|Salt Lake City

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:


Mcdonalds probably causes more harm then Smoking so where's the legislation on that. Why doesn't the Mighty "government" give out food vouchers so people can only buy McyD's once a year?
McDonalds causes cancer?  Why has nobody told anyone?
Do you relise how bad McDonalds is for you? It's probably alot worse then smoking.. And the sun causes cancer, so lets get rid of that.
Uhhh, no probablies about it.  The single largest cause in the US each year is heart disease.

Heart disease: 654,092

While smoking can contribute, you need only look at all the obese American threads, stories, articles, etc., to see that most heart disease is caused by poor diet.

Cancer was the number two killer, but given all the things that have been shown to cause to cancer, you can't hang that one all on smokers.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard