New anti-smoking law. - Page 4 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


Lounge For casual talk about things unrelated to General Motors. In other words, off-topic stuff. And anything else that does not fit Section Description.

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-17-2007, 06:59 PM   #31
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Genoa, Illinois
Posts: 4,013
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Allmachtige is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim W
...but they do, so, I guess the government has to tell him whats right and wrong

I'm all for the freedom of choice, but seriously, for the kids, don't smoke in the car.
You just contradicted yourself.
Allmachtige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 07:35 PM   #32
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MN
Posts: 1,172
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Bonnevillan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddalder
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnevillan
not sure if any of that was directed at me, but i never said i oppose the rule, in fact i agree that kids should not be subjected to secondhand smoke.
kids in their late teens however can make their own decisions. plus cops should not waste time with things like this when they could be put to better use (IMO)
I disagree with a "generalized" statement that kids in their late teens can make their own decisions. I deal with grown adults every day that have no difficulty making bad decisions. In fact, if it weren't for bad choices I'd be out of a job! How can you suggest that an older teen with little life experience is okay to make these choices when so very many older people, who have much more life experience, can't make good choices (not referring to smoking specifically)? This is a perfect example of something that affects all of us. Whether we're subject to second hand smoke or paying into healthcare to take care of these people when their health fails, sooner or later we all pay. I pretty much okay with anything, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. This does, plain and simple. There is no accepted medical evidence to suggest that smoking is healthy or that it should be encouraged. There isn't even a little bit of gray area here.

As far as police enforcing this, I agree that there are many other things they could and should be doing. There is a long list of things they shouldn't have to do. As long as people persist in doing things that adversely affect others, this list isn't going to get any shorter.
i didnt say that they WILL make the right choices... but they CAN CHOOSE not to ride in a car if there is smoking going on and they dont want to be subjected to it. the law shouldnt dictate that choice for them, IMO.
Bonnevillan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2007, 01:31 AM   #33
Senior Member
Certified Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,928
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BonneMeMN is on a distinguished road
Default

I agree with the law, it'* a safety issue plain and simple. Yes it is about rights, your right to smoke should not impede someone'* right to good health. The law isn't meant to strip the smoker'* rights, but protect those who chose not to smoke.

IMO the littering from smoking while driving is pretty damn bad as well. Anyone who'* looked at, let alone cleaned up an area near any busy road, or parking area knows how many cig butts are all over the place.
BonneMeMN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2007, 02:57 AM   #34
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 1,137
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
chr0mius is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MOS95B
Minnesota won't even let you think about smoking in a building other than your own home (I get the workplace an resturaunt part, but bars?? Who goes to a bar for anything healthy?). The Missus won't let me smoke inside the house, so I usually don't
It'* not for the patrons of the bar, it'* for the employees. The employees don't necessarily smoke, and they sure aren't there to kill their livers and lungs.

I still don't see how your statement holds up. The reason people shouldn't be allowed to smoke is not because it smells bad. It'* because it'* unhealthy. It'* not about courtesy, it'* about well being. Whether or not you like the smell of smoke, it'* bad for you. It'* not okay to harm the health of the people around you because it'* chilly outside.
chr0mius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2007, 10:11 AM   #35
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,295
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
MyLittleBlackBird is on a distinguished road
Default

To put it simply, you wouldn't like it if someone poisoned you against your will, would you?
MyLittleBlackBird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2007, 10:57 AM   #36
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 691
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
*B2* is on a distinguished road
Default

Maybe the smoker should be forced to ask the child, "would you like to smoke a cigarette with me this morning?", because that is essentially what is happening. I doubt they will say yes.
Grant
*B2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2007, 08:44 AM   #37
Senior Member
Posts like a Supercharger
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 156
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
auroralover is on a distinguished road
Default

There is a huge debate going on in Ohio about this, and has been for quite a while.. Whether I'm a smoker or not doesn't matter, but it just seems this group of people is in the crosshairs of everybody right now. If smoking is so bad, which it is, then just make it illegal to smoke, period. I can go into a bar, have a few drinks, but can't smoke. But I can then get into my 4000 pound vehicle and drive all over the city, possiby injuring or killing someone. I didn't hurt or offend anybody by smoking that cigarette, just ruined the lives of the people/persons I just injured or killed by being impaired.
How about people walking around with STD'*, or worse, aids? Are they a health threat to people if they don't disclose they have these diseases? Let'* ban sex unless it is with one person and one person only the rest of your life, so as not to be a health threat to the rest of society.
As to paying for health care costs of other people who do bad things, what about overeating? Obesity is out of control in this country, and the health care costs associated with it are astronomical. You may hear a news blip reporting about it, but nothing is ever DONE about it.
I just have a problem with regulating smoking to the extent that they are. After all, it is perfectly LEGAL. Just ban it, and be done with it. Some of this may seem extreme, but I have just had it with this one issue being targeted.

By the way, I don't smoke, but imagine how pissed I would be if I did
auroralover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2007, 09:34 AM   #38
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,295
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
MyLittleBlackBird is on a distinguished road
Default

Why don't they make it illegal? Think about how many congress/house members smoke cigars/cigarrettes. You don't think they'd take something away from us if it affected them, do you? Same reason alcohol is legal. They don't want to lose it, so they won't make us lose it. I bet you if we had political figures(some 50%) in office that used "street drugs", and wouldn't take a public lashing for it, they'd be pushing to legalize it, or it already would be. End story, if it'* good for them, then it'* okay. If it has no bearing on their daily lives, unless it makes it easier for them, it'* illegal.
MyLittleBlackBird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2007, 09:41 AM   #39
Senior Member
Posts like a Supercharger
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 156
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
auroralover is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MyLittleBlackBird
Why don't they make it illegal? Think about how many congress/house members smoke cigars/cigarrettes. You don't think they'd take something away from us if it affected them, do you? Same reason alcohol is legal. They don't want to lose it, so they won't make us lose it. I bet you if we had political figures(some 50%) in office that used "street drugs", and wouldn't take a public lashing for it, they'd be pushing to legalize it, or it already would be. End story, if it'* good for them, then it'* okay. If it has no bearing on their daily lives, unless it makes it easier for them, it'* illegal.
That is exactly what I'm saying. They won't make it illegal because of all the money involved. It'* all well and good until it starts effecting someone'* paycheck. Screwed up world.......
auroralover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2007, 11:18 AM   #40
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,446
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
ddalder is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by auroralover
If smoking is so bad, which it is, then just make it illegal to smoke, period. I can go into a bar, have a few drinks, but can't smoke. But I can then get into my 4000 pound vehicle and drive all over the city, possiby injuring or killing someone. I didn't hurt or offend anybody by smoking that cigarette, just ruined the lives of the people/persons I just injured or killed by being impaired.
Here is where I have to disagree. At least in Alberta, and I don't know about elsewhere for sure, whether you are over the legal limit of .08 or not, if you're impaired it'* illegal to drive. That law says you can't drive with a blood alcohol OVER .08, but it also says you can't drive impaired. This is for ANY reason. At least in Alberta, driving with a blood alcohol level above .08 and impaired driving are two completely seperate charges. They are often, but not exclusively laid together. And yes, whether you choose to accept it or not, you would hurt someone by having that cigarette. IMO, your logic is flawed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by auroralover
How about people walking around with STD'*, or worse, aids? Are they a health threat to people if they don't disclose they have these diseases? Let'* ban sex unless it is with one person and one person only the rest of your life, so as not to be a health threat to the rest of society.
Again, you're not making a legitimate comparison. First of all, STD'* are generally not life threatening. Smoking clearly IS and kills on a regular basis. STD'* also don't have near the monetary impact on healthcare that smoking does. Most (if not all) areas have laws which state you must disclose to a potential partner if you're HIV positive or have AIDS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by auroralover
As to paying for health care costs of other people who do bad things, what about overeating? Obesity is out of control in this country, and the health care costs associated with it are astronomical. You may hear a news blip reporting about it, but nothing is ever DONE about it.
I would like to see your figures. Yes, obesity is a problem and it is getting worse. Perhaps it'* just where you live, but we regularly have television spots and news items focused at living a healthy lifestyle and eating a balanced diet. This still doesn't even come close to what smoking costs society on an annual basis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by auroralover
I just have a problem with regulating smoking to the extent that they are. After all, it is perfectly LEGAL. Just ban it, and be done with it. Some of this may seem extreme, but I have just had it with this one issue being targeted.
Personally, I think smoking should be illegal. There is absoultely nothing positive that comes from smoking and endless scientific and widely accepted evidence that shows how terrible it is. Perhaps smoking is targeted so much because it'* about the worst of the worst preventable causes for disease, death and financial hardship to healthcare. Likely the only reason it is legal is because there would be no way to outlaw it. Do you remember what happened when they tried to outlaw alcohol? At least with alcohol, there is some scientific evidence of benefit when used in moderation.
ddalder is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
October 1st- New Cell Phone Law In Connecticut Gumball Lounge 8 10-04-2005 10:14 PM
UNREAL!!!! Damn useless law matt95ssei General GM Chat 13 01-04-2005 07:13 PM
Tradition,Heritage, and the Law Twister97 Lounge 4 04-05-2004 01:41 AM
Law Enforcement bashing...... willwren Forum updates and suggestions 0 11-12-2003 03:35 AM
Murphys Law at its finest Jim W 1987-1991 15 07-08-2003 04:53 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:58 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.