Mooka Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/08/28/state/n193817D14.DTL&hw=smoking+cars+children&sn=001&sc=1000 (08-28) 20:51 PDT SACRAMENTO, (AP) --Californians who smoke in motor vehicles carrying young children could be slapped with $100 fines under a bill approved Monday by the state Senate.But a measure to force automakers to produce more lower-polluting, alternative-fuel vehicles fell four votes short of passing. The smoking ban, in a bill by Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, would cover vehicles carrying children who were required to ride in a child safety seat. Under current law, that would be children who were younger than 6 or who weighed less than 60 pounds. But a bill on the governor's desk would require children younger than 8 years to ride in child seats unless they were at least 4-foot-9. Sen. Deborah Ortiz, D-Sacramento, said the Koretz bill was an attempt to "protect the health of children who cannot protect themselves." "We all know that secondhand smoke is hazardous," she said, particularly for young children whose lungs are still developing. "Children are effectively smoking a pack and a half a day for every hour they are exposed to smoke in a car." I think they may be taking things a bit too far... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Personally, I am glad this made it through, although I am sure Arnie will smite it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 And they say conservative are in our bedrooms? Pretty soon the Gov't will be telling people they can't smoke in their homes. :doh: think not? http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=566 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Personally, I am glad this made it through, although I am sure Arnie will smite it. Then I hope you are pleased when the rest of the choices in life are removed. BTW how is your diet, and what activities do you engage in? Are you living in a area with good air quality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAFGA Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 I can't believe this bill actually made it through. If I were a liberal, I would be embarassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Make smoking ILLEGAL or STFU..... take the tax dollars in one hand while waving your finger at the people with the other... very nice.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 I guess I don't see what the big deal is. Why should be ok to constantly subject your children to toxins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 I guess I don't see what the big deal is.Why should be ok to constantly subject your children to toxins? Are we to allow the goverment to choose thier diet at home also? If the goverment were to take and support my children,THEN they would be entitled to make choices related to them. Are we gonna fine for promiscuity or alchohol abuse ? It affects our health and the well being of those around us...How about aids or other sexualy transmitted diseases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Are we to allow the goverment to choose thier diet at home also?If the goverment were to take and support my children,THEN they would be entitled to make choices related to them. Are we gonna fine for promiscuity or alchohol abuse ? It affects our health and the well being of those around us...How about aids or other sexualy transmitted diseases? Done building your straw man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Done building your straw man? I'm not sure he's using the straw man tactic so much as he's asking you to draw the line of where you think Government intervention stops. Is it a hard line or is it relative to the times? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Done building your straw man? It's hardly a strawman TEG. At what point will the gov't stop invading our lives in an effort to "improve" the lives of children. This issue is but a stepping stone for something larger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Forcing kids to inhale toxins isn't a liberty you enjoy in being a parent. If you are willfully harming your kid, I personally think the government has every right to come in and mandate that you stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Forcing kids to inhale toxins isn't a liberty you enjoy in being a parent.If you are willfully harming your kid, I personally think the government has every right to come in and mandate that you stop. How about forcing them to ingest them via poor diet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Yeah TEG, I think I have to go with the bad guys on this one. Is it smart to smoke in a closed car with little kids? No. Should it be illegal? HELL NO. Problem with common sense is that it isn't that common. Stupidity isn't against the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 I think parents should be allowed to make their kids smoke if they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 How about killing pedophiles and getting rid of 10 year back-logs on death row? Bullthis politicians! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Not healthy, but it should not be illegal. Next comes houses. Then smoking within a certain distance of anyone else. Then smoking altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Quote: Originally Posted by The Evil Genius Done building your straw man? It may be to you,however when does the goverments power stop? Is it simply the idea of children being endangered? Should we outlaw sports, swimming,...Baths? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Quote:Originally Posted by The Evil Genius Done building your straw man? It may be to you,however when does the goverments power stop? Is it simply the idea of children being endangered? Should we outlaw sports, swimming,...Baths? Some of the same people here have no problem with government intervention when it comes to safety (of the country, aka Patriot Act). And yet, someone tells you that you cannot poison your kids with secondhand smoke and it pisses you off? Give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Yeah TEG, I think I have to go with the bad guys on this one. Is it smart to smoke in a closed car with little kids? No. Should it be illegal? HELL NO. Problem with common sense is that it isn't that common. Stupidity isn't against the law. On that ,I could see (somewhat) fining someone for smoking in a "closed "car. But are we gonna fine for sitting in traffic? The exhaust fumes are toxic as well,especialy the MTB(the goverment required) and particales from soot. The idea of personal responsibility is lost with the nanny goverment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Ironic, "nanny government" is the arguments that were used when seatbelts and then, car seats were deemed mandatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 why i'm glad to be a libertarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Some of the same people here have no problem with government intervention when it comes to safety (of the country, aka Patriot Act).And yet, someone tells you that you cannot poison your kids with secondhand smoke and it pisses you off? Give me a break. Glad you brought that up :laugh: The goverments JOB is to provide national security,it is NOT to micro-manage your life...But I guess you missed that in the constitution Yet I suppose you cannot recognize the difference. Added You obviously are one of the ones whining about goverment spying and you cannot see the distinction? You should be in the head of the pack cheering the NSA on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Ironic, "nanny government" is the arguments that were used when seatbelts and then, car seats were deemed mandatory. As long as I pay the insurance and healthcare for myself and kids it IS a intrusion on my rights. I can understand recomending use or actions, but fines for non-compliance is BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Paging Mr. Kurp......paging Mr. Kurp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.