• beyondtheveil said on Jan 19, 2007....

  ariene- I saw a New Jersey legislator on tv a few months ago trying to get a law passed to keep anyone from smoking in a car for safety reasons, even though smoking was bottom of the list for causing accidents. Go figure.
   
  This law makes no sense. Does that mean it's ok to smoke with someone under 16, just so you're not in a car? Sounds to me like the "I hate smokers regardless of who or what they are" mentality.

• kelly said on Jan 20, 2007....

  You're missing the point.  If a cop saw someone who was driving a beating a minor with his fist do you think the cop would be justified in pulling the guy over?  Smoking is no different.  The smoker is intentionally subjecting a minor to a known carcinogen.  It is an abusive act by an adult on a minor.
  
  
  People who smoke just don't get it.  They will never understand how disgusting they are to be around.

• silverwhisper said on Jan 20, 2007....

  ariene, i think you're straying towards slippery slope arguing towards the end there a bit, but i agree that this is unnecessarily intrusive.
  
  kelly, your analogy doesn't work. temporary exposure to a carcinogen as would be involved in the 4 minutes it takes the average smoker is simply not enough to have any measurable health impact. this cannot therefore meaningfully be compared to physical abuse by an adult, which is obviously nowhere near the same thing.
  
  further, you're not accounting for the fact that a minor in the car of an adult is very likely present of his or her own volition. you cannot legislate away the right of people to make decisions w/ which you do not agree. a person who smokes is known as a smoker--the minor's decision to get into that car is still that minor's choice. not yours.
  
  and i understand perfectly well how disgusting smoking is, thank you very much.
  
  ed

• Ariene said on Jan 20, 2007....

  beyondtheveil - Sometimes I think these bills are just a money grab, because they're not thought through. The laws just seem to be inching closer and closer to taking away all parental rights. ed - Although I smoke, I do respect those who don't and usually comply with their wishes not to in their presence. I don't smoke in my car, by choice, and leave my windows open when I smoke in my home even though I don't have any minor children. I really liked your response. I don't think this bill will be made law, because even Corzine thinks it's too invasive. I guess I tend to reach a bit, at times, because we're losing more and more freedom every day while government keeps growing.

• mom said on Jan 20, 2007....

  I think it should be outlawed for people to talk on their cell phones while driving.  That is dangerous.  I have seen people talking away and are oblivious to everything else.  I  think it is ok to talk for a short time on the cell phone if it is important then make it quick but anything else, should be off limits.
  I am a reformed smoker, my husband still smokes.  I do get irritated with so many laws about smoking getting passed.  Anytime a new law comes in it does take away our freedom to choose.

• Ariene said on Jan 20, 2007....

  Mom - I know what you mean about cell phones. My sister talks on hers all the time and won't even use the headset I bought her.

• mom said on Jan 20, 2007....

  When people are at the grocery store doing shopping and are on their cell phone, they stand in the aisles, leave their carts in the middle of the aisle.  It drives me nuts.  They are oblivious to everybody around them. I have a cell phone that I keep in my car for emergency purposes, and that is all.  Other than that I don't use them.  I do not like being tied to the phone anyway at home let alone out in public.

• kruuyai said on Jan 22, 2007....

  silver, I think your response to kelly has some logical flaws... "temporary exposure to a carcinogen as would be involved in the 4 minutes it takes the average smoker is simply not enough to have any measurable health impact"

  Second hand smoke is a real issue and it kills.  No, being exposed to cigarette smoke in a confined area for four minutes once in a lifetime would not be enough to cause a measurable health impact, but repeat this exposure over time, and it certainly would.  Add to this the fact that, depending on whether the windows are open or not, the smoke will linger in the air for much longer than four minutes. 

  "further, you're not accounting for the fact that a minor in the car of an adult is very likely present of his or her own volition." 

  Wrong again.  I grew up with two parents who smoked, and I certainly never had a say as to whether I was going to get into a car with them or not, and I certainly would never have dared to voice a protest against having to breathe their cigarette smoke... I would have gotten a backhand across the face. 

• kruuyai said on Jan 22, 2007....

  Mom... I think the intent of the anti-smoking laws is not to take away the freedom of the smokers, but to liberate the non-smokers who have been forced to smoke whether they want to or not.  I have known some very considerate and responsible smokers who always go outside or to a designated area to smoke so they won't affect anyone who doesn't want to breathe smoke.  If more people were like that, these kinds of laws wouldn't be necessary, but I think, since we are dealing with an addictive substance (and I believe I've heard that nicotine is the most addictive substance known to man), then people do get a bit testy when they feel that they are about to lose their fix.  And they often tend to disregard the needs and rights of others.  BTW, kudos to you for having kicked a powerful addiction.

• silverwhisper said on Jan 22, 2007....

  kruuyai: but see, that isn't what the law is penalizing. the law itself is badly written, b/c it seeks to impose behavioral penalties based upon an assumption of a pattern of behavior when only a single incident is the basis for it. i'm fully aware that nicotine is a carcinogen, but i also am fully aware that there's a difference b/n these two things.
  
  your second argument is a presumption of bad parenting--which frankly, while i sympathize--is what the situation you're describing represents. you cannot assume bad conduct on the part of the parents, and i believe your argument requires such a presumption.
  
  ed

• mom said on Jan 22, 2007....

  Since I am a ex smoker, I see things from both sides.  Yes, it is unhealthy but to say that you cannot smoke close to a building or putting more restrictions on smokers is silly.  I do not like the government making so many restrictions on a lot of things i.e. seat belts. Every time they pass a new law it takes a little more of our freedom away, whether it is smoking, drinking, seat belts, guns etc.  So I don't like it. I don't like the smell of cigarettes and don't want to be  around it.  Here you have to be at least 25 feet away from a building in order to smoke.  A lot of smokers will go outside, and respect the fact that you don't like it.  So why make more laws?  Also all white house has to do is sign some document and automatically you become a criminal.  Pretty soon they will make it so you can't smoke in your car and then in your house.  If you continue to smoke then you are a criminal and how will they inforce that?  They have so many bills and laws now that they can't enforce, why add more?  People want to ban smoking all together but do you know how many petitions I have refused to sign for legalizing Marijuana?  Every time I turn around someone is trying to get it passed.
  That is my honest opinion.  Thank you for your time

• kelly said on Jan 26, 2007....

  silver, the minor probably does NOT have a choice if that is his parent.  Four minutes is probably understated--and I'm not sure where you get that number since no one gets anywhere in four minutes.  Additionally, even if it was only four mintues it's not really four minutes.  It's constant exposure.
  
  
  Did you know that the biggest danger to our skin isn't from getting burned once by going down to the beach?  It's the day to day exposure you get just walking from your house to your car and from your car to whereever.  Smoke is just another carcinogen that has a buildup effect.
  
  
  I'm staying firmly with my idea that it is really child endangerment.

• silverwhisper said on Jan 26, 2007....

  kelly: it takes a smoker 4 minutes to smoke a cigarette. that's what this law penalizes, not creating a smoke-filled environment which yields the constant exposure upon which your support for this law is based. this is why i said in my previous response, although directed at kruuyai, that this law is badly-written.
  
  if it's the constant exposure that's the problem, then that is what the law should address. you're free to stick w/ your position, but your basis for it is IMV flawed.
  
  ed

• Ariene said on Jan 26, 2007....

  Mom - I've heard of apartment dwellers filing lawsuits against smokers on the basis that the smoke enters neighboring apartments through walls. I guess some people will do anything for a buck. As for the 25 feet law, I can't possible comply with that. When I wash my clothes and go outside for a smoke, walking 25 feet puts me either in the middle of the road/parking lot or in front of another building. Now, even Atlantic City casinos have to have designated smoking areas. I guess that's better than banning smoking altogether.

• mom said on Jan 26, 2007....

  I think the smoking laws are crazy, we had designated smoking areas, but now they have made it 25 ft. from any public building.  It won't be long before they will be doing that all over.

• kelly said on Jan 27, 2007....

  silver, I see your point about the letter of the law.  I think I just hate smokers so much that I let that get in the way, which is not a good way to approach analysis of a law.  I would maintain, however, that a re-written law designed to protect children from their parents isn't such a bad thing.  You see, I was a smoker throughout grade school.  Well, actually my dad was.  I was simply the person who would wake up every morning wondering why it was hard to breathe only to realize that my dad was smoking a cigarette.
  
  
  I'm wondering when my early years as a smoker will catch up to me.  I've said elsewhere that I view smoking around others as nothing less than a physical assault.

• Ariene said on Jan 27, 2007....

  Kelly - You know what I hate...When I'm around people who wear what smells like a half bottle of perfume. I immediately start coughing and have to leave. Oh, then there is floor wax, paint and one of my favorites..ammonia which is commonly used in business on a daily basis to clean floors. Have you ever picked up a child at school, only to breathe in fumes from school buses? My point is, you can't blame everything on smokers. As for your breathing difficulties when you were younger. Perhaps smoking affected you, but did you ever go to a doctor at the time to find out if that was the case? Childhood asthma is common whether in a household where someone smokes or not.

Comment on "Smokers turned Criminals"

Currently tagged	law smoking freedom privacy New Jersey endangerment of a minor politics cell phonesQUIT TALKING casinos childhood illness asthma allergies (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment
	Comment Anonymously