Washington could ban smoking in cars with children
Monday, January 5, 2009 12:37 PM PST
By The Associated Press
Printable version
E-mail this articleOLYMPIA — Anti-smoking groups are rounding up sponsors for legislation that would outlaw smoking in vehicles when children are passengers.
A member of the Tobacco Advisory Board of Pierce County, Leonard Sanderson, told The Olympian the proposal would make it a secondary offense, meaning smoking drivers could be ticketed if they were pulled over for another offense, such as speeding.
Four other states have outlawed smoking in cars with children: California, Arkansas, Louisiana and Maine. A similar bill died in last year’s session of the Washington Legislature.
Just wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:31 AM:
" My daddy passes gas a lot and he smells so can they give him a ticket too? "
kelso gringo wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:33 AM:
" This law would be a victory for every child who has a selfish parent that subjects them to second hand smoke. "
basketmkr wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:50 AM:
" I have to agree w/ Mrs.Pellwerds. I feel sorry for the smokers who have been shoved from piller to post, and out the door. Enough is enough. We don't need more laws to stigmatize them. "
JUST ME!! wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:53 AM:
" OH MAN!! Say it aint so, we are going 100% commy and anything goes to make it okay. Educated people start education not regulation. "
citizenmom wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:59 AM:
" What a concept...protecting children from their own parents! I hope this law passes hands down. Nothing makes me more upset that seeing little children in the back of a car in a smoke filled haze, breathing carcinogenics that they have no choice but to breathe. ughh. "
zar wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:06 AM:
" "Mrs. Pellwerds" you can still kill yourself, just not any children that may be riding with you. I have been praying for a law like this. "
Fanky wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:08 AM:
" ...not that I don't think this makes sense, but I have to say I completely object to this and everybody should fight this, not because it is a bad idea, but because the government is starting to go too far. The government is essentially telling people how to raise their children, next, they will be saying you can't smoke in your house (essentially, what is the difference). Government is not supposed to run our lives, for a land of the free, we have more laws than almost any other democractic country and we have more people in jail than China.. just makes you wonder...? "
KRun wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:12 AM:
" You shouldn't be smoking in your car with your child. It is irresponsible. It makes me so mad when I see people do that to their children. "
local_nurse wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:15 AM:
" I agree with this ban totally, there are so many illnessess that affect children by their parents stupidity and lack of care about smoking around others. "
Blondee wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:17 AM:
" That would be wonderful! My ex and his wife are continuously subjecting our children to their smoking, at least that would be one less place he could do that. If they want to smoke fine, but it's very selfish to put the kids' health at risk. "
El Fuego wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:19 AM:
" If I roll up some alfalfa, light it and inhale it, is that considered smoking? If I light a cigarette and just let burn, is that considered smoking? If my favorite watering hole decides to have a bbq within 25' of the building, is that considered smoking? Guess I need to check RCW and get a clear definition of smoking. Might be a catch 22 there. "
gouise wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:20 AM:
" All of us in this house support a ban that protects kids from smoke.
I will be glad when smoking is outlawed in public all together.
It's really yucky to have to walk past smokers in parking lots. I don't stink up their air, it's not fair they can stink up and poison mine or anyone else's.
It's about time the law favors the non-smokers. "
I will be glad when smoking is outlawed in public all together.
It's really yucky to have to walk past smokers in parking lots. I don't stink up their air, it's not fair they can stink up and poison mine or anyone else's.
It's about time the law favors the non-smokers. "
safetygirl wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:29 AM:
" It might be "your" car, but those lungs belong to the child and you are slowly KILLING them! "
Don Keyhotay wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:32 AM:
" Obviously, it's stupid to smoke w/kids in a car. Period. And while I generally agree with the statement that, "Stupid should hurt", I believe that this bill is just another power grab. What's next? Look at a city official wrong and get a summons? I seem to remember another bill where they'd only ticket you as a secondary offense, but that sure changed. Go ahead people, sit by idly while your rights slip away... "
Just My Opinion! wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:37 AM:
" It is so amazing how fast we Americans are to throw away our rights that men and women have spent centuries fighting to keep and give for us ungrateful blobs. I have three kids and never let them around cigarette smoke unless it is outside then we move upwind of it. It is my responsibility to protect my kids. It is not the goverments right to step in and do this! I care about the poor kids that have irresponsible parents but that is when it comes down to family and friends to show how hurtful it can be and chastise them then. Again it is not the goverments job. Goverment is to protect my life from foreign threat and my liberty from those who want to take it away thats it! "
cynic954 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:38 AM:
" This is good next they need to ban smoking in houses with young children. No smoking within 25 feet of an entrance just like the rest of the state. "
JUST ME!! wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:42 AM:
" Go after parents for pollution, but ignore big industry, alot of children with strange types of cancers yet we just fine them. HMM! "
imho wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:49 AM:
" Using this analogy, cars and factories should be banned as well. Oh, and boats, ships and airplanes. We need to ban semi's, dozers and all construction vehicles too. They emit far more pollution into the air than smokers do.
While we're at it, we should ban all processed foods, deep-fried foods and
all other foods not sold in their "natural" wrappings. These foods are known to cause obesity in children -- quickly becoming the biggest health threat to our children.
Don't forget to ban carpets, wood floors and paint. Carpets are a petri dish full of chemicals, diseases and bugs. Most of this stuff is made in China -- where they do not have the same "strict" regulations that we have.
Speaking of China -- most, if not all, of your kids' toys are made in China. Do you know what really goes into them? Ewwww. Have you seen the list of chemicals that are banned in the U.S. that are perfectly acceptable in China? Do you honestly think this crap is getting checked at the ports?
Don't even get me started on the need for banning alcohol and all prescription drugs. Rx drug overdoses are eradicating teenagers as we speak.
Let's ban all of the above as they all have the potential to harm children.
Or, simply accept the fact that some parents are not nearly as perfect at parenting as you. "
While we're at it, we should ban all processed foods, deep-fried foods and
all other foods not sold in their "natural" wrappings. These foods are known to cause obesity in children -- quickly becoming the biggest health threat to our children.
Don't forget to ban carpets, wood floors and paint. Carpets are a petri dish full of chemicals, diseases and bugs. Most of this stuff is made in China -- where they do not have the same "strict" regulations that we have.
Speaking of China -- most, if not all, of your kids' toys are made in China. Do you know what really goes into them? Ewwww. Have you seen the list of chemicals that are banned in the U.S. that are perfectly acceptable in China? Do you honestly think this crap is getting checked at the ports?
Don't even get me started on the need for banning alcohol and all prescription drugs. Rx drug overdoses are eradicating teenagers as we speak.
Let's ban all of the above as they all have the potential to harm children.
Or, simply accept the fact that some parents are not nearly as perfect at parenting as you. "
DUH wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:50 AM:
" I'm a smoker but have never smoked a cigarette in any of my cars. Kids or no kids. The law wouldn't hurt me a bit. And besides, it keeps the resale value of my vehicles up. I have never smoked in my house either. And gouise, if you see me smoking outside in a parking lot and choose to walk through my smoke, that's your problem not mine. Outside the 25 foot ban, I am well within my LEGAL RIGHT to smoke. Your LEGAL RIGHT don't come into play until you are inside that 25 foot ban and inside the building. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:00 AM:
" The number one health danger in the United States is obesity. It causes heart disease, diabetes(with it's accompanying diseases), high blood pressure, etc.. There is a study out that says at the current rate of increase in the incident of morbid obesity every person in America will be be morbidly obese within our generation. Lets put an initiative on the ballot that fines every parent who feeds their child a Happy Meal. Or require that all televisions come with a lock box that allows only 1 hour of viewing by a minor. These would add more to the health of the child. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:01 AM:
" I am against smoking at all and I support all of the initiatives against smoking, but this time I wish the Legislature would stay out of this. I don't know want the smokers to claim that Big Govt. is taking their rights away. And two, I don't want us to move incrementally on this. I prefer a statewide initiative that will stop smoking any place but your private property. And that would rule out the car because the car, once it leaves the private property, is in public domain. Let's quit doing this step by step. Every anti-smoking initiative wins by a 60-65 percent approval. That's because 83 percent of the adults in the state DO NOT SMOKE. Only the feeble 17 percent smoke. So really instead of this action, let's take the big step. Push them back into their home. Anywhere else should be illegal. And I hope the smokers have enough brains not to say that it is govt. taking this step. The initiative process is the purest form of democracy -- a bill written by the people and voted on by the people. So you smokers when it happens, blame the people not govt. It's time to finish this once and for all. Make people who smoke do it on their own property and no where else. "
momto1 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:03 AM:
" I see both sides to this ban. I grew up with my mom smoking around me, then she had to give up smoking indoors because of my dad's heart. But it is still a parent's right to smoke in their car or home, and the government shouldn't interfer. I do not smoke and never have. "
lola*in*longview wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:06 AM:
" I support this 100%. No child should have to inhale cigarette smoke. I used to smoke and am totally guilty of doing so around my children. I look back now and can't understand what the hell was I thinking. It is just to risky, I don't want to be responsible for the death of anybody due to second hand smoke. It wasn't that hard to quit, wish I would have stuck with it a long time ago. "
taffeta wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:08 AM:
" This shouldn't even have to be a law. This is just plain common sense! "
onemom wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:13 AM:
" yes, this might be a good idea, but....what is next??? They will want to ban smoking in your own yard. They may go after those of you buying potato chips for you obese kids. Ban McDs, they are responsible for many an overweight kid. Why not just ban the sale of cigs completely and do away with the evil things?? They are very bad for your health, why are they still sold??? Anything else, food or medicine, ingredient in anything that has caused so much death would have been banned by now. Put the tobacco growers to work growing corn instead. How about stiffening any laws for people caught using drugs or have drug paraphenalia that have kids? "
theraydude wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:32 AM:
" whats next with big government tell you where to live where to work when to take a crap please people you can say oh how horrible which i personally believe to be true but laws like theses make america lokk more and more like a social country where its big gov and there are your parents telling you what to do so good luck with that sheeple "
bmc dennis wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:36 AM:
" OK if you want o give up your rights as an American go ahead. There are to many laws now that we let happen. One day they will say give us your guns because a child could be hurt by them. Should you smoke in your car with kids no but this is america the land of the free hahahahaha. Not anymore just keep letting these laws pass and soon smokers or none smokers wont have ay rights. "
dredger wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:37 AM:
" good also extra tax on high fat foods and I'm over weight. "
treeedman wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:39 AM:
" To all who are concerned about "BIG BROTHER and BIG BAD GOVERNMENT" It is very clear that second hand smoke is harmful. Children are often exposed to 2nd hand smoke. Second hand smoke in an enclosed automobile is often concentrated at a much higher level than in a home or outside. Childrens lung tissue is fragile and locally, rates of reactive airway disease in children is high. Lung tissue is permanently damaged by second hand smoke exposure. How many ways can this be said? Nobody can be allowed to abuse the health of children. When adults cant protect kids, BIG BAD GOVERNMENT should. We protect children from adults all the time. This is just another example. I applaud the proposed ban and so should all. "
? wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:50 AM:
" What about all the garbage that is spewed into the air in this town everyday by it's industry? It's carcinogenic, not only to children, but to adults, animals, anything with a pulse. Don't I have rights as an adult to be slowly put to death by the air pollution in this town? Maybe I should try to get a petition banning that. Think it would fly? This is just another attempt of one group attempting to control the actions of another. It has nothing to do with the safety of children. If cigarette smoke doesn't kill them, the air they breath everyday probably will or maybe it will be the car they don't see or the illness the doctors don't treat agressively enough or the parent who beats them one to many times or maybe the sky will fall. Any of this making any sense? It's kind of like a law banning smoking in a personal vehicle where the government has no business legislating. Because if they can pass a law like this, what is to say they can't pass a law against speaking to harshly to your child, or maybe looking at them the wrong way which would lead to stress, eventually to heart disease and they might die at 60 or so. Please. I agree that smoking shouldn't be done around children, neither should drinking. What I don't need is some politician telling me this. "
reel mccoy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:50 AM:
" Way to much police control, it's getting to be a police state like it or not. I don't like smoking period, and i also don't like drinking. Stop making cigarettes and booze, see how long they can get along without those resources. "
onemom wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:59 AM:
" treedman, what about the french fries and soda pop parents feed their kids??? they are causing health problems also. parents should not NEED any LAW to tell them not to smoke around their kids. and again, just ban the sale of cigs in the state making them illegal to have and smoke. oh, but that would cut into tax money the state relies on getting. "
Pinky wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:06 AM:
" Does anybody remember the old days? When you didn't wear helmets when you rode your bike, your parents not only smoked cigarettes in the car, they drank when they were pregnant smoked when they were pregnant.... Like virginia said.. You've come a long way baby!! LOL "
DUH wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:13 AM:
" Just look at the pollution that is spewed out of those stacks down at the mills 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The chemicals in that stuff eats the paint off of cars and houses in the area. Just look at the houses and the cars parked in the highlands area for example. What do you think those chemicals do to a persons lungs? I'd say it's a lot more harmful than the occasional whiff of cigarette smoke you get while walking through a parking lot. Long term exposure to almost anything man made can have adverse effects. Just look at some of the warning labels on some cleaning supplies that we use in our homes... This product is known to cause cancer in laboratory animals. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:18 AM:
" Treeedman: You are absolutely right. "Nobody can be allowed to abuse the health of children." So require that you have to be 18 to purchase fast food. Ban the sale of televisions to any household with children. Ban the sale of video games and consoles to any household with children under 18. Require a bed time curfew of 8pm to insure that all minors receive 8 to 10 hours of sleep. Pretty soon we will only have Ozzie and Harriet families. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:21 AM:
" What if a parent continuously smokes in the car, house, apartment, etc. with their children present and the child dies from cancer caused byt the second hand smoke? I believe that parent should be charged for the death of that child. What about those of you who think the parent should be allowed to smoke? Do you think the parent should be punished? "
Ella Mentry wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:29 AM:
" Hope no one lights up around these comments. So many straw men. *poof* "
opinionated 1 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:29 AM:
" Why doesn't the goverment just ban tobacco products and use . If someone is caught with tobacco give them a possession charge just like with any other banned substance . Marijuana is an illegal plant and it has medicinal value , so why is something much more dangerous still legal ? "
gimpy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:30 AM:
" It's about time! I'd like to see tobacco use banned forever. I grew up as a child of smokers and to get anywhere was at least a 5 hour road trip. My siblings and I fought over who got a window, so we could roll it down for fresh air. My brother usually won, because he could get car-sick at the drop of a hat. As adults, none of us smoke. "
LongviewFam wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:42 AM:
" This new law will be the same as having to use car seats for children. It is about the child's safety. It doesn't mean people can't smoke in their cars, just not when the kids are in it. Duh. Not that big of a deal if you really care about your kids' lungs rather than your habit. Think about the kids health and smoke outside. "
person wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:44 AM:
" More laws and regulation is not the answer. The constant infringment on peoples rights needs to stop. This state has far greater problems than parents smoking in cars. Why don't the law makers focus on meth? There are more comercials about the dangers of smoking than I can stand to watch, all this whhile this state and more importantly our community is in the strangle hold of meth. This is simply a waste of legislative time when there are much bigger fish to fry. "
swan wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:46 AM:
" While I'm not opposed to this law, this is a continuation of the permanent ban on smoking. This law makes somewhat sense, but the follow up to this law will be that the chemical that soak into the upholstery of your vehicle will also be found toxic to people, specifically kids. Therefore, smoking will be banned in vehicles, even if you don't have kids, in case someday they will ride with you. After vehicles, the same will hold true of homes. Smoking will effectively be banned indoors. Later on, it will be determined that smoking causes general air pollution, and at this point, it will have been banned everywhere else and there will be so much momentum, it will be banned outdoors for environmental reasons. This law is a slow progression towards the inevitable of an all out smoking ban. If you don't like it, fight it or go to Canada. "
gr8 ant wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:55 AM:
" This is wonderful...wish it was in affect 25 years ago, when I was a kid. Hated going to school smelling like an ashtray!! "
Im_not_saying wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:08 PM:
" Everyone who states it does not harm anyone, or that it is worthless has to realize that secondhand smoke, breathed by children leads to several medical ailments. These medical ailments result in more visits to emergency rooms and doctors offices. The resulting strain on the health care system causes rates to raise, and insurance companies to pay out more. Therefore causing you, me, the smoker, and the kid when he/she grows up to have to pay. If you go outside to smoke at home, why do it in your car? If you can't wait until you get where you are going - you should quit. As far as government going to far - government is preventing these smokers from affecting my life. Where are MY rights? These smokers congregating outside bars and restaurants making it so that I have to pass through their foul stench if I choose to patronize a business. You want to chant about smokers rights? I'll call you a wwwwwwahhhbulance. "
Montana wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:14 PM:
" First off, I am a non-smoker. This proposal is crap. If a parent smokes in the car with a child just imagine what happens at home. Nothing is done to parents smoking around kids in their own home. And a secondary offence is only something the cop can stick to you if he stops you for a real offence. Make the stop a primary offence or leave it alone. Better yet, how about Big Brother staying the heck out of this. "
Montana wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:19 PM:
" This law makes the lawmaker who proposed it sound like a great guy. It has nothing to do with the wellfare of kids. Ban the product if it is so bad. But wait - we get a ton of tax revenue from smokes now dont we? "
toledoone wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:44 PM:
" They could put a smoke detector in your car...right next to the GPS they are going to put in your car, so they can tax your mileage. "
toledoone wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:45 PM:
" Actually, I think they should just install a chip in your arm and then they could track everything you do. "
mom of four wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:46 PM:
" Do it already! Should have been a law along time ago. I don't care that you smoke but be respectful about it. Thanks DUH for being away from an entrance 25 feet! "
NIMBY wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:20 PM:
" I must have been sick on the day we discussed that smoking is a right in Wagle's U.S. History class "
greenbean wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:22 PM:
" This is no different than requiring car seats and seat belt for children. It's "your car", but the safety features are required. No different that saying it is not safe to smoke in a car with children breathing the fumes. If we ever want to reduce healthcare costs, we need to start making better choices. If parents can't figure out on their own that this is harmful to their children, then a law is required. You and I will be paying for the medical bills of these children if we don't make a change. "
Frugal in Kelso wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:25 PM:
" Smoking around children should be considered a form of child abuse, as it directly impacts their health and well-being. I grew up in a house where both parents smoked, and suffered from asthma and allergies - didn't stop them from lighting up at all. Tobacco products won't be made illegal - those corporations put too much money in the pockets of politicians for that to happen. Those of you whining and complaining about the loss of "rights" and the government monitoring and controlling you should wake up. You are already being monitored, whether it's "security cameras" everywhere, the GPS in your cell phones, GPS in newer vehicles, RFID in your driver's license, credit and debit cards and passport, monitoring phone calls, keeping tabs on all your banking activity, internet usage, library books checked out, etc. etc. Smoking or using tobacco isn't mentioned in the Constitution or any of the Amendments, but other freedoms that have been severely curtailed are. Where's the outrage over that? Guess as long as you have a pack of smokes, a six-pack of beer, your junk food of choice, and the television remote, that's all that really matters. "
mad monkeys wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:29 PM:
" I am all for this ban. The children do not have a choice they have to ride with their parents, guardians, etc. The second hand smoke may cause asthma, it can cause frequent and more severe asthma attacks in those that have it, and more middle ear infections. The children who breathe second hand smoke more likely to get pneumonia, bronchitis, breathing problems that dont get better and poor lung function. As if those are not enough reasons to say yes to the ban lets look at a higher risk for (SIDS), and Smoke filled rooms can have up to six times the air pollution as a busy highway. Your vehicle being smaller than the average room in the house can you honestly without guilt place a child in this danger? I lived all my life with asthma, and I remember when I was little and I had to ride around with the grown ups who smoked and I remember how hard it was to breathe. I remember my trips to the ER due to asthma attacks. This ban isn't taking your rights away it is looking out for someone who cannot speak up for their right to have good health. It is looking out for their lung health as well. It is time to grow up and think of others. Smoking in the car while your child is in there is no different that standing there and just blowing smoke in their face. And if your child has lung diseases you are putting them at risk. "
DW wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:42 PM:
" Frugal in Kelso, I was raised by two chain smoking parents, and I didn't suffer from any form of illness from second hand smoke. And I never picked up the habit. You may very well have had asthma and allergies no matter if your parents smoked or not. I have a son that has asthma, and allergies and he has never lived around cigarettes. You anti-smoking nazi's had better be careful what you wish for, something you like to do, or need may very well be next on the list. Be afraid, be very afraid...... "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:54 PM:
" Let's go directly to a smoking ban anywhere except on your own property and not allowing it in your car when you are off of your property. There is nothing good or healthy about smoking. More than 83 percent of the adults in the state are smart enough not to smoke. Let's just make it so that we don't have to witness it at all. It's going to come to that. So let's quit this inch by inch. Smokers are second class citizens and certainly they are in the distinct miniority. Time to push them back to their property. Make the fine hefty enough so that it will hurt. Say $500 for first offense. That will slap some sense into some of them. The rest well thanks for helping with the city and county deficits. "
lilsue62 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:54 PM:
" To all the moms and dads out there or anyone else who want to ban the smoking. I don't smoke and I am not about to tell people what to do in or on their own property or with their children. Thats like me coming in and saying "you can't use that TP because its harmful to the environment." The environment we are handing down to our children. To citizen your children are sucking in a lot of carcinogenics with all the mills here in longview and kelso. Have you ever wondered why down in the projects next to the mills that 90% of the people living there have some form of disability. Most were born in that area and have been told its safe. I would not worry about a little cig smoke. I never died from my parents smoking as most older folks parents did also. This is another way for the state to but in where they are not wanted! "
cherokee wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:59 PM:
" While we are at this banning thing, let us ban all alcohol sales also. If there are no drunks on the road, then there will be no children killed by drunk drivers! "
tallsy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:03 PM:
" This should happen. Kids should not be exposed to ciagrette smoke. This should have happpened along time ago. Adults should know better than to put their kids in danger. I am 100% for the Ban "
lilsue62 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:16 PM:
" I think some laws go way to far. Do you all know it is against the law to allow your 2 and 3 year old to ride their tricycle on the sidewalk. When my son was 2 I got him a trike and took him out to ride it on the sidewalk. Mind you this is back in the 80s. As I was walking with him a Longview police officer pulled over to the side of the road. He got out and informed me that it was against the law to allow my 2 year old to ride his bike on the side walk. I told the officer if he thought i was gonna allow my son to ride in the streets he was nuts. We all need to decide on how far the laws are allowed to go. Would you all allow your 2 and 3 year olds to ride in the streets with their bikes? They have taken away your rights in protecting your child from getting run over. How much further are you willing to let them go. I for one told the officer to arrest me if he really needed to, but i was not allowing my son in the street at the age of 2. Its a parents right to decide whats what with their child not the governments! "
flatbakman wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:17 PM:
" Why not just ban smoking all together. Then we could:1. Spread the taxes that only smokers pay for their habit now to everyone (another net tax increase)2. We could increase revenue by fining and jailing people for smoking (This would also help the employment picture by making more jobs for lawyers, jail people, judges, etc.)3.We could end tax subsities and payments to tobacco growers (but don't expect a tax decrease because of it. And best of all We could tell the new president what he can and can't do and expect him to live with our decision. "
lngconnn wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:28 PM:
" I'm against smoking and I will not have my children around it at all... or at least try not too. I think it's so unhealthy. BUT, the government shouldn't write up a law about it. I agree with the no smoking in public places law, but a car is personal property. It is the parent's decision whether they want to slowly kill their child or not and get them started on the stick. It is not the government's decision. Just like spanking. "
treeedman wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:33 PM:
" DW, it is probably more accurate to say that up to this point in your life, you don't seem to have suffered any form of illness from second hand smoke. Anything else is denial and ignorance. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:41 PM:
" Cherokee, you start the initiative and I will vote for it. My guess is the difference between your initiative and the one I propose to ban all smoking except on personal private property is this: 83 percent of the adults in Washington do not smoke and usually vote 60-65 percent for any anti-smoking initiative. That's a big majority. Do you have that kind of support for your idea? Does the majority of the public willing to make your initiative law? That's the difference. The majority supports anti-smoking bans, the majority does not agree with you. "
banana hammock wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:57 PM:
" An early supporter of Hitler, by 1934 Niemller had come to oppose the Nazis, and it was largely his high connections to influential and wealthy businessmen that saved him until 1937, after which he was imprisoned, eventually at Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps. He survived to be a leading voice of penance and reconciliation for the German people after World War II. His poem is well-known, frequently quoted, and is a popular model for describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control.
Here it is.Remember it becouse thisis what is happening.
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." "
Here it is.Remember it becouse thisis what is happening.
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didnt speak up because I wasnt a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." "
DW wrote on Jan 5, 2009 2:59 PM:
" TDN Bad Boy, I have a question. You own or run a business correct? Now let's say that the government/public decides through the initiative process that Bad Boy's business is not in the best intrest of the world, and they vote to put you out of business and ban your product or services........just something to chew on. "
1arealocal wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:02 PM:
" RE: Cheney119, for once I am almost in complete agreement with you.
Raising children is the PARENT's responsibility not the govt's. Keep my tax dollars going towards something productive, say the community's infrastructure. I say let the smokers buy all the cigarettes they want to, less taxes for me to pay.
PS. I am a non smoker as well. "
Raising children is the PARENT's responsibility not the govt's. Keep my tax dollars going towards something productive, say the community's infrastructure. I say let the smokers buy all the cigarettes they want to, less taxes for me to pay.
PS. I am a non smoker as well. "
Macaroon wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:03 PM:
" I think this is a great idea, but I'm afraid that like a lot of other laws (smoking within 25 feet of a window or door of a public building, talking on a cell phone while driving, etc, etc, etc) it won't be followed or enforced. "
jy27 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:04 PM:
" My brother smokes in the car with his 3 and a half year old daughter. I can't stand it! She has no choice. Second hand smoke is a killer, and she is so tiny and fragile. If he cannot make the right choice the government needs to step in and make it for him. "
onemom wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:22 PM:
" jy27-- If your brother is to stupid to make a responsible choice of not smoking in the car with his own kid, that is the kind of person that should be first in line for the next new law of sterilization for stupid people that do not lead productive lives and endanger their kids. smokers today, who will be the next target?? some people should be sterilized before they can reproduce. "
TDN Bad Boy wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:34 PM:
" Well DW then I would be out of business wouldn't I? Tell me, when was the last time you heard of that happening? Oh and just so we are on the same page. Like many smoking defenders, you said GOVERNMENT. The government is not responsible for Washington's smoking ban. The people are -- as in 65 percent of the voters who approved the initiative. This wasn't a government action, it was a peoples action. Let's face it, the Washington politicians were too chicken to do the right thing. Most likely most of them were getting kick backs from big tobacco. I applaud the Oregon lawmakers for doing this. In my opinion, it's one of the few things that state has gotten right. So DW does that satisfy you? I live by the laws. And if the laws say I can't operate my business in Washington, then I have two choices. Start a different business or move to another state. So you could actually have three choices: 1. find a healthier habit, 2. move to another state or 3. smoke only in your own home. Personally I hope that when it happens we make the fine so big that almost all of the 17 percent left will quit. However, I know not everyone is that smart. "
RTLL wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:35 PM:
" I don't smoke in the company of children, period. And darn few adults, I might add, and they're all fellow smokers. But, since it involves the health of innocent children I would support *this particular* ban. All that said, I think we really need to be careful in the way government "bans" things on our behalf. What next? Beer and pizza? Those are pretty unhealthy. Bike riding is really dangerous, so that might be next. Breakfast sausage (and that gravy!)has probably killed more Americans than we'll ever know, so biscuit-bellies should be on the alert ! Skateboarding? Ha ! Its gotta go ! Every new ban just gives big brother a little more strength, so those in favor of "less government" better be careful about what they wish for. "
Fencepost wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:38 PM:
" Smoking is a disgusting habit and forcing children to inhale second hand smoke is reprehensible and irresponsible. The only thing MORE disgusting, reprehensible and irresponsible is the big hand of government reaching into our lives to protect us from ourselves and becoming a nanny state that won't allow us to parent our own children and won't let us take responsibility for them. "
spete98611 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:51 PM:
" This "control via legislation" ball is really rolling now. Like the story mentions California, Arkansas, Louisiana and Maine already have such legislation in place. This law then allows legislators to say, "Hey. Smoking is now banned in automobiles to protect children. Why not move it to include private residences?". Such as California is currently working towards. I'm happy about it. Once this legislation is enacted "We The People" (majority) can begin to dictate how other people raise their children under the guise of public safety. Lets get rid of common sense and personal responsibility and let the government dictate the way in which we live our lives. It's crazy how animated people get over tobacco. I laugh every time I'm in the hospital and a healthy person dies. It's crazy how much people believe they know and persuade others to believe in an attempt to prolong their life. My grandfather was an alcohol drinking smoker and lived to be 89 until he died in his sleep. My great grandmother was a smoker and lived to be 113 until she died in a kiln fire. Everyone's bodies react differently to exterior influences yet everyone has to try to dictate another's life. Our time on this planet is short yet everyone thinks they know better than the other and place themselves atop a pedestal. Well, that pedestal falls just as everyone else does...and I'll be somewhere laughing. "
DW wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:11 PM:
" Bad Boy, smoking is a personal choice. I will stick to my guns on this one. I think it is wrong to start down this road. If we start banning things because a majority of people think it is wrong, then we open up a pandoras (sp) box. Guns, certain types of cars and trucks, food, outdoor activities that might be hazardous, this list could to on and on. I find it hard to believe as a conservative you would support this type of action. The initative process I believe has its flaws, but for the most part it is a good thing. However, pure democracy by popular vote is not good. A representative republic works, pure unadultered democracy will always fail. "
Hershey's Squirt wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:21 PM:
" I see a lot of people talking on cell phones while driving. "
LongviewFam wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:24 PM:
" DW, yes, smoking is a personal choice. That's why it's okay for an adult to make that choice for HIMSELF, but not to make it for someone else when that choice is known to be harmful. It's unfair for a person to make a choice that harms others. If we are going to talk about rights, what about the kids' rights in the backseat to stay away from deadly fumes that they never made a choice to ingest? You can take this "rights" thing too far when it comes to injuring others because of your personal habits/decisions. "
LongviewFam wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:26 PM:
" All the pro-smoking drivers: This law does not remove your right to smoke in your car! It just prevents you from inflicting your poisonous habit's deadly fumes to children riding with you. Don't smoke with kids in the car. It's not your RIGHT to hurt innocent children. Wanna smoke? Go ahead and do it ALONE!! "
TheGenius wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:29 PM:
" I don't have a problem with preventing children from being exposed to secondhand smoke. I'm curious as to how they are going to enforce this. Are they going to double-up by looking for cell phone offenders as well as smokers? This just has a little too much of a "nanny state" vibe going on for me. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:32 PM:
" DW: Smoking may have started out as a personal choice but it grows into an addiction. Studies of nicotine addiction has shown that nicotine addiction is harder to break than heroin or cocaine. And the tobacco companies are constantly altering tobacco to insure the tobacco plant produces stronger nicotine concentration. If you want to end smoking the State should use some of the major funds they received from the tobacco settlement suit to set up public clinics to distribute nicotine patches and anti-depressants along with support groups to help smokers break the addiction. "
MAMA DUCK wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:33 PM:
" I agree with this idea 100%. As a kid, both of my parents smoked 5 packs a day. Our car would be so full of smoke that it was hard to see out of the windows at times. We got made fun of in school because we stank of smoke so badly. I haven't had any negative health effects yet, but I'm just waiting for them to pop up, I'm still young. Bottom line, besides being gross, smelly and distasteful to non smokers, smoking around your children is harmful to their health. You wouldn't hand them a cigarette and tell them to light up, so why force them to breathe in the crap from yours? "
CR RES. wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:40 PM:
" I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THIS BAN. I SEE SO MANY PEOPLE SMOKING AND LITTLE ONES IN THE CAR WITH THEM. I JUST WISH THAT THE SMOKING BAN WOULD BE ENFORCED OUTSIDE OF LOCAL STORES AS YOU WALK UP AND THERE IS TWO OR THREE PEOPLE STANDING THERE SMOKING AND WE HAVE TO WALK THROUGH THE SMOKE. "
ex longview resident wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:57 PM:
" I am all for this law! I think if you are smoking in a car with a child in it, you should be charged with neglect or abuse! You are in fact neglecting your child's needs! You are impacting an innocent childs health just to light up! How selfish can you be?? "
columbian wrote on Jan 5, 2009 5:04 PM:
" ALL A BIG TO-DO ABOUT SMOKING.BETTER GET UP IN ARMS ABOUT THE GUN SMOKE IN FOREIGN LANDS.AND THE 15 TRILLION DEBT.AND THE SMOKE FROM ALL THE BURNING BRIDGES BEHIND US.WHEN ARE WE GOING TO WAKE UP,AND STAND UP TO ALL THIS CRAP. "
cherokee wrote on Jan 5, 2009 5:30 PM:
" To those who wish to ban all tobacco products, I would like to remind them that Native Americans use tobacco in their religious ceremonies. Not every Native American smokes though. I personally do not smoke myself and never will, neither do I consume alcohol. "
JJ wrote on Jan 5, 2009 5:51 PM:
" Oh god give me a break. As a smoker I have the right to smoke were the hell I want to. It is not up to the government to tell me were and when I can light up. I say go to H E double hoskey sticks to government running my life. "
Lucky7 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 5:56 PM:
" I'm all for this law, in fact I think it should be extended to your place of residence. Go out on the porch to fire up your cancer stick and let your kids grow up with healthy lungs! "
mom of four wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:04 PM:
" LILSUE62- Just to let you know that officer was wrong telling you that it is okay for a child under the age of 15 to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. Sorry you are misinformend. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:23 PM:
" Lucky7: And you should be required to prove you don't have kids at home to buy alcohol. Or buy a gun. "
Louie wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:36 PM:
" Anyone with a shred of common sense and decency would not smoke in a car with children present. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand the negative affects on children, or anyone else for that matter, of such behavior. "
JUST ME!! wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:42 PM:
" GRRRRR!! I am a american and I am smoke free and I dont need my goverment telling me how to raise my kids,,I am American and Smart,,educated and Grrrr!!! I want my fellow americans to use there edumacation..We didnt need them thar politians telling us about tea then and still dont... "
US CITIZEN wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:42 PM:
" i am going to look at this the same as i do for seatbelts, hunting in orange vests,talking on my cell phone while i am driving more people letting there right to choose to go the way of the dodo. "
Thought wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:56 PM:
" I'm all for it and I'm a smoker. While we are at it why not triple fines for drivers that violate any law with children in them.Its about time children were protected from parents ignorance.. I am Thought and I approve this message. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:01 PM:
" Thought: I like that idea. They already double fines in work areas even when there is no work being performed. Lets get the initiative going. "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:06 PM:
" Thought: And the extra income should be required to go to school funding. "
Don Keyhotay wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:09 PM:
" Wow Bert; What does this have to do about guns?? I've been a big gun collector, and raised kids. Are you trying to imply that the two aren't conducive? I spent 3k on a gun safe, thank you very kindly, to insure the safety of my (and my neighborhood) kids. Dare you not imply that my ownership of weapons implies irresponsibility. Wow, if I read you right, your arrogance. "
an observer wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:21 PM:
" Ban smoking and we won't die of cancer, ban driving we can end traffic deaths, ban walking then we can't fall, ban eating what we want and end obesity, ban alcohol and we can end abuse, ban marriage and we end divorce, ban guns ban knives and forks so no injury can occur, ban freedom of speech, ban books, ban religion, ban a thinking! What a glorious world. PC perfect. "
disappointedinthistown wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:36 PM:
" I don't care how many smokers are 'put out' for not being able to "smoke in their own cars"-- children deserve to breathe fresh air and not be forced to breathe the poison of adult choices they are victims of. We know smoking causes health issues, that is no argument, so don't subject children to it. ...and for all you smokers who think you're doing people a favor: ROLLING DOWN THE WINDOW WHILE SMOKING DOES NOT ELIMINATE 2nd HAND SMOKE!!! If smoking adults were just a little bit considerate and not so selfish about their "RIGHT" to smoke, there wouldn't need to be laws proposed such as this. I completely support no smoking in cars with children. ...but like the cell phone law, we'll see how long it actually lasts. "
AmericanGirl wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:46 PM:
" I smoke but not in my car and I think this is a great idea and while they are at it they should ban all things that could be or are harmful to children and babies, like booze that tends to make people mean and could end in abuse and we all know tv and fast food is a huge obesity issue and well the other sure killer of children is abortion so yes we really need to stop all of this harmful stuff. "
dksgirl12 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:07 PM:
" I totally agree with this.. as an ex daycare worker it would break my heart to see kids come in and they REEK of smoke.. they are breathing in the horrible toxins! "
bert wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:21 PM:
" Don Keyhotay: The issue is protecting our children from potential danger. It is a fact that every nine hours a child or teen dies from a firearms accident. Since 1990 more than 5,000 children have died from gun accidents. In 2005, there were 16,298 kids injured by a firearm -- and an additional 14,052 kids were injured from BB or pellet guns. If you want to see all of the facts just go to: http://www.kidsandguns.org/study/fact_file.asp . So even though you may be a responsible gun owner, you are obviously in the minority. Therefore any home that has children, or where children may visit should be banned from having guns for the safety of our children. "
lord gregor wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:26 PM:
" Take it a step further: ban smoking in homes where children are located. One of my closest friends grew up in a home where his father smoked and he has lifelong asthma issues because of his father's irresponsible selfishness. No child should be required to grow up in a home where their parents smoke: either the cigs go or the children go, its up to you smokers to decide! "
Simple Man wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:52 PM:
" My step dad did this every time I rode in the car. He rolled down the window and the smoke went directly out the window. These hippies should worry about things like parents feeding their kids full of fast foods. "
Aconserve wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:57 PM:
" More laws, more laws. Why do you guys care if someone smokes in a car with kids "we" (Washington Residents) passed assisted suicide laws and support abortions to the hilt. All of a sudden we care. Hahahaha. What a joke. This is commen sense it dosen't need to be a law. It won't be a primary stop it'll be a secondary, just like talking on cell phones and you can see how great that law is working. Hahahaha. "
redneck wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:06 PM:
" When do we stop giving up our right, when we don't have any left? There is not very brite people out there and all the laws in the world can't stop them, but if we give up any more of our independence we will not be free any more. We start out with not smoking in public places, no smoking with kids in cars, no talking on cell phones while driving. What next no wearing shorts pants when temperature is below 50 degrees? Or voicing your opinion online? Where does it stop. "
an observer wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:12 PM:
" I don't disagree with protecting the kid but, just illegalize smoking everywhere! Which will upset the Marijuna and Crack crowd but, if you are to ban it in the car and bar you should ban it in the house as well! Then again you might have to enforce the laws we all ready have,as well, nah, why would anyone want to do that....That would mean they might have to enforce all the laws. Then we would have a problem with immigration, and taxes etc. etc.. "
Beer&Skittles wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:23 PM:
" 1. Unlike others on this posting, I was raised by 2 & 3 pack a day smokers, and as a result, I have had chronic and severe lung issues since I was a kid. I have never lived around a smoker since, and the issues have never gotten better. I have been told I have the lungs of a 50 y/o 3 pack a day smoker - and no I don't live anywhere near the mills. There's but one cause - my parent's smoking. They've felt so guilty for so many years, when they were young, they were convinced smoking was healthful. It took them years to quit, but they finally did. Both have died from health issues from their smoking, even though they quit 20+ years before they died. Both my siblings also have lung problems as well. We spent lots of time cooped up in that old station wagon with blue air over the years. And the inversion layer in the house. To anyone who thinks the government (US!) doesn't have the right to protect children, I say "Waaaaaaaaaa a a a a aaaaaaaaaaa!" and nothin' more. "
mommy6 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:25 PM:
" When the govermentbuys me a car and pays for the gas and the ins. then they can tell me what to do in said car. When the goverment pays for my childs health care,laundry (water and supplies to wash) and their other needs then they can tell me how to raise them. When the goverment pays for ALL my housing cost and EVERYTHING that goes along with my every day living then they can tell me how to live. Until this happens keep your nose out of my life. My kids go to school,have clean cloths,medical and are some of the healthyest kids I know. BACK OFF!!!!!!! "
SignalBiker wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:33 PM:
" Oh great another bill that we the tax payers are paying for to go through the Legislature that does nothing for anyone. How much did it cost the last time? The lobbyist should pay for it. The legislatures should be working on better bills to improve our economy and education. "
somebodysmother wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:35 PM:
" I don't miss sitting in the haze of my parent's smoke! I HOPE THIS LAW PASSES!! I will DEFINITELY vote YES for it!! "
mikadax wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:41 PM:
" finally my prayers answered only about 25 years too late lol! "
Amazed By Ignorance wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:20 PM:
" The words "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness", are the only defense I need in response to this. Smoking in a car with kids is abuse and selfish? Well, how attentive are you when you're gabbing on your cell phone with kids in the car? For all those wanting to get rid of us smokers? Have you sat back and considered just how much trouble millions of smokers going cold turkey would be? Enough is enough. "
slowburn wrote on Jan 5, 2009 10:30 PM:
" There was a time when it wasn't uncommon to see a pregnant woman drinking alcohol. What changed? We learned that it wasn't healthy and we stopped, for the most part. There was a stigma attached. Not only were you harming your baby, you felt ashamed for being a poor parent in the eyes of others. We didn't need a law to stop the practice. We adapted our behavior over time. We evolved. Laws can be helpful, and laws can be a waste of time. This is a waste of time. It will never get anywhere no matter how much "the people" want it. Now, don't we have some sort of monumental budget crisis to discuss? "
piper wrote on Jan 5, 2009 11:55 PM:
" My mom and dad would be locked up in the pen for a long time if they were alive today! I never had a car seat, wore a seat belt or bike helmet, was a latchkey kid at 6, my mom smoked and had an occasional drink while pregnant, and we walked two miles to school, regardless of the weather. We also had small toys we could choke on, ate red M&Ms, and were allowed to climb trees, ride horses and roller skate (all helmetless) We played outside unsupervised for hours and had access to power tools. I don't know if it has gone too far or not but they can't lock everyone up. "
re-read&think wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:37 AM:
" Bert, what does responsible gun ownership have to do with irresponsible smokers? I don't know any gun owners who would put their child into a car with a loaded gun. Yet, I see smokers who put their children in a car full of smoke everyday. "
paytonydm wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:50 AM:
" KRun,and others,might want to think a little deeper in regards to our childrens wellbeing.There is plenty of other abuse to children that our tax dollars could go to.I have a hard time with the parent that is verbally abusive.How about this,if you become preganant,you must complete a semester of child development at a local community college. "
re-read&think wrote on Jan 6, 2009 1:04 AM:
" mommy6, I would have to assume from your post that you do not have ANY TYPE of government assistance. However, think about how many children are on government assisted medical. How many of those children have health problems associated with 2nd hand smoke? Why is the government along with our hard earned tax dollars paying for their parents irresponsibility? There are a lot of adults out there who are lacking good judgement. So what is the problem with telling these particular people DO NOT SMOKE IN YOUR CAR WHEN CHILDREN ARE PRESENT. True this is common sense to most of us, but to some it needs to be a law otherwise they're too selfish of stupid to put their childrens health about their own addiction. "
chinook66 wrote on Jan 6, 2009 6:03 AM:
" If cigaretts are that bad then just outlaw them in the State of Washingron or even the nation......I'm not a smoker but you need to remember they are legal right now. This govt. is going down hill fast! "
viper wrote on Jan 6, 2009 6:34 AM:
" well the government stepped in and said no to punishing your child and what we got in return is a lot of disrespectful kids and Gangs with our hands tied so we can't due anything but talk to them so we can get somemore disrespectful kids . now we have disrespectful kids raising more disrespectful kids . should get real good soon . the point is they don't have enough police to handle the people that disobey the cell phone laws so are we going to have a (special Task Force ) to patrol the streets looking for people smoking in cars ? it's going to happen period I agree you should not smoke in the car with kids in there and you should not drive drunk and you should not drive while talking on a cell phone you should never take a phone to the bathroom with you but no matter what people are going to due it just because you say they can't point is you can't enforce the laws you have with what you got so now you want to add some more laws that won't get enforced ? so Whats the point ? lets all stand on the deck of a sinking ship and add more water that will help the problem wasting money makeing penny annie laws. when there are real problems to address "
taco wrote on Jan 6, 2009 7:01 AM:
" Comments from above:
1. So now you won't be able to smoke in your own car? - Apparently driving is a right, not a privilege.
2. "To those who wish to ban all tobacco products, I would like to remind them that Native Americans use tobacco in their religious ceremonies." - Apparently, they invented smoking in cars before the horrible white man invented Henry Ford. This has to be the most compelling argument for allowing parents to poison their children in close quarters. "
1. So now you won't be able to smoke in your own car? - Apparently driving is a right, not a privilege.
2. "To those who wish to ban all tobacco products, I would like to remind them that Native Americans use tobacco in their religious ceremonies." - Apparently, they invented smoking in cars before the horrible white man invented Henry Ford. This has to be the most compelling argument for allowing parents to poison their children in close quarters. "
taco wrote on Jan 6, 2009 7:05 AM:
" Another brilliant argument: Smoking in a car with kids is abuse and selfish? Well, how attentive are you when you're gabbing on your cell phone with kids in the car?
Don't you love how those who can't defend their inconsiderate or inappropriate actions try to change the subject? "
Don't you love how those who can't defend their inconsiderate or inappropriate actions try to change the subject? "
Joe Shmo wrote on Jan 6, 2009 8:19 AM:
" I don't like the noise from muscle cars. I think we should outlaw muscle cars and throw people in jail if they have one or work on one in their garage. I also don't like basketball. we should out law people watching basketball too. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 8:22 AM:
" All those who think it's a parent's right to smoke in the car with their children, do you also think it is the parent's right to beat their children? "
Joe Shmo wrote on Jan 6, 2009 8:28 AM:
" I don't condone beatings but a few spanking here and there don't hurt. Look at what we are raising these days. No respect. "
TheGenius wrote on Jan 6, 2009 8:42 AM:
" So, what would happen if you got pulled over while talking on a cell phone and smoking at the same time with kids in the back? Would they shoot the tires out and call SWAT? Would the arresting officers collective heads explode at such an occurance? I need to know these things. "
Aconserve wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:08 AM:
" castle rocker is it a parent's right to kill their unborn child... sure is.
Picture this... a parent pulls over to smoke a cigg on the side of the road or a parking lot, they leave the child in the car while they're outside smoking, is this neglect, probably will be soon. I don't think people should smoke in their car with children in it but making it law is a waste of time. "
Picture this... a parent pulls over to smoke a cigg on the side of the road or a parking lot, they leave the child in the car while they're outside smoking, is this neglect, probably will be soon. I don't think people should smoke in their car with children in it but making it law is a waste of time. "
biasmedia wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:35 AM:
" hmm so its ok to take my rights away guess the first amendment and free speech is only for people that you deem fit? so let me see if i got this right, i can hit my kid, i can force them to do yard work in the rain, i can feed them nothing but rice 2 times a day, i can swear at them, i can lock them in there rooms for most of the day,i can blame there for all of my life problems to there face this is all ok but if i smoke in my car with a window down this is wrong??? stats a bought second hand smoke is misleading they dont account for the rise in industrial pollination (wich is why a city this small has such a big cancer treatment facility)or take acount that the food qulity has been going down for the last 50 years these would take account in the rise of cases and if you get cancer 5 years after smoking and a type that is no way smoking related they will still put it as a stat for smoking related i know this for a fact i im a cancer survivor) do real studys that account for everything "
Kalama rose wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:00 AM:
" I love how all the conspiracy theorists come crawling out of the woodwork whenever limiting where smoking is allowed is mentioned. I have never smoked but was one of the kids raised in a smoke filled environment and hated it. Now that we know the dangers of second hand smoke it only makes sense to protect those too young to speak up. Some of the posters here say it will be impossible to enforce so why bother? What laws like this do is draw public attention to activities that can be harmful. And by the way, there is a difference between punishing and diciplining a child. "
bert wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:07 AM:
" Re-read&think: If all gun owners were responsible then it would have nothing to do with this discussion(parenting through legislation). You obviously did not visit http://www.kidsandguns.org/study/fact_file.asp. "The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. Children aged less than 15 years was nearly 12 times higher than among children in 25 other industrialized countries combined." These children that are killed by their families firearms are not a possible health danger. They are absolutely DEAD!! If all parents who have children at home were responsible gun ownership it would not be an issue. But as you pointed out in your second post,"There are a lot of adults out there who are lacking good judgement."
And if you think this argument will not be used when they come for your guns, think again. Maybe Obama was right. "When small town people get scared they cling to their guns and religion." "
And if you think this argument will not be used when they come for your guns, think again. Maybe Obama was right. "When small town people get scared they cling to their guns and religion." "
Kalama rose wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:17 AM:
" Biasmedia, your argument makes no sense. What you are talking about is abuse of a child. Smoking is not a "right" protected by the constitution. I'm sorry you had cancer, but to use "stats" as an excuse to pollute the air with second hand cigarette smoke is just denial. By the way, do you continue to smoke? "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:24 AM:
" Wow!!! You people are way to worried about your "rights." Is any new law taking away your "rights." When murder first became agianst the law was that infringing on people's "rights" to kill another person. How about theft, does that take away you "right" to take what is not yours. I agree, the fewer laws the better, but this is one that needs to be a law. It shouldn't have to be, because a parent should care enough about their child that they don't smoke anywhere near them. But stupid people require stupid laws. "
Fencepost wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:27 AM:
" The people who would subject their children to second hand smoke won't be stopped from harming their children by this legislation. It's nothing more than a feelgood measure. How many other ways are those people carelessly harming their children? "
Amazed By Ignorance wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:31 AM:
" I am sick and tired of having my liberties restricted, and trampled upon. To those citing that 65% of the people don't smoke, and the laws prohibiting smoking are just? I don't see it that way. I see it as a tyranny by majority. Of course it's not a fair vote. As for raising my kids? I'll raise them as I see fit, and remain outside the lemming train of thought laid down by the government, and the "moral majority". Stay out of my personal life, and my right as an adult to make personal choices...and I'll gladly return the favor. God only knows how any over the age of 35 survived to complain, bicker and whine on these blogs without the all mighty government providing the guidelines. Let the attacks...begin. "
Simple Man wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:54 AM:
" I think we can all agree America has taken a turn for the worse. Could this be because of the govt taking over the rights that we've always had? Maybe some of these anti-smoking groups should get a life or a hobby that doesn't include infringing on others privileges that so many Americans have fought and died for. "
bert wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:55 AM:
" Castle rocker: you are right,"But stupid people require stupid laws." So the parent that is too stupid to understand that a fast food diet for a child is putting their child's health in risk. Obesity in America is at epidemic levels. In the northwest the rate of obesity has risen from 10.2% in 1991 to 19.1%. (http://www.obesityinamerica.org/) Almost doubled in a ten year period. So there needs to be some legislation to prevent parents from murdering their children by fast food. Any parent too stupid to realize that Television watching has a harmful affect on their children,"Violence and addiction are not the only TV-related health problems. A National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey released in October 1995 found 4.7 million children between the ages of 6-17 (11% of this age group) to be severely overweight, more than twice the rate during the 1960's. The main culprits: inactivity (these same children average more than 22 hours of television-viewing a week) and a high-calorie diet. A 1991 study showed that there were an average of 200 junk food ads in four hours of children's Saturday morning cartoons."(http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html) ,should have their access to television legislatively controlled. There are so many things that our children need to be protected from that their parents subject them to on a daily basis. We need to protect these children through more and stronger laws. "
1arealocal wrote on Jan 6, 2009 11:28 AM:
" WE dont need more laws than we already have. There are plenty of RCW's that can handle this issue. Keep big government out of my car or home for that matter. Our privacies are protected by the 4th Amendment and it is being stripped away. Common sense should be the rule here not more expensive government legislation. As I posted before, let the smokers smoke themselves to death, the taxes they pay support a bunch of these leftist liberal policies that "protect" us from ourselves. "
swan wrote on Jan 6, 2009 11:42 AM:
" I would prefer they dealt with this problem by instating parental licenses. "
swan wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:00 PM:
" Ban smoke from childrens' lungs, ban McDonalds from their bellies, ban adults from their correspondence, ban television from their minds, ban the sun from their skin, ban dirty hands from their mouths, give them baths in 2" of water; where does it stop? Ban merry-go-rounds from their merriment, cover their mattresses in plastic, lock the guns, hide the alcohol, tighten the aspirin lid, outlaw bean bags, don't buy toys from China, don't ride in the front seat, talk to them about drugs, learn them some Jesus...on second thought, it would probably be easier if there were no kids. "
bert wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:02 PM:
" Swan: Not a bad concept. What happens when a person's parental license is revoked? Do we do a post birth abortion? "
Joe Shmo wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:34 PM:
" Cheney119 smack me when I get done saying I finally DO agree with you on this one. "
Fencepost wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:41 PM:
" 1arealocal, what we think of as our property and our cars aren't really ours. If you don't pay Big Government the property taxes they demand, Big Government will kick you off of ITS property and sell the right to use it to someone else. Likewise, if you fail to pay Big Government license & registration fees, weight surcharges, fees for emissions testing, etc. or you use "your" car in ways not approved by Big Government, you WILL lose the privilege to use "your" car as intended, and if you violate Big Government's laws, it will be IMPOUNDED by Big Government. The concept of private property ownership in the United States is a fallacy. The only difference between taxation and extortion is that taxation is conducted by Big Government. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:53 PM:
" The label on the side of a pack of cigarrettes says they are going to give you cancer. You can all tell me about the Grandma, Aunt, Cousin, etc... that has been smoking for 97 years now and still going strong, but for every one of those lifetime smokers still living, there are 100 who didn't make it. Like I said the label on the side of a pack of cigarrettes says they are going to give you cancer, and if you decide to do it in a car with your children anyway, you are unfit to be a parent. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:55 PM:
" Where does the constitution provide the right to smoke? "
beehivemommy wrote on Jan 6, 2009 1:35 PM:
" The inalienable rights of a U.S. citizen do not include the right to do harm to others. There are too many people who are so self-centered they do not consider the permanent damage they do to others, their own children included. All kids need and deserve protection from danger. Sad, but true, that we should have to regulate this. Fine if you want to smoke and kill yourself, but you should not be allowed to do it anywhere someone else cannot escape it. "
bert wrote on Jan 6, 2009 1:43 PM:
" Castle rocker:Where does the constitution require or give the authority to the governing body to invade every aspect of our lives to protect all people from their own stupidity? "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 1:51 PM:
" You said it beehivemommy. I don't know where these people think their "right to smoke" comes from or why they think this law is taking it away. This law keeps their right to smoke intact, as well as their childrens right to a life free of lung cancer and heart disease caued by second hand smoke. Arguing against this law is like arguing against drunk driving laws. Sure you have the right to drink and/or get plastered, you just can't drive afterwards. that law protects those who may me harmed by your driving while intoxicated. Sure you have the right to smoke just not in a car with your kids. That law protects those children who may be harmed by that smoke. "
billjr64 wrote on Jan 6, 2009 2:23 PM:
" I don`t smoke, never have. My parents did though, I would never think of telling them what to do. Anyway on with my ramble, right handed people are clearly in the majority in this state. Why don`t we pass laws saying that left handers can`t drive, possess firearms, fish/hunt, have children, etc. Makes about as much sense. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 2:36 PM:
" bert: the law doesn't protect smoker's from their stupidity. Only a law making cigarrettes and smoking illegal would do that. The law, along with the ban on smoking in public places, protects others from smoker's stupidity. Much like Drunk Driving laws. They are not in place to protect drunk people from themselves, they are in place to protect other people on the road. That is the flaw in you arguments against these laws. They are not taking away your rights, they are restoring my rights. My right to breathe fresh air in this case. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 6, 2009 2:42 PM:
" billjr64-The law protects others from harm caused by smoke. The ridiculous examples you give do not protect anyone from anything, they simply discriminate against lefties for being lefties. Second hand smoke is harmful, therefore smokers should not be allowed to smoke in public places or in their cars when shildren are present. "
bert wrote on Jan 6, 2009 2:58 PM:
" Castle rocker: as you asked in an earlier post." Where does the constitution provide the right to smoke? " Where does the constitution provide the right the breathe fresh air? So every time the government gives a permit to a manufacturing complex to spew pollution into the air, but just a little bit, they are violating your constitutional right to breathe fresh air? And this pollution permeates everywhere. Your car. Your house. Your parks. Every time you inhale you ingest these pollutants. No matter where you are or what you are doing. No matter if you are a man, woman or child. And it is done with the permission of the government. "
local taxpayer wrote on Jan 6, 2009 3:44 PM:
" When are we going to stop creating laws to save the lives of the stupid. I mean if they want to smoke and kill themselves then let them,and as for the kids well if the parents are that stupid then the kids dont have a chance anyway. The world is way to populated already and we are trying to save the stupid ones. "
billjr64 wrote on Jan 6, 2009 4:42 PM:
" castle rocker- just trying to show that the majority can and does implement any law they see fit against the minority, which I don`t agree with. While my ramble does seem foolish, I can spew out non facts to make it seem reasonable. Did you know that 72% of the 911 terrorist were left handed? You don`t support terrorism do you? "
msfans wrote on Jan 6, 2009 5:01 PM:
" To all these people against this issue I ask this question: If you are for protecting "OUR" children from irresponsible parents from the bad effects of second hand smoke that might or might not kill them 50 years down the road why would you proudly hand them a 3000 lb piece of steel that goes over a 100 miles an hour that plays loud music and hand them a cell phone to talk on? Come on people get off your soap boxes and look in the mirror. You are putting your children in just as much danger as a smoking parent and if you don't believe so than you are the ones who are being irresponsible. You cannot legislate everything and if you try then why do we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Just finish shredding them and Rename our country U.S.S.R. or China. "
wowwow wrote on Jan 6, 2009 5:30 PM:
" I support the ban because it has already been proven that second and third hand smoke causes cancer and what horrible person would deliberately do that to innocent children who can't get out of the way or other people who just want to be their friend in the same car.???????? "
tired wrote on Jan 6, 2009 5:36 PM:
" I thnk that what you do on your own property is your business,and that includes your car.I am not a smoker and never have been,I grew up with a dad that smoked in the car,truck and house and I have no health issues and neither do my 5 siblings.So before you let our government start telling you what to do every waking moment of the day,think about this what would you do if they told you that having sex was illegal?Can't do it in your home,car,RV or in a motel or anything?Would that be fair?Would it be right? "
AmericanGirl wrote on Jan 6, 2009 5:59 PM:
" What will they come up with when we have no more smoking? LOOK OUT!! "
US CITIZEN wrote on Jan 6, 2009 7:10 PM:
" why dont we add to this law no more yelling at the kids while driving,talking,eating ,drinking,listening to music.you liberals would give up all your rights. "
98626 wrote on Jan 6, 2009 11:08 PM:
" When is enough laws enough? the constitution was based on commen sense. Where has the commen sense gone? I agree the government needs to stay out of personal business. Freedom? Persuit of happiness? What is happening to this Country/State? We need to unite when enough is enough! Our forefathers would be confused. Think about it...the bars were intended for drinking, smoking and cursing...to keep it out of the home...so people had a place to go to do those things. Now the government has taken that place from us. There were pleanty of bars that were non smoking for the non smokers. Now there are zero smoking bars for the smokers. Where is the common sense? What happened to freedom of choice? "
Ms. Z wrote on Jan 7, 2009 12:09 AM:
" I cannot believe I just read so many comments that basically say "It is my car and I can smoke in it if I want to and these are my kids and I can kill them if I want to and no damn government is going to tell me I can't!" "
AmericanGirl wrote on Jan 7, 2009 7:36 AM:
" I can't believe how many people that are acting like smokers are just horrible but if they were meth heads or alkies they would be saying we need more programs for the poor people. "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 7, 2009 8:08 AM:
" Anyone think it shold be legal to drink and drive with your children in the car? Common sense. The law is for people that don't have any. "
disappointedinthistown wrote on Jan 7, 2009 8:29 AM:
" Totally, ms z- at the same time, I'm picturing someone stomping their foot and clenching their fists while making a scrunched up mad face... like a child throwing a fit when you take away their gameboy... "
castle rocker wrote on Jan 7, 2009 9:08 AM:
" Enough is enough smokers. Stop saying the government is taking away your right. They are not, you can still smoke whenever you want and as many packs a day as you want. Just can't fo it in the presents of those of us who don't want to inhale your cancer. That includes your kids eventhough they might not know it yet, but they will when they're 18 with lung cancer and heart disease. "
bert wrote on Jan 7, 2009 10:11 AM:
" This law will be enforced as vigorously as no smoking within 25 feet of a door, window or air intake. Next time there is someone smoking outside the door within 25 feet of a business entrance call 911 and see what reaction you get. Or the use of a cell phone while driving. How about Washington's law; Full text of the LawRCW 70.54.050:Exposing contagious disease -- Penalty.Every person who shall wilfully expose himself to another, or any animal affected with any contagious or infectious disease, in any public place or thoroughfare, except upon his or its necessary removal in a manner not dangerous to the public health; and every person so affected who shall expose any other person thereto without his knowledge, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. ; so don't go into public with your cold/flu or face the potential of being cited. Passing laws with good intentions are only as good as their enforcement. "
Ms. Z wrote on Jan 7, 2009 10:47 AM:
" bert, if there is smoking within 25 feet of a door of a business and you call the health dept they will issue a warning to said business and fine them if it is a continuing problem. "
bert wrote on Jan 7, 2009 12:25 PM:
" Ms. Z: So as a small business owner, which I am, you are saying that I must first, define a line of demarcation to differentiate between 24 feet 11 inches and 25 feet 1 inches, second I must post an employee where they can view this no smoking area to insure no one steps beyond the 25 foot area with a lighted tobacco product. Since there are other business entrances on either side of my entrance, if this is not enforced who would get the fine from the health department? Since there is parking immediately in front of my business, if some one pulls into a parking space, less then 25 feet from my entrance, and are smoking in their vehicle, am I liable for a fine? Also there is no time constraint on this provision so does this mean that I must have an employee on duty 24 hours a day to insure there is no smoking within 25 feet of my entrance at any time? Does anyone know of any business who has received a fine from the Health Department for some one smoking Within 25 feet of an entrance, window or air intake? "
bert wrote on Jan 7, 2009 1:41 PM:
" Ms. Z: And exactly how does reporting violation of the no smoking legislation and causing the business owner an extra expense hold the individual responsible for their actions? "OH NO!!! Please don't report me. If you do it will cost the business owner." "
An observer wrote on Jan 7, 2009 3:45 PM:
" Why not make the state "ward" of the kids. They then will have to house, feed and nuture ever child. No need for this law.. At birth just hand over the kid. "
sweety375 wrote on Jan 7, 2009 3:55 PM:
" I agree with this law! You should not be able to smoke with your children in the car. That is your choice to smoke not theirs. They are too young to make taht decision. Kill yourselfs but not your kids. To those that think this law should not be passed and have kids, you need to take a good look at yourselves. "
bengalkat wrote on Jan 7, 2009 7:50 PM:
" Of course you can still smoke in your car. Just don't do it when you have your kids in there with you. How hard is that? Kids should have rights too, and one of those rights should be the right to NOT have to breathe in second hand smoke. In this day and age we know very well how bad second hand smoke is. Why CHOOSE to subject your child to potential life long health problems? "
ragned wrote on Jan 7, 2009 8:47 PM:
" im a smoker, and i have children i will not smoke anywhere near them nor come back into the house wearing the shirt or jacket ect i had when i was smoking.. i also wash my hands afterwards it really rages me to see people driving down the road with their infant child in the car with a smoke hanging out the window.. why dont you just flick the ashes on them too since they're blowing back onto them i grew up in a smoke filled home will never do that again its my chose to smoke which may be bad but im not going to expose it to others "
teacher wrote on Jan 7, 2009 9:07 PM:
" This is encouraging legislation. The children in our community deserve no less. It's too bad we can't do something about stopping pregnant women from smoking. "
mill creek resident wrote on Jan 8, 2009 2:00 AM:
" common sense should not require a law.
I smoke.
I have a 5 year old daugher.
I don't smoke inside and certainly not in the car with her. With that said, I will fight this legislation tooth and nail, sweat and blood... they go to far and never know when to quit... and for all you "what about the children?" whiners: when the USA fails to be free, I blame you. "
I smoke.
I have a 5 year old daugher.
I don't smoke inside and certainly not in the car with her. With that said, I will fight this legislation tooth and nail, sweat and blood... they go to far and never know when to quit... and for all you "what about the children?" whiners: when the USA fails to be free, I blame you. "
nickandholly wrote on Jan 8, 2009 8:15 AM:
" My parents smoke around me when I was little and I turned out just fine. I am guessing that over 50% of these people are former smokers. And of course when they smoked they didn't smoke in their houses or around their children. Oh no cause they were perfect parents right. I agree with not smoking in a house with anyone who doesn't smoke. But in a car where there is fresh air running thru. NO I don't smoke but all these laws trying to make it harder for smokers to smoke. Why don't they just quit making them and the world be a happier place don't ya think. "
mustang wrote on Jan 8, 2009 9:07 AM:
" Give the name of one person that the cause of death was second hand smoke "
mustang wrote on Jan 8, 2009 9:43 AM:
" I feel it is unsafe for children to be in a car, because of of all the accidents that happen. So in the tradition of protecting our cildren we need to ban any one under 18 years of from being in a car. Second lets pass a law that requires a license to have children, that way the goverment picks only suitable persons to have children. Now that solves the problem. "
bert wrote on Jan 8, 2009 10:07 AM:
" Poor parenting begins before the moment of conception. How many children are really planned? Through the pregnancy. Smoking and drinking during the pregnancy. To the birth process. Planned C-section for the convenience of the mother and doctor(studies have shown that even a 2 or 3 week early delivery through C-sections causes health problems for the infant). Through infancy. Feeding formula instead of Mother's milk. Throughout childhood. Too much prepared and fast food. How many times have you been in a fast food restaurant and seen a parent giving a toddler a french fry? Using the television as a baby sitter or substitute parent. Smoking in the vicinity of the off spring. Having guns in the home. The list of poor parenting in infinite. The one true way to protect all children from all definable dangers is to set up government camps where parents are required to live upon realization of inception of a child. There they would be supervised to assure that they don't drink, don't smoke, do not argue in front of the children, don't holler too loudly at the children, don't spank, don't feed junk food to, don't allow too much or inappropriate television, don't have affairs, don't get divorced, etc..
Only this way will our children survive and be healthy. "
Only this way will our children survive and be healthy. "
JUST ME!! wrote on Jan 8, 2009 10:37 AM:
" I have to ask?? Our govement allows the sale of smokes, reaps the benifits from the taxes and now they want to fine people they supply thier addictions?
HMMM?? and now thier worried about the kids..yep... "
HMMM?? and now thier worried about the kids..yep... "
bert wrote on Jan 8, 2009 10:53 AM:
" JUST ME!!: Don't forget the subsidies we give tobacco farmers to encourage them to produce tobacco. "
True American wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:02 PM:
" Smoking bans have gone too far in the first place. It should be the business owners right to choose whether or not to allow smoking. If you don't like the smoking, don't go there, don't work there, and if your really so against it in the first place, why would you give your money to a business that has practices you don't agree with? I think if I were ever to get a fine for smoking for any reason or circumstance besides inside schools and government buildings, I honestly wouldn't pay it in protest. They can throw me in jail and waste more space. Then they could come ask us TAXPAYERS for a new jail that you will vote down because the newly built one is too full because of us darn tabacoo users. This petition as good as it sounds will not save lives. None of these bans will. 53,000 or so people died every year from second-hand smoke supposedly before the bans and what is still amazing is that even with the bans in place there are still 53,000 or so people that die every year. TDN Bad Boy, I thought you were a conservative, but your comments are very liberal on this subject. Have you ever heard of free agency? "
klb65 wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:37 PM:
" My parents smoked in the car, the house and everywhere because that is what post WWII people did..they weren't educated to the issues that smoking would cost their children. Today, no one has an excuse to smoke around their children, no matter where it is. Smoking kills people and causes asthma, and ear infections for children which is just the tip of the iceberg. I have hated smoking my entire life, have never tried it and wouldn't pick up a pack of cigarettes to toss them in the garbage..that is how much I hate them. It is the most vile and disgusting habit and it stole the life of my parents, my aunt, my mother in law and several friends so don't give me that crap about it being a right...cigarettes are death to many people and to continue to smoke isn't a right, it's just beyond stupid! What controls you, controls your life (and potentially the outcome and longevity)..kill yourself if you want but if it takes a law to make ignorant parents not smoke in the car with their captive children, then I'm all for it! "
halohound wrote on Jan 8, 2009 1:42 PM:
" Is The No Longer America? You know, Land of the FREE Home of the BRAVE! I don't care who says what, their smoking bans are in violation of our constitutional rights! FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS! We have many rights that they are attempting to take away. This surely doesn't feel like America, Land of the FREE anymore and I am seriously considering selling out and moving to anther country - perhaps that's the best choice. MAKE A NEW COUNTRY FOR ALL OF US SMOKERS AND STOP TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHTS! If you don't like that I am smoking then move away from me. Most smokers are very respectful when it comes to smoking around others - I will smoke when I want - where I want! First time I ever get a ticket for smoking guess what! I'm going to go visit the governor of the state who is probably sitting there puffing away on a cigar that we paid for! GET WITH REALITY PEOPLE AND STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS! "
mill creek resident wrote on Jan 8, 2009 2:00 PM:
" It all boils down and it's not about health. It's about how much control the government has that was never meant to have and how many self righteous bacteria encourage this continued slippery slope.
Ousting smoking at every possible step, then alcohol, then unhealthy food, maybe dangerous sports are next, maybe sitting in front of a computer posting comments on TDN (because we all know the risks of carpal tunnel and eyesight problems associated with computer use).
Farewell freedom and the American way. "
Ousting smoking at every possible step, then alcohol, then unhealthy food, maybe dangerous sports are next, maybe sitting in front of a computer posting comments on TDN (because we all know the risks of carpal tunnel and eyesight problems associated with computer use).
Farewell freedom and the American way. "
JustMyOpinion wrote on Jan 9, 2009 9:02 AM:
" I hope soon that expecting mothers wont be allowed to smoke either. "
mom of four wrote on Jan 9, 2009 11:16 AM:
" It shouldn't need to be a law. However, it should be a law that every person in America needs to get an education....that being said here is a news clip for all you smokers that like to give yourself, your loved ones and strangers cancer. http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=11466175&ch=4226723&src=news
If you are getting all rilled up over a "stupid law" then you must be a "stupid" person that needs it. "
If you are getting all rilled up over a "stupid law" then you must be a "stupid" person that needs it. "
bert wrote on Jan 9, 2009 12:23 PM:
" Mom of four: You are correct. Everyone should get an education. So that you can have an informed decision. The dangers of second hand smoke is based strictly on antidotal evidence. You have cancer and lived in a house with smokers therefore your cancer must be from second hand smoke. It has nothing to do with the fact that you lived a life style with no exercise, ate only high fat high sodium , low nutritional value prepared foods, laid out in the Sun to the point of severe sunburn and drank alcohol to excess daily. It is the same type of evidence that says because both of my parents were alcoholics and my father was a violent wife beater I must also be an and wife beater. And yes my parents were both alcoholics and my father was a very violent wife beater but I neither drink nor beat my spouse. "
bert wrote on Jan 9, 2009 12:35 PM:
" In order for scientific theory it must be able for it to be able to be demonstrated and repeatable. Just like the scientist that proved frogs ears are in their legs. He stood behind a frog and yelled jump. The frog jumped 20 feet. The scientist then amputated the frog's two front legs. He again stood behind the frog and yelled jump. The frog jumped 10 feet. The scientist then amputated the frog's hind legs. Again the scientist stood behind the frog and yelled jump. The frog did not move. Therefore scientifically proving that frog's ears are in it's legs since it must be deaf after amputating it's legs. Same type of science proves second hand smoke is dangerous. "
kelso-teen wrote on Jan 9, 2009 12:44 PM:
" i support this ban 100%!!!!
if the parents want to give themselves lung cancer, fine. that's something they'll have to live with.
but don't hurt your kids!!!!
65 million teenagers have been affected by second hand smoking and approx. 1 million people have died each year from second hand smoking.
America IS a free country, but what if someone else doesn't want to be around your cancer?! Don't we have the freedom to say we don't want to get sick from smoking? "
if the parents want to give themselves lung cancer, fine. that's something they'll have to live with.
but don't hurt your kids!!!!
65 million teenagers have been affected by second hand smoking and approx. 1 million people have died each year from second hand smoking.
America IS a free country, but what if someone else doesn't want to be around your cancer?! Don't we have the freedom to say we don't want to get sick from smoking? "
Simple Man wrote on Jan 9, 2009 1:45 PM:
" 65 million teenagers huh. That's weird I was in a 3A high school and am stationed with many young adults and teens and Ive never met a single one that has lung cancer from 2nd hand smoke. I have however seen way too many obese toddlers, kids, teens,and adults. Leading cause of death was heart disease last I knew, I also thought (correct me if I'm wrong) high amounts of fats, cholesterol, and trans fats were very bad for the heart. The only reason smoking is being pushed is because so many people are ignorant enough to believe anything they hear about smoking because they've been brain washed. "
DW wrote on Jan 9, 2009 3:00 PM:
" Kelso teen is just regurgitating what he/she is being taught in schrool. Forget the 3 'R's, we must educate our young skulls full of mush of the insainity of smoking. One thing is for sure, non-smokers outnumber smokers, so this is what we must do as a society to save humanity. Smokers must build special rooms in their homes only for smoking. The rooms will have a high tech ventilation system so that no second hand smoke is vented into the environment. Smokers cannot smoke outside anymore because we know that second hand smoke hurts mother earf. It causes global warming, and 3,247 polar bears die from second hand smoke every year. Smokers will also have to wear clothing that identifies them as a smoker so that we can spit on them in airports. The cost of this legislation will fall on tax payers since we need to protect ourselves from the evil smoker. So I propose that we vote for these measures through the initiative process. And if necessary, we will make it a capital crime to smoke. Smokers should be put to death if they break these laws. Also, it will be allowed to kill smokers in self defense if they are seen lighting up outdoors, since we know they are so evil and trying to kill non-smokers every chance they get. "
turkeyhunterman wrote on Jan 9, 2009 4:09 PM:
" http://www.co.chippewa.wi.us/ccdph/CVTFC/secondhand.htm Be informed and make good choices. "
bert wrote on Jan 9, 2009 7:45 PM:
" Turkeyhunterman: This quasi scientific report sure has it's share of "seems" and "mays". As I stated in an earlier post, these results are based on antidotal evidence. "
turkeyhunterman wrote on Jan 9, 2009 9:38 PM:
" http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422-- Bert, the last website used the word "seems" and "may" one time each. Cigarette smoke contains known carcinogens. Not could be or maybe but known carcinogens. Those facts are indisputable. Like I said before be informed and make good choices! "
bert wrote on Jan 10, 2009 9:09 AM:
" Turkeyhunterman: According to the World Health Organization working rotating shifts, as many in our community do, is a carcinogen. Artificial sweeteners have been proven to be a carcinogen. Many of the pesticides used to protect our foods are a carcinogen. If you start with an expected result you can work backward and prove your theory. A good part of our scientific studies are pure BS. Designed to produce the desired evidence. Don't even get me started on statistics. Did you know that 73.4% of all statistics are made up? "
turkeyhunterman wrote on Jan 10, 2009 11:47 AM:
" Working backwards is how to find and fix a problem. It's called root cause analysis. Carcinogen is defined as a substance or agent that tends to cause cancer. Shift work in and of itself is neither a substance or agent but how the body reacts to working night shift and how the bodys production of meletonin is effected does increase the possiblity of cancer. Read the whole study. Not just the first few lines. "
kitten wrote on Jan 10, 2009 12:49 PM:
" Scenario: An obese mother and father are standing in their kitchen cutting a triple cheese pizza for their three obese children to eat for dinner that night. Suddenly, the SWAT team crashes through the door and handcuffs them and takes them to jail for harming their children. How far are we from this scenario if we continue to let the government "protect" us and our families from our own choices? I hate smoking and wish smoking parents had an ounce of sense. They don't. Neither do the parents who stuff potato chips into their obese child that is already at risk for diabetes. We can't save them all. It is called natural selection. "
Longview_Mom wrote on Jan 10, 2009 1:08 PM:
" You have got to be kidding me! They might as well ban smoking all together if they are going to pass this law and take away free will while they are at it. I am a parent and a smoker and I choose not to smoke around my child (house or car) but seriously now that is ridiculous it is bad enough you can't smoke in a bar or pretty much anywhere else these days. "
bert wrote on Jan 10, 2009 1:24 PM:
" Turkeyhunterman: The same thing that primitive tribes used. Sacrifice a virgin to the Gods and you got a good crop. Root cause analysis, don't give the crop God and get a bad crop. And are you disputing that shift work causes cancer? "
bert wrote on Jan 10, 2009 1:29 PM:
" Longview_Mom: You can't be serious. They already have taken away free will. Can't drive without a seat belt. Can't ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Can't ride a scooter, skateboard or bicycle without a helmet. Have to vaccinate your child with questionable vaccines. The list goes on and on. "
Longview_Mom wrote on Jan 10, 2009 1:38 PM:
" Seriously a lot of you make me sick. Maybe they should have run more tests on cigarettes before releasing them for purchase to the public. My parents quit smoking before I was old enough to even remember them smoking, but my grandparents owned a bar that I stayed at with them regularly when I was a child that was secondhand smoke filled 24/7 there house was part of the bar so there was no getting away from it. I started smoking when I was 13 and am now 24 and still smoke my spouse smokes and although we make the conscious choice not to smoke around our child, does it make us bad parents because we smoke? I don't think so. I don't have lung cancer and have lived around and/or smoked my entire life some people just have bad luck and I believe that everything happens for a reason I believe in God and if someone dies or gets sick for whatever reason it was just there time and wasn't the cause of anyone or anything unless of course it was murder or suicide. We can't all die the same way and from the same thing and if we all did wouldn't that be odd. "
DW wrote on Jan 10, 2009 1:55 PM:
" I still think the anti-smoking nazi's had better be careful what they wish for. And to be honest, I think that parents that feed their kids cheese burgers, fries and a pop are doing far more damage health wise than a parent that smokes in a car. You anti-smoking nazi's will believe almost any statistic that sounds horrific when it comes to smoking. So here's another statistic for you. Did you know that 3,247 polar bears die each year because of the global warming caused by second hand smoke!! That is no different than kelso-teen saying that 1 million people die a year from just second hand smoke, not to mention the amount that must die from actual smoking. Remember like I said before, smokers save tax payer tons of money because they don't live long enough to get such benefits as social security, and Medi-care/Medi-caid. Most smokers don't die of cancer either. They die from secondary infections such as phnumonia, bronchitis, or other types of respitory diseases. So you smokers out there don't have to take this crap....it is a personal choice. Not so different than if I decided to take up skydiving. Except if I decided to take up skydiving as a profession, it is very hard to get life insurance. So why is it that smokers can still get life insurance? Don't tell me that insurance companies aren't crunching numbers in their favor. "
DW wrote on Jan 10, 2009 2:12 PM:
" Also, TDN BadBoy, I didn't get a chance to respond to something you posted earlier. I gave you a scenerio where the people/Government would outlaw your business because they don't like your product or services. You came back with "when has this ever happened?" Can you say, Crown Zellerback (sp), and pretty much the forest products industry in the pacific northwest. When the loonie lefty, red diaper doper baby, granola crunching, evironmental whack jobs started with the idea of "saving the forests", it was profitable and lawful to log on state lands. Now you can't even look at state land with out buying a use permit, much less log on it. Thus the industry dried up, along with thousands of job and the tax revenue that states, and counties depended on for their coffers. So for you to say it can't happen, it has already happened, and your business or product that you need or want can be as much of a target as forest products or tobacco. Be careful what you wish for BadBoy, you might just get it!! "
DW wrote on Jan 10, 2009 3:49 PM:
" Hey bert, I don't wear a seat belt when I drive, I talk on a cell phone when I drive, I don't wear a helmet when I ride bikes off road, I drive 5 miles over the speed limit almost 100% of the time and even did so in the snow. I ran a red light this morning while talking on a cell phone and dipping a chew, and I carry a loaded hand gun on my hip almost 100% of the time, except when I am at work. I don't believe man causes global warming, and I grew up with chain smoking parents that smoked in the car, in the house with me and my brother completely enveloped in the fumes. I don't have any side effects from it and I am almost 50 years old. Am I your hero or what?? "
Bert wrote on Jan 10, 2009 5:12 PM:
" DW: You rock. The only thing that you have wrong is that smoking is a personal choice. It started out as a personal choice that became an addiction. No different then an alcoholicism is an addiction but taking that first drink was a personal choice. "
cherokee wrote on Jan 10, 2009 10:43 PM:
" Hey Bert. Did you know when the American government under President Andrew Jackson removed the Native Americans from the southeast to the Oklahoma territories several hundred innocent children died as a result? After this smoking ban goes through, I propose branding Andrew Jackson a murderer of children. "
1arealocal wrote on Jan 11, 2009 12:54 AM:
" Wake up. This bill and others like it are not about smoking, fat content, and other "vices". This is about Big Government continuing to step over it's boundaries by telling us how to live our lives. How much is this bill going to cost taxpayers? Leave it to the left wing drones to support this type of legislation. Welcome to Amerika. "
Sprintboatfan wrote on Jan 11, 2009 7:55 AM:
" I support this ban 100%. I too was raised in a home where both parents chain smoked. They did the same in the car. I and my other siblings had no say in the matter. I am now very sensitive to cigarette, one breath and I am sick to my stomach and can't get the taste out of my mouth.
I am a repair tech, and when I walk into and out of businesses, I have to leave the sidewalk, and walk around folks smoking on the sidewalks, right outside the business, so they don't have to be in the rain, or like the covered area where you walk into the welfare office..always reeks of smoke.
I for one am sick of it. One of my best friends is a lifelong smoker, and is over 60, and doesn't care if He dies from it. When we travel anywhere by car, or get a Hotel, it is always a major issue, as He cannot go more than 20 min. without feeding His addiction.
How many smokers just litter the ground with their butts...Look out behind the Castle Rock Eagles parking lot, literally covered with Butts.
Smokers I know are very inconsiderate of others, and seem "Put Out" if you ask them to move.
Go ahead with the ban, even expand it. "
I am a repair tech, and when I walk into and out of businesses, I have to leave the sidewalk, and walk around folks smoking on the sidewalks, right outside the business, so they don't have to be in the rain, or like the covered area where you walk into the welfare office..always reeks of smoke.
I for one am sick of it. One of my best friends is a lifelong smoker, and is over 60, and doesn't care if He dies from it. When we travel anywhere by car, or get a Hotel, it is always a major issue, as He cannot go more than 20 min. without feeding His addiction.
How many smokers just litter the ground with their butts...Look out behind the Castle Rock Eagles parking lot, literally covered with Butts.
Smokers I know are very inconsiderate of others, and seem "Put Out" if you ask them to move.
Go ahead with the ban, even expand it. "
truthsquad wrote on Jan 11, 2009 9:22 AM:
" Are we so helpless and immature and ignorant that we need Big Nanny Government to lead us every step of the way? It sure doesn't take much for people to be willing to give up their freedoms! "
bert wrote on Jan 11, 2009 10:48 AM:
" Sprintboatfan: If the smoker is outside and not within the designated distance of the ban then you have NO right to ask them to move. 1arealocal: you are correct that Big Brother wants to control every aspect of your life. Read "Oregon regulations to prohibit 'topping off' " in Sunday's edition. Another regulation to make sure that you are a good little girl or boy. "
kitten wrote on Jan 11, 2009 12:41 PM:
" Where is the line? Where is the responsibility? How far are we willing to go to feel a false sense of security that everyone will be okay and all pain and suffering will magically diappear from the world? So many are so apathetic that it is mind-boggling. "
DW wrote on Jan 11, 2009 2:08 PM:
" So sprintboatfan, the smell of a Marlborro makes you gag, but the exhaust from a 1000 horse power, gas guzzling, 0-60 in 1.5 second, rooster tail throwing, no muffler, killing spotted owl and marbled merlet speed boat gives you a rush?? I think you need to visit Shick Shaddle, something in your bottle is messing with you. "
cheri1910 wrote on Jan 11, 2009 2:51 PM:
" We cannot legislate common sense. We've been trying to do exactly that for the past 30 yrs or more that I know of. All it does, is slowly take away our Rights, gets us to not think for ourselves. If we start legislation of something like this, we have to take into consideration that we now make these parents criminals. Are we willing to build more prisons, and pay for the prisoners food, shelter and health care? Are we willing to pay for the Foster homes that these children will have to live in? Are we willing to pay the social workers and counselors more tax payer money for these children? Our Social Services system is already stressed to the limit! The ramifications are too high a price to pay.
And don't get me started on the subject of the crap we feed our kids as a nation! THAT is child abuse too. "
And don't get me started on the subject of the crap we feed our kids as a nation! THAT is child abuse too. "
harligrl45 wrote on Jan 11, 2009 6:38 PM:
" Whatever happended to our civil rights, sounds like the US is becoming a dictatorship, next they will be telling us what we can and cannot do in our own homes. It's all a bunch of crap. I think they make up these stupid laws because they are bored and have nothing better to do. "
tia010 wrote on Jan 12, 2009 5:31 AM:
" Hi,
I think this is good next they need to ban smoking in houses with young children.
Tia,
Home Business "
I think this is good next they need to ban smoking in houses with young children.
Tia,
Home Business "
Sprintboatfan wrote on Jan 12, 2009 7:14 AM:
" DW,
Get your facts straight! All our sprintboats have mufflers, and put far less polution into the air than the average semi passing our track. Tell me how these boats "Kill" anything.
I just want to light a car tire on fire under the nose of every smoker who's cloud of smoke I breath..and then say..what? This is my right man!!
Too bad if you don't like the smell! "
Get your facts straight! All our sprintboats have mufflers, and put far less polution into the air than the average semi passing our track. Tell me how these boats "Kill" anything.
I just want to light a car tire on fire under the nose of every smoker who's cloud of smoke I breath..and then say..what? This is my right man!!
Too bad if you don't like the smell! "
klb65 wrote on Jan 12, 2009 8:53 AM:
" Fear is a great motivator. Smokers fear their loss of rights when it comes to smoking and the ones I know, are so controlled by cigarettes that they can barely get through a meal at a restaurant or a ride in the car before having to take a "smoke" break. It's pretty sad to watch someone so addicted unable to focus on a conversation because they are so anxious to get out for the next "fix". So, I agree it is your "right" to smoke but don't pull the bs line that government is taking away all of your "rights"..that is just another excuse! As for saving the government money because smokers die early, that is just another line of BS. Smokers cost insurance and medicare a ton of money because they have many more health issues that a non smoker..like pneumonia and emphesyma to name a couple of them and then of course there is the chemo and the radiation to prolong the life of a smoker who gets lung cancer. Sure eating and obesity are also huge issues and preventable but when you eat, the physical impact is on yourself and no one else..smoking impacts your family, friends and strangers who unfortunately cross a smoker's path. Smoking has been proven many times over to cause cancer and the right of the unborn and children is far more important that the "right's" of a smoker to smoke in the car. "
mole wrote on Jan 12, 2009 10:06 AM:
" I'm gonna start smoking!!!only when I top off!!! TO MANY RULES,these are uninforceable rules!!WORK ON THE ECONOMY!!SPRINTBOAT,WHY IS YOUR RIGHTS MORE IMPORTANT!!!they are smoking in designated ares ,WALK AROUND,or can your legs not work for all the sprinting you do!! "
1arealocal wrote on Jan 12, 2009 11:00 AM:
" RE: klb65...you post is pointless. Smokers pay, via taxes, for the health care and social programs you are all spouting off about. Approx. $5 per pack of cigarettes are taxes, if I am not mistaken "premium" brands are about $9 per pack (I haven't smoked since they were $4)...WE aren't talking about the RIGHT to SMOKE here, WE will do it anyway. WE are talking about government further overstepping it's constitutional bounds and infringing on your civil liberties. First no smoking in cars...then pull over for the random police checkpoint so you can get your papers checked. This is a slippery slope that some of you are silently allowing the gov't to walk. COMMON SENSE not LEGISLATION. "
jackiefaling wrote on Jan 12, 2009 3:18 PM:
" The government should not be "protecting" our families. People need to take care of their own families and stay out of others business, maybe then we would have better families. Everyone thinks that giving the government more control will solve things, but that is just the opposite. Parents shouldn't smoke around their children..but it isn't a government issue. People are out molesting children and we are making more and more stupid little laws...our laws we have now aren't even working. Soon we won't even be able to smoke in our own homes. This is pathetic. The liberals will ruin this country. "
bert wrote on Jan 12, 2009 4:13 PM:
" More government control means more safety for all of us. I was just watching the news and there is a national organization that is trying to ban all cell phone use while driving(including hands free). In all 50 states. The reasoning is that it is too distractive. Funny thing is that studies show that talking to a passenger in you vehicle is just as distractive. So next you will not be allowed to speak in your car while driving. Keep taking away the freedom and choices with things you disagree with and soon enough they will come for your freedom of choice also. "
livnez wrote on Jan 12, 2009 8:49 PM:
" I'M not a smoker,but ...c'mon is this the best that our elected people can do?? What are they smoking!! How about a cure for diabetes,or Brain injury research. How embarrassing !! Make them all take the WASL and see if that helps "
swan wrote on Jan 13, 2009 8:26 AM:
" To everybody that keeps falling back to the argument "this law just makes common sense", the other side is arguing for completely different reasons. We don't disagree that there would be plenty of benefits to not smoking in the car around kids. What is at stake is the greater issue of what's next. Greater resources will have to be expended towards this effort. If it passes, this will necessitate increasing the number of officers, infrastructure, and judicial costs. In addition it calls into question the enforceability by the government, which will increase initial legal costs, because it most certainly will be challenged if it passes. It's not that we don't disagree with the intent of the law, but the means by which it is carried out must be balanced against other priorities that the People have. Is this really our best bang for the buck? "
saturos wrote on Jan 13, 2009 12:45 PM:
" How hard is it to not damage your children? For Gods sake. What kind of people are you? Anybody who thinks that smoking in a car with children is ok should have a suit filed against them. Why damage your children with your addiction to that crap? "
DW wrote on Jan 14, 2009 8:16 AM:
" saturos, the next time you feed your kids McDonald's think about what you just said. Children's diet is the biggest cause for health concerns. I think maybe McDonald's should be on the list of things that need to be banned. "
TwentySomething wrote on Jan 14, 2009 9:01 AM:
" I think subjecting children to a smoke filled car could be considered child-endangerment (got my flame suit all zipped up-fire away!). Before you unleash the hounds on me, allow me to share a relevant and true example. Someone I know lost a lung as a child, because of her parents constant smoking around her. Is this not child endagerment?! {To make matters worse, she grew up and married a husband who smoked. As a result, she developed cancer and was barely able to breathe or eat in her last days. } When parents make choices that jeapordize the health of their children, the state steps in, why not in this case as well? "
TwentySomething wrote on Jan 14, 2009 9:03 AM:
" DW- the issue you bring up has come up before. I believe there have been cases where parents were so grossly neglegent in the feeding of their children (actually endangering their lives by allowing them to become so overweight) that the courts stepped in. "
Simple Man wrote on Jan 14, 2009 9:05 AM:
" Everyone that gets so worked up over people smoking just need something real to really worry about. Who is some grocery store owner, politician or starbucks rat to tell Sgt. Smith he cant have a few smokes in his car with his kids if he rolls the window down. Ive never personally met a single person who died from 2nd hand smoke. Its about as hyped up as global warming is. "
DW wrote on Jan 14, 2009 10:10 AM:
" That's the scary part TwentySomething. How did we ever get to the point that we have to legislate common sense. We have gotten to the point that, as our new fearless leader Barack Obama has stated, "only government can solve these problems". We are very quickly becoming a "nanny state". People are getting used to the idea that government will take care of us from cradle to grave. We are loosing our independence and our freedoms, and we are giving them up without a fight. Do I think that children should be around cigarette smoke? Of course not, but what we really don't want is government mandating such things. We are getting to the point that the goverment will tell us where we can go, how we will get there, what we will be allowed to eat, and how much, etc. etc. Pretty soon TwentySomething, you will be ThirtySomething, then FortySomething, and a little light will go off in your head and you will say, OMG what have we done?? "
1arealocal wrote on Jan 14, 2009 11:10 AM:
" RE: DW, nicely stated at 10:10am...pretty soon we all will be checking our papers at the WA/OR border so the gov't can track our "mileage". These left wing drones that think Nobama will do no wrong and save them need to wake up, re-insert their spines, and be Angry Americans. "
tushyturtle wrote on Jan 14, 2009 7:49 PM:
" I concur DW nicelystated.
Can Americans not think for yourselves?
Stepford wives... or country for those to lazy to take things into your own hands, or homes. "
Can Americans not think for yourselves?
Stepford wives... or country for those to lazy to take things into your own hands, or homes. "
bluE wrote on Jan 14, 2009 9:17 PM:
" i think someone needs to put a cap on how many kids people can have while they are at it. and they should have to pass an intelligence test in order to do so.. no cuz im sure politicians would start rejecting the rebels and revolutionaries.. they already have live their lives hiding or in prisons.... thats a way to make sure they dont breed eh? meanwhile each and every tv fed fool gets to spit out a kid every 10 months. but yeah anyone that poisons their kid needs woke up somehow, just not by a copper, i hate coppers just like they hate me! "
MMGrad66 wrote on Jan 15, 2009 5:24 AM:
" As I write this opinion, there have been 240 opinions prior to mine. I would like to know how many of you have actually read the scientific research on second hand smoke. There are studies out there that indicate that SHS has minimal effect in causing cancer. I believe that most of you have bought into an idea without really examining the research. After doing your own personal research and you then come to the conclusion that SHS is harmful-fine! Most of you are spouting the politically correct line about SHS. By the way, I am not a cigarette smoker. I never have been and never will be. One of my favorite memories though is riding in the car with my Grandfather and him lighting up a cigarette. I loved the smell of a freshly lit cigarette. "
bert wrote on Jan 15, 2009 9:53 AM:
" MMGrad66: And now there is the beginning of talk about third hand smoke. Must be like razors. When people stop buying your rhetoric you come out with a new level. "
shaun49er0101 wrote on Jan 15, 2009 12:18 PM:
" I dont think it is ok to smoke with kids in the car, on the same note I do not believe the government should be stepping in as much as they are. This is part of our civil liberties and the more the government gets involved the more our civil liberties will be taken away one at a time. "
spete98611 wrote on Jan 16, 2009 11:28 AM:
" Has anyone noticed that the majority of people who attempt to dictate the lives of others are typically lacking common-sense and education? I'm sick and tired of people spouting off about what they supposedly know. Very few of you know very little about anything and your fear of not knowing urges you to jump to conclusions. I've read statements from people here saying that smokers are ignorant, unproductive, stinky and dangerous members of society. Really? Do any of you know how many of the doctors, nurses and staff members at St. John's are smokers? I can name eight doctors off the top of my head that many of you see quite regularly that are smokers. Are these the same ignorant, unproductive, stinky and dangerous members of our society that yo talk of? What about our President-Elect? He is a smoker. Before he even thought of running for the presidency he was quite the smoker and not just of cigars but of cigarettes as well. He now claims that he is attempting to quit but that is just to appease the radical non-smokers of this country. Smokers may be a minority in this country, but, it's good to know that ignorant people will never be in short supply. It's no one's right to tell another person how to live or raise their children. Whether it be right or wrong. Nobody has the right to tell anyone how to live. Whether they be a smoker, fat or stupid. Dictate your own family. "
Kelsomomof3 wrote on Jan 17, 2009 3:48 PM:
" More children die because of drunk drivers every year then because of second hand smoke. Which one of you want to ban alcohol because of this? Or how about the fact that more children in the U.S. have heart disease, high blood pressure, and numerous other obesity related health problems then there are children with health problems associated with second hand smoke. How many of you, that are so quick to call a smoker a bad parent that doesn't think of the health of their children feed your kids fast food more then once or twice a month as a reward, special treat, or because your just to tired to be bothered cooking anything healthy for your kids. You might as well be smoking in your car with them for as much as your doing to protect their health. "
bert wrote on Jan 19, 2009 11:13 AM:
" Kelsomomof3: You forgot all of the deaths and injuries caused by parents who are careless gun owners. "
grouch wrote on Jan 19, 2009 7:57 PM:
" what about the unborn children who are subjected to smoke and are born prematurely or with a number of problems? Too many laws take away our rights but how else can children be protected from stupidity? "
Kalama rose wrote on Jan 19, 2009 9:07 PM:
" Having not logged on to TDN for several days, it really is unfathomable to me this discussion is still going on. OK, all you smokers...live in your denial and just keep puffing away, nobody really cares if you kill yourselves...what nonsmokers want is to NOT have to inhale your second hand toxic waste. "
JUST ME!! wrote on Jan 20, 2009 8:14 AM:
" Thanks TDN, I relized through this article, how my neighbors look at our goverment and thier un-questionable trust and willingness to just hand over thier paychecks rather than handle personal affiars without the goverment doing it for them. Scary! "
bert wrote on Jan 20, 2009 11:14 AM:
" Grouch: Parents have been doing stupid things since Adam and Eve. How has the human race survived this long without government protection from all of the stupidity? Even in the last several generation, when smoking was the norm and smokers were in the majority, it is a wonder that the population has increased. It should have been in decline. Now we have a national epidemic of obesity. So every time you go into a fast food restaurant and see a parent feeding their overweight child french fries, hamburgers and milk shakes, you are witnessing stupidity at it's finest. Every person in the United State should be aware by now that obesity is the number one health threat. "
Past Month's Most Commented Stories