capcloser Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Papers today claim that smoking in your car if you have children with you will be against the law soon,the police apparently said it will be difficult to enforce,how can they tell if a child is under or over 16?Also a labour minister said in the house today that passive smoke in a car is 27 times more dangerous than in a home,but a leading anti smoking campaigner admitted there is no evidence to support this,even going as far as to suggest that the whole issue of passive smoke dangers were exaggerated! Dont get me wrong,i do smoke but i dont inflict my habit on other people,just seems like more nanny state politics to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donna miller Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 What if you don't smoke but your twelve year old does? :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pampam Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Eyup capcloser my mum smokes and when I go over to her house (she smokes like a chimney) the next day the back of my throat is sore: I used to smoke but have never smoked indoors I couldn't bear it. Even before they made it illegal i never allowed anyone to smoke in house this goes back about 37 years when I went to visit two sets of friends on a Sunday afternoon one house smelt like an old ashtray! And the other smelt like a Sunday lunch cooking . That was it for me I didn't want my house smelling like the ashtray so ther was no smoking in house after that :plus I had a growing family:then I packed in when I moved to a new house and spent more time outside than in so stopped .. I couldn't imagine anyone who valued their kids smoking in a car with them in it but you do see it happening : perhaps wee need these""daft"" laws because some people aren't bright enough to see what damage they could be doing to their children : working with public as I do I realise that some people really need things ""spelling out "" for them lol pp ... Just like I did about the internal workings of my motorhome :/. Pp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Had Enough Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 capcloser - 2014-01-30 10:53 PM Papers today claim that smoking in your car if you have children with you will be against the law soon,the police apparently said it will be difficult to enforce,how can they tell if a child is under or over 16?Also a labour minister said in the house today that passive smoke in a car is 27 times more dangerous than in a home,but a leading anti smoking campaigner admitted there is no evidence to support this,even going as far as to suggest that the whole issue of passive smoke dangers were exaggerated! Dont get me wrong,i do smoke but i dont inflict my habit on other people,just seems like more nanny state politics to me The reason that you don't inflict your ghastly habit on others is because, over the years the 'nanny state' has informed you of the consequences and the laws that the 'nanny state' has enforced has made you realise that you shouldn't pollute the air that others have to breathe. Fifty years ago, without the influence of the 'nanny state' you, like most other smokers, would cheerfully have poisoned everyone else in the room or the car. As has been said, many people are very stupid and need the 'nanny state' to guide them and to protect others from their folly. How anyone can moan about a law preventing children from having to travel in a confined space full of second-hand smoke is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJay Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 donna miller - 2014-01-31 6:33 AM What if you don't smoke but your twelve year old does? :D A 12 year old can not buy cigs, so who ever bought them . is breaking the law. Surely it is as dangerous to smoke whilst driving, as it is to use a mobile phone? Think it would be impossible to enforce, as the phone issue seems to be? Wish the poloticians (?) would do some reel work, and sort out more pressing things, than wasting time on silly un- inforcable laws PJay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I agree HE.. Although, lets await the usual "..my Granny smoked 40 a day from the age of 11..and she lived to be 98!.." type posts.. (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 pepe63 - 2014-01-31 9:11 AM I agree HE.. Although, lets await the usual "..my Granny smoked 40 a day from the age of 11..and she lived to be 98!.." type posts.. (lol) I can see the DM headline now 8-).................."12 year old murders parent for preventing him smoking in the car" >:-)..................... Bring back bad parents I say...........they never did me any harm :D.............. http://mybadparent.com/ I still enjoy a sound spanking :$......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Had Enough Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 PJay - 2014-01-31 9:08 AM donna miller - 2014-01-31 6:33 AM What if you don't smoke but your twelve year old does? :D A 12 year old can not buy cigs, so who ever bought them . is breaking the law. Surely it is as dangerous to smoke whilst driving, as it is to use a mobile phone? Think it would be impossible to enforce, as the phone issue seems to be? Wish the poloticians (?) would do some reel work, and sort out more pressing things, than wasting time on silly un- inforcable laws PJay The phone law is working just as the speeding and drink-driving laws are working. Some people will break them as we all know, but does this mean that because a few people break a law we should scrap it? And what's silly about it? This is the job of politicians. They make laws which are designed to make us safer and healthier and so far they seem to be working! We had exactly the same outcry when laws on seat belts, drink driving, talking on phones etc. etc. were introduced. Nanny state, interfering politicians, why can't they do some real work blah blah. These laws are enforced as the number of convictions for talking on phones for instance proves. Some people are stupid and try to get away with many things but that doesn't mean we should scrap the laws! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 The title of this thread is incomplete - the new law is about smoking in a car where there are children present, who presumably have no choice in the matter. I think it is probably an un-enforcable law but I assume the idea is to ' educate ' those people who are either unaware, or really don't care , that they are risking their childrens' health. I can't see why anyone could object to protecting the health of children. :-| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Had Enough Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I cannot understand why people are going on about this law being unenforceable. If you are spotted by a police officer and you are driving without a seat belt or talking on a mobile phone or weaving all over the road, you'll be stopped and the law will be enforced. If you are seen smoking and there are children in the car you'll be stopped and the law will be enforced. If there is doubt about a child's age the driver will be asked how old the child is and if the officer thinks that the driver is lying he'll ask for proof to be produced at the local police station within a certain time. Police forces now do mobile phone checks to reinforce the law. In the rush hour they have cameras by the side of the road and anyone caught using a phone is stopped and prosecuted. If this smoking in cars becomes law I can guarantee that during the hours of the school run there will be similar police checks to ensure that we are obeying they law. If this becomes law it will be easily enforceable. You can't always tell if someone is slightly drunk but it's very easy to see if someone is smoking or talking on a phone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Collings Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 I have never smoked and think anyone starting today is stark raving bonkers. Goodness knows how many accidents have been caused by drivers distracted lighting up It would make a lot more sense but be almost unenforceable to ban smoking in any room with children. Modern homes to minimise the need for heating have a slow rate of air change. Internal combustion engined road vehicles have plenty of waste heat for paassenger comfort and the rate of air change is many times faster meaning dilution of smoke is much greater than in a room. Nanny you want to get out more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 George Collings - 2014-01-31 11:50 AM Modern homes to minimise the need for heating have a slow rate of air change. Careful George - or the government will set up an inquiry to find out how many smokers, with children, live in "modern" homes. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capcloser Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share Posted January 31, 2014 I dont inflict my habit on others out of common courtesy,not because of constant nannying,if i visit mum or freinds who dont smoke then i dont! .My point was more about laws passed when common sense should prevail,but as many have posted there are always stupid people about who dont seem to have any sense,so i suppose laws will be passed.My old gran never smoked but had a serious mars bar addiction she lived to 94.Oh and i think you cant buy fags unless you are 18, smoking age is 16 ,mind you its a long time since i was asked for proof oc my age.Remember governments like to control our lives as much as possible,cos we are all to stupid,look at crazy health and safety laws where old ladies cant have hanginv baskets or a mat outside their door *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 The police should do what we pay them for, and that is to catch thieves and villains not waste their time on smokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 knight of the road - 2014-01-31 2:02 PM The police should do what we pay them for, and that is to catch thieves and villains not waste their time on smokers. Protecting children from the actions of adults is not wasting police time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 Next time I see a child walking on a pavement breathing in all those nasties from fuel pollution I shall make a citizens arrest on the parent , disgusting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 antony1969 - 2014-01-31 2:41 PM Next time I see a child walking on a pavement breathing in all those nasties from fuel pollution I shall make a citizens arrest on the parent , disgusting Which law will you use ? :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 malc d - 2014-01-31 2:15 PM knight of the road - 2014-01-31 2:02 PM The police should do what we pay them for, and that is to catch thieves and villains not waste their time on smokers. Protecting children from the actions of adults is not wasting police time. Sorry, but its a waste of time, its up to the individual parent to safeguard his or her kids, not the police, let the police crack down on the child abusers thieves robbers and bandits, so much easier for the police to persecute smokers but much harder for them to tackle the real villains, sorry pal but you are out of order in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 knight of the road - 2014-01-31 2:55 PM malc d - 2014-01-31 2:15 PM knight of the road - 2014-01-31 2:02 PM The police should do what we pay them for, and that is to catch thieves and villains not waste their time on smokers. Protecting children from the actions of adults is not wasting police time. Sorry, but its a waste of time, its up to the individual parent to safeguard his or her kids, /QUOTE] That's what the new law is about.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 malc d - 2014-01-31 2:44 PM antony1969 - 2014-01-31 2:41 PM Next time I see a child walking on a pavement breathing in all those nasties from fuel pollution I shall make a citizens arrest on the parent , disgusting Which law will you use ? :-D Don't know , am guna watch an old episode of the Sweeney to see what Regan would of done , Your Nicked !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capcloser Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share Posted January 31, 2014 That my point the police should be solving crimes not acting as nursemaids,3 cars were broken into on mums street and the police didnt even turn up,all you get is a crime report number so you can claim on your insurance,even that is a con,mums neighbour had his wing mirror ripped off,he informed his insurance but paid for it himself cos he didnt want to claim,the insurance company put his premium up cos he lived in what they now consider a high crime area.I am not suggesting smoking with kids in the car,it just seems that common sense has gone out of the window.Remember the cheese rolling that has now been banned,i believe the lady that supplied the cheese was warned she could be prosecuted what is going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antony1969 Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 The filth got enough to do nickin us criminals doin 35 in a 30 zone and stitchin us up when we whack a burglar in us house . them coppers don't need to be looking out for smokers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 What's going on?..by now, on the Chatterbox of old, there would've been howls of "..it's PC madness, I tells ya.....it's 'elf'n'safety gorn mad!...bl**dy limp wristed liberals.." etc Come on now chaps, you're slippin'....Lift your game! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted January 31, 2014 Share Posted January 31, 2014 pepe63 - 2014-01-31 5:27 PM What's going on?..by now, on the Chatterbox of old, there would've been howls of "..it's PC madness, I tells ya.....it's 'elf'n'safety gorn mad!...bl**dy limp wristed liberals.." etc Come on now chaps, you're slippin'....Lift your game! ;-) Good point pepe. Must say I'm surprised that any forum members would be affected by the new law, so why should any of 'em worry about it ? :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capcloser Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share Posted January 31, 2014 Good point,i havent got any kids so it doesnt affect me,oh well anyone got a u shaped lounge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.