Rant Car smoking ban

Thats because you are unwilling to recognise the points made by the people in favour of the law change, or unwilling to recognise their merit.

• It is dangerous to be concentrating on things other than driving, whilst driving, especially things on fire. This is dangerous for other road users, and passengers, not just the driver.
  
  Yes, this is the same as eating and drinking whilst driving but one step at a time.
  
  
• Second hand smoke can harm passengers in the car, and when they have no choice (i.e. young children) it can be very damaging.

Like Nexxo says, why force people to wear seatbelts? Because its good for them, and not all of them were happy about it, but its saved lives. This ban wont save as many lives, but it might save some, and isn't that worth it?

 

Why one step at a time? Ever taken your hand off the wheel to change the radio station? There's your eyes and ears distracted at the same time, last time I checked my cigarettes didn't tune into 5Live.

Second hand smoke? Should be at our discretion, those of us sensible enough not to smoke with children or non smokers in the car WONT, those that aren't WILL. They'll be punished and they'll keep doing it, are the police going to pull over ever single one of them? Not a hope.

Waste of time and money? Yes.

 

Yes I have, and I dont disagree that it is also dangerous to be doing that - however you have to consider that radios and music serves a purpose in the car, which is to keep the mind from wandering and risking falling asleep. New cars generally seem to have controls on the steering wheel so this is gradually getting better.

Then you disagree with the seat belt law too? Those of us sensible enough to wear one will do whereas those of us not sensible enough risk getting seriously injured in a crash. What about the parents who dont plug their kids in? What about if the kids get seriously injured in a crash?

No, not a chance the police will pull every single one over, but its a deterrent against it, and less people will be doing it than before, which makes the roads and the cars that little bit safer. If they keep doing it then they face the same sanctions as those who do other illegal things whilst driving.

P.S. Cna you clarify the waste of money, I might be missing somthing (not meant in a sarcastic way, I really realise I may be missing something) but pulling a car over to fine them doesn't seem all too costly. Traffic police are surely there on the road anyway?

 

And something in your hand that's "on fire" (as you put it) doesn't serve a purpose such as keeping you awake, but some music does? I fall asleep with my radio on every night, NEVER with a lit cigarette.

The admin that comes after pulling someone over to fine them, logging it, processing it etc costs money, in single instances it may be a small cost but with the amount of people they would likely have to pull over it would cost quite a bit.

 

but that doesn't address what is being listened to on the wireless though does it.

>Nice bit of drum n bass, turned to 11, more than a tad distracting with twin 15" subs pumpin'
>Nice bit of Heavy metal, turned up to 36, head a bobbin
>Nice R4 play to get enthralled in, I'm personally liking the return of Sherlock series at present, and a new load of torchwood are on their way
>Hows about something to engage the mind The Infinite Monkey Cage had me pissing myself and pondering the meaning of life and the empty space within everything

All things I have done or do do, all 100% more likely to cause me to have an accident than a wee glowing ember betwixt my fingers.

The reasoning for the original suggestion of the ban was dreamt up on the back of a something someone once heard somewhere off his mates down the pub (probably), it has no scientific grounding, and now we've moved onto 'it's a bit distracting' the ground becomes more dubious

And until cars run on rails we have to accept that 100% of drivers do not give the road 100% of their attention 100% of the time, maybe we should all stay at home wrapped up nice and snug in our protective bubble wrap suits (phthalate free of course, we are thinking about the kiddies here)

 

And finally you can address my last point:

I realise its the classic "arguing against smokers" argument, i.e. you never get anywhere because many people who do it will claim its OK in almost every respect, but I just cant accept that if you have a stick with a glowing ember at the end and you get into a situation you will not be distracted by either dropping it or crushing it into your hand.

Nor do many smokers seem to think that its a good idea to protect the younger generation from starting smoking. By allowing it in confined spaces you are sending out a clear signal that it is OK to do it and that its OK to pollute other peoples lungs in the meantime, because frankly by allowing people to do it in places where the smoke is going to harm others is a wholly irresponsible, whether it is their choice to be there (friends) or not (children).

The tobacco companies target children already, the last thing we need is responsible adults showing them its OK!

 

Frankly I don't see how driving with something in one of your hands IS dangerous. You can still brake just fine and you can still steer just fine, and in a crisis you'll instinctively drop everything you're holding and spin the wheel if you need to anyway.

There are no statistics or hard facts supporting the notion that smoking whilst driving is dangerous from a safe driving perspective, but in any event, it is not being argued from that angle, it is being pushed solely with regards to health. And where health is concerned, if we ban it in cars, we MUST ban it in homes too. It is functionally identical.

I'm not actually coming down on one side or the other on this, I'm just saying, we must be consistent:

1. Ban smoking in cars, homes, toilets, vans, sheds and all enclosed spaces.

2. Don't ban smoking in cars or any other enclosed private spaces.

Pick one. We can't have double standards.

 

Smoking also stops the mind wandering and keeps me awake (although if I need to keep awake I'll stop and nap)
I do disagree with the seatbelt law.Every study done has shown that 3 point seatbelts cause more injuries than they prevent all they do is keep you alive when otherwise you would have died.
I dont think the state should be deciding which risk an adult finds acceptable, I choose not to wear a belt in the volvo at all I accept the increased risk death in exchange for the reduced risk of injury. In the Mr2 I have 4 point belts for both seats
Once my children are out of car seats I won't feel happy with them using 3 point belts because of the increased risk of injury, I intend to fit 4 points all round, does that make everyone who puts their children in 3 points a bad parent? should it be legislated against? if not why should parents who don't use belts at all?
Whilst the police might be on the road already while they are issuing a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt which poses no risk to anyone else they aren't dealing with tailgating,speeding etc which do pose a risk to others

 

Stab in the dark this but I'm guessing you have never been a smoker, lest you would know it is possible to do other things while smoking without thinking about the smoking. I once got in a shower not even realising I was still smoking!

I've dropped cigarettes while driving and the order of response from me is 1) expletive, 2) look for somewhere to safely pull over, 3) pull over, 4) locate the burning item in question .... On the other hand, some d**kh**d passenger who decides to attempt to debate the rights and wrongs of smoking at all or the best way to get from A to B is a far greater distraction to me than smoking ever would be.

What you don't seem to understand is you can smoke without thinking about it. It is habitual. Most other things you do in a car require you to think about them, whether driving, fiddling with knobs or gobbing off

 

After all the arguments put forward for banning smoking while driving all completely unsubstantiated as far as I can see I cant see how they can possibly expect to pass such a useless law as that.

 

Google scholar had a few things, here you are:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0891524587901131 (you might need to pay)
http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1061467

(nb, caps is in the abstract, I didnt do that)

I feel like this would be more than you would need, but im sure this, to you, is still all insubstancial, so I will let you go here: http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=smoking+car+danger&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1,5&as_sdtp=on , and find your own papers

Now, on to the less good, but still evidence for my point:
http://www.safermotoring.co.uk/drinkingeatingsmokingwhendriving.html

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/details-9815.php
http://www.choicequote.co.uk/news/c...nhs-study-shows-danger-of-smoking-in-cars.asp

http://www.ch-avignon.fr/sections/nous/etablissement/actualites/dossiers/tabac-environnement

(translated from French, and admittedly not necessarily as relevant in the UK - basically 16% of wildfires in that area of France can be attributed to cigarettes thrown from windows)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_bans_in_private_vehicles

(though the link to the news article linked on wikipedia is dead, thus sadly not a good source)

I realise these aren't the best sources, but sadly my I dont have access to anything outside my faculty of educations publications so cant find any medical or accident related stuff.

Please now substantiate your point.

And PS, I sure hope that new gif you have isn't meant to be purely antagonistic towards me.

 

Wait just a second, when you drop a *** in a car, it's going to burn the floor a bit, then go out. If your car floor counts for more than your safety, then yes it is dangerous, but so is being a ****ing moron, go figure.

 

I can't believe this rant is going on.

Still trying to find any link anywhere that links to the original research there. To me the biggest factor there is driving like an arse.

Any calculation on how far a car travels while someone scrabbles about messing with the radio or shutting the kids up on the backseat?

If you look the biggest contributing factor in accidents is not paying enough attention whilst driving, it won't take you long to find the stats on that. I've yet to see any research that lists smoking as the number 1 major distraction while driving, the biggest factors (again, easy to find several lists) generally includes music, talking, eating and noisy children at the top of the list.

So, we should ban radios, foodstuffs, sew our mouths shut and never drive with children on board. Sound ridiculous? Yes, of course it does.

I agree you shouldn't smoke in cars with children, that as I've said before is being a good parent just like you wouldn't pour beer down them.

Yes and from your own quote 13.8% from walkers....

Some people are arses, no surprise there.

If anything should be banned from the roads it feckwit drivers, there are plenty of those to be dealing with.

 

Or what? Are you going to take him outside? For heaven's sake, and your own, develop a sense of humour and try not to take everything so seriously.

We get it, you don't approve of smoking, in cars or out of them. Get over it already.

 

I agree in principle that it is possible to distract yourself quite badly with smoking while driving, but it is also quite possible not to do so - by lighting up before you leave, by lighting up while stopped, and by generally not being stupid. The distraction argument applies equally to food, sat-navs, hands-free kits and the like, as I've said; ban one, ban them all. (Also, remember: the current push for legislation is not motivated by this concern at all.)

But we needn't even bother. If you killed someone while not paying attention and while lighting a cigarette, you'd currently go down for driving without due care and attention. This concept also covers the same situation with food and the rest. It covers the distraction concern fully; again, why make two laws to cover the same problem?

As for reduced concentration and reaction times caused by carbon monoxide build-up, I'd argue that the effect is negligible unless you chain-smoke in the car for a prolonged period, with the windows closed and the AC off - in which case I'm confident that driving without due care and attention would again apply.

This is the thing. We already have a law to punish people who are stupid enough to let smoking make them a danger on the road - driving without due care and attention. Why ban it all? Why punish people who aren't stupid and who can smoke and drive as safely as not?

Also,

With you on that one, seems like a very stupid and childish poke - unless it's just meant in light jest, but that wouldn't really fit with what's currently going on here.


edit -
I just wanted to say,

can we leave this widely-expressed sentiment alone now? I don't know why we're all so exhasperated and angsty about this thread, it's an interesting topic and there've been some very good points made on both sides. There're a few drama queens, but it's not been that inflamed really. I'm sure we can still fashion a good debate out of it. Let's just see how it goes, rather than continuing to mourn the thread's existence

(I know I'm being a total hypocrite here, as the first person to throw an angst-bomb in this thread, but I've since done my best to apologise and make up for that.)

 

Not really just got bored and been playing around with gifs lol suppose you need a sense of humor to see the funny side to it

Lol it was in jest might do yours next

 

Feel free, it's a kid in that cartoon though, not sure whether that'll weigh on your conscience

I can see why he's a bit touchy, though, it's really odd timing to be making jokes - given the animosity in this thread, it's difficult to interpret it as a friendly joke. It feels more like a taunting joke. You can't drop fun-making into the middle of a hostile debate and expect people to take it as a light pat-on-the-back bit of fun the same way they would if you were best friends.

Also,

This kind of thing really stands at odds with your established maxim about taking things lightly and having a casual approach to the forums, and is kinda self-defeating. It's rude and aggressive - which'd be fine, but it makes you sound rather invested in the forum and its internal loyalties and rivalries, not nearly as aloof and laid-back as you constantly claim you are and constantly tell others to be.

Just sayin'. Be consistent if you want to be credible.

Also, it's not a very helpful thing to bring to the table. The point of a forum discussion isn't to believe what you believe, drop the discussion and 'get over it' - it's to share opinions and debate. If you don't like that, if you're frustrated by the lack of a quick-and-easy resolution to all disagreements, chip in to the discussion, or leave it alone - but don't berate people for not just leaving it alone. That's not why we're all here.

edit - although on reflection, perhaps much of this, all of this drama, is due to the thread being in the wrong section. It belongs in the much-neglected Serious Discussion section really.

SD is in a vicious cycle whereby nobody uses it because nobody reads it, and nobody reads it because nobody uses it

 

Its a cartoon ffs not a kid lol

All that coming from the person who posted this I agree about being consistent

When you get to my age you may just realise there's a lot more important things than banning people from smoking while driving, Oh and you will find a sense of humor will help a lot

 

I have to admit that made me laugh out loud, then rofl on my realisation you earnestly believe that codswallop of attribution and psychoanalysis

Obviously from the above, child, you know me not at all. My established maxim? I simply balance a healthy sense of humour with a passion for that which I believe in. In this instance, the right to smoke in one's own property. You quite plainly have yet to develop either a sense of humour or an insight into the workings of the human mind.

It's neither rude nor aggressive, in stark comparison to your earlier post brought about by yet another lack of insight and sense of humour failure on your part,

and is only likely to be interpreted as such by those who themselves consider any counter to their opinion as an attack on them.

Stating the same argument ad infinitum, whilst insulting those who do not take one's same stance, is not debate nor discussion, it's merely bullish entrenchment.

Edit: As you know doubt believe yourself to be? Right now I'm hard pressed to think of a worse fate

An asinine comment if ever I read one

 

My view.

ban it with children and non smokers, otherwise if your a smoker or passenger who does not care then no problem.