Ban Smoking in Cars

[Headnavigator]

Oh bother. Reading all this has got me dying for a fag again - and I gave up before lots of you were born. I did used to enjoy smoking - there has never been any substitute. Can't we stay off the subject? OK, I'll withdraw from the thread and not read any more. Just sit here longing!

 

[Storm™]

to an extent.
But what I'm getting at is that as economic pressure mounts, people inevitably start looking around them and wondering why other people's "rights" to do something have a higher cost than their "rights" not to pay for it through taxes, if you see what I mean.

Well its a fair point, but what causes it .... the good ideas club preaching, then the government granting everyones wish, then oh sh!t, why am I paying for it.... no wait I am unhappy. If you dont want to pay for it (an you are only paying for some NHS stuff atm, as are the smokers remember) then dont bring it up as a priority. I mean how much NI do we pay. Smokers probably overpay for the care that they as a whole receive. Has anyone done those figures. 40/50+ years of NI payments and you've used a few visits to the Dr's for a cold, maybe a hospital visit for a saucepan stuck on your head (joke). And YOU pay for the prescriptions! wtf! (BTW if you ever look at the British National Formulary it shows the price per tablet that it costs. Pence, and I mean pence for most of them. And overpayment on prescriptions for Bruffen, paracetamol, etc when they are cheaper at the supermarket. Sickening.
What you're paying for was the development of the drug as well, and still its pence.

The example of driving is a valid point - but as oil becomes more scarce and fuel prices continue to rise, the focus on "unecessary" car use may go the same way as the smoking debate - those of us in rural areas who depend on our cars will start wondering why the chelsea tractor drivers aren't taxed at a higher rate than us etc etc.
At heart we are all quite selfish. Especially where money is involved.

I agree. I have a Landy now because my old car was rear wheel drive. Because the council here claims it grits all major routes (meaning the A30) it gets away with, not gritting what it calls minor routes. I had to take food to friends who live in a village where I used to live. Because they were cut off. They are a 800 yards from the A30. As are the rest of the 2000 residents of that village. I would have been stuck in too as I live miles from the A30.

Without the landy the last two years would have gone the same as the one before that - loss of a weeks earnings for my partner £300.00 - loss of my earnings. Starving because we dont have a freezer so we have to buy fresh. And starving means to go without food, no smug comments about africa please. And we are young fit and healthy. It was the same for pensioners, we were all doing food runs. A police car was hanging out of a ditch for a week here thats how bad it got. But I would get lumbered with the Chelsea Tractor penalty as well wouldnt I.

One village Lewannick, had an overturned car sitting on the road to the A30. The alternative for them was this road 1/4 a mile to the A30 or the others ... 5 miles to the A30 in those road conditions without gritting. So the car sat there for two weeks. The tow truck went down the road to get it (no grit) got stuck could not get free. The dustbin lorry went down that road (because the council refused to put cones out so the locals made a sign and it was ignored) and it got stuck. And there they sat for two weeks till it was safe enough to go down the road.

It aint London here. But it aint the middle of nowhere either but you can see it from here. And its the same everywhere. Rural is not the same as "minor roads". But you need a 4 by 4 to even have a chance without grit.

 

[alanf]

The stated aim is to protect child passengers. Logical way round it is to remove all the seats apart from the drivers. No passengers, no problem.

I would have thought a more likely strategy to ban smoking in moving cars is as a safety issue. There are few more antisocial than drivers who flick hot ash and fag ends out of the window regardless of cyclists, pedestrians, motorbikes and open tops. Not just drivers though, those who light up while in a crowd leaving an event; waving a lit cigarette around other peoples clothing, bags, arms and at childrens eye level.

It won't happen. We always wait to see how it works out somewhere else. US, Ireland and Scotland for bars etc. Smoking is banned in New York parks and beach areas. Not aware of anywhere that bans smoking in private cars.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

with Storm (I think hell may have just frozen over too)

Without a 4x4 I, nor most of my neighbours, would not be able to live where we do. During the snow last year Powys County Council stopped gritting any of the roads to our village (they never grit my road anyway), so we were effectively stranded for a month. The Council also refused to collect our rubbish because, wait for it....., the road had not been gritted and it was too dangerous for the council vehicle to get to our house
But, it could still be theoretically possible to devise a system where those without ready access to public transport pay a lower fuel duty / RFL rate.

BTW - we don't pay for prescriptions in Wales. But that benefit is out weighed by the laughable ambulance provision and the distinct lack of any DGHs

 

[Storm™]

Not aware of anywhere that bans smoking in private cars.

Australia - reason - brush fires from discarded cigarettes. Not safety/passive smoking etc. And i dont know if its the whole of Australia but it is in the South.

 

[For want of a better word]

Ban Tobacco.... simples
( but the ConDems won't because there is too much in it for them and their ilk!... tax, profit jobs for private health processionals, corner shop,s supermarkets and others who peddle the filthy weed))

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Ban Tobacco.... simples
( but the ConDems won't because there is too much in it for them and their ilk!... tax, profit jobs for private health processionals, corner shop,s supermarkets and others who peddle the filthy weed))

And neither will labour if they know what's good for them. Banning tobacco would be political suicide - look how much damage the public smoking ban did to John Reid!

 

[Storm™]

There are few more antisocial than drivers who flick hot ash and fag ends out of the window regardless of cyclists, pedestrians, motorbikes and open tops. Not just drivers though, those who light up while in a crowd leaving an event; waving a lit cigarette around other peoples clothing, bags, arms and at childrens eye level.

Cyclists - cycling two abreast and laughing, and waving you on when on blind bends, pay no road tax but get their own lanes ....

Motorbikes - overtaking on the inside, roaring down middle lanes in traffic queue's, pay less road tax, can ride one without any qualifications ... (Unless thats changed now)

Open tops - REALLY??? lol they deserve it surely lol.

Smokers smoking out in the wide open air ..... they should be shot surely. How do you get to these events - cars? Buses? Public transport. Mmmmmm fumes.

Children's eye level - Yes I am always amused at this. I care about children and would love a child of my own. But I am constantly amused that because people have children that its somehow everyone elses responsibility to deify them in the same way their parents seem to. Allowing them to behave like runaway feral cats. Screaming, climbing on stuff. Running into you. Or the "don't touch" rule when going into shops. Which means touch it if you like cause I am useless at enforcing that statement. Or the god given right to moan like a bi*ch cause I dont, Jedi like, feel the presence of the pram approaching from the rear. Then the "what is you're problem" when I say excuse me as my legs are rammed by the said useless parent. And tell me do parents take the kids to the shops so others can care for them while they run amok around the shops. And when they break stuff .... "it wasn't their fault, you shouldn't have put it at their eye level should you" ..... of course, because the old Jedi abilities were running low and I could not foresee what a sh*t parent I would run into today. Planting your kids in a parking space in a car park while you go get hubby who is somewhere around here ...... and I try and reverse into the space that I found, only to be shouted at by kids aged 4 and 5. And then the stupid bint coming back to find me in the parking space and ranting at me that I intimidated her kids...... and if you're in here you're an ***** btw.


Edit - thinking about it you're excuse is going to be that your not allowed to smack your kids any more isn't it. Yeah I knew it. Well that's these faceless do gooders for you. But if you feel the need, you can come round here and beat them till you're breathless and they pass out, I wont utter a word of complaint. No phone lines here so Esther Rasnson won't be dribbling down your neck. And you can go away calm with well behaved kids......

 

[Winker]

I am off for a fag and a drive, anyone comming?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Cyclists - cycling two abreast and laughing, and waving you on when on blind bends, pay no road tax but get their own lanes ....

Motorbikes - overtaking on the inside, roaring down middle lanes in traffic queue's, pay less road tax, can ride one without any qualifications ... (Unless thats changed now)

Open tops - REALLY??? lol they deserve it surely lol.

Smokers smoking out in the wide open air ..... they should be shot surely. How do you get to these events - cars? Buses? Public transport. Mmmmmm fumes.

Children's eye level - Yes I am always amused at this. I care about children and would love a child of my own. But I am constantly amused that because people have children that its somehow everyone elses responsibility to deify them in the same way their parents seem to. Allowing them to behave like runaway feral cats. Screaming, climbing on stuff. Running into you. Or the "don't touch" rule when going into shops. Which means touch it if you like cause I am useless at enforcing that statement. Or the god given right to moan like a bi*ch cause I dont, Jedi like, feel the presence of the pram approaching from the rear. Then the "what is you're problem" when I say excuse me as my legs are rammed by the said useless parent. And tell me do parents take the kids to the shops so others can care for them while they run amok around the shops. And when they break stuff .... "it wasn't their fault, you shouldn't have put it at their eye level should you" ..... of course, because the old Jedi abilities were running low and I could not foresee what a sh*t parent I would run into today. Planting your kids in a parking space in a car park while you go get hubby who is somewhere around here ...... and I try and reverse into the space that I found, only to be shouted at by kids aged 4 and 5. And then the stupid bint coming back to find me in the parking space and ranting at me that I intimidated her kids...... and if you're in here you're an ***** btw.


Edit - thinking about it you're excuse is going to be that your not allowed to smack your kids any more isn't it. Yeah I knew it. Well that's these faceless do gooders for you. But if you feel the need, you can come round here and beat them till you're breathless and they pass out, I wont utter a word of complaint. No phone lines here so Esther Rasnson won't be dribbling down your neck. And you can go away calm with well behaved kids......

Maybe the answer is - as parents won't smack their kids make it law that other people affected by the spoilt brats are allowed to smack the parents. To make it proportionate bring back the rule of thumb - any smacking stick allowed as long as it's not thicker than your thumb (I've got size 11 hands BTW

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

with Storm (I think hell may have just frozen over too)

Without a 4x4 I, nor most of my neighbours, would not be able to live where we do. During the snow last year Powys County Council stopped gritting any of the roads to our village (they never grit my road anyway), so we were effectively stranded for a month. The Council also refused to collect our rubbish because, wait for it....., the road had not been gritted and it was too dangerous for the council vehicle to get to our house
But, it could still be theoretically possible to devise a system where those without ready access to public transport pay a lower fuel duty / RFL rate.

BTW - we don't pay for prescriptions in Wales. But that benefit is out weighed by the laughable ambulance provision and the distinct lack of any DGHs

The only people around us who got their roads gritted were neighbours of the deputy leader of the county council (they got their bins collected as well)
And the residents of the deeply rural village of Myddfai (neighbour - HRH prince of Wales when he pops down to Llwynwermwd!!)
I spent most of my days off in my jeep - doctor's appointments, shopping, laying flowers on parent's/ children's graves etc for all my family and neighbours - I clock on average 5,000 miles a year and I get stung for tax because most of the urban populace now consider it essential to take their spoilt offspring to school in the civilan equivalent of a chieftain tank.
When I was at school some of my mates would walk two miles to school in the morning.

 

[The Cumbrian]

I pay a LOT for the privilege of having a car. No one else pays for it for me - so how does someone who does not know my skill levels, have a say in what I do in my private "Lawful" property.

Does this mean you support people being allowed to use class A drugs in their own lawful property?

In fact because it is not as easy as just sitting there, you tend to pay more attention when you are smoking.

So do people eating, drinking and using their 'phone pay more attention because they know it not as easy?

 

[JamezF]

Motorbikes - can ride one without any qualifications ... (Unless thats changed now)

That all started changing about twenty years ago. Last time I paid any attention I believe it was necessary to do compulsory basic training, then depending on your age you can do a test that would allow you to ride machines up to a specified power (30bhp-ish?) that you're stuck with for two years. Older riders can go for the unlimited option straight away. It used to be that you could ride a bike of up to 12bhp on the road on a provisional licence without doing the CBT part, but I think now you're not even allowed on the road, at all, without doing that first.

You don't even automatically get a provisional motorcycle entitlement on your licence when you pass a car test any more.

Arguably it's far easier for someone to pass their test and drive off in a 350bhp car than it is to be allowed to ride a motorcycle with one tenth of the power.

(Some of this may be mis-remembered. I passed my bike test in the late 80s/early 90s when the examiner still used to jump out into the road in front of you and hoped you could do an emergency stop. It's changed enormously since then.)

James

 

[Storm™]

Yup it's appalling. I know this thread is going wonky but as the theme was safety and health it's roughly in there -

Earlier this year my best friend died of lung cancer (non smoker btw). However in January she was having her radiotherapy and was in remission. But she was unable to get to her treatment due to the ungritted roads. That may have made the difference who knows. I couldn't get to her because she didn't tell me because she was worried about me driving in those conditions. So there we are. So no grit for weeks despite claims of "we have enough and then some".

Later we hear (word of mouth) that a friends dad drives one of the gritted lorries. He's been told to drive around with the gritting lights on but drop no grit. Allegedly. Because of trying to reduce spending.

Later she dies. Sadly. Her son who is a ..... Friend to substances ..... Moves down to be with her. He's out there most of the time but the local authority offer him something. A free moped, and lessons and all the safety gear to get him to a job that they will set up for him. How cool is that. He refuses .... I know ..... And so gets a free lift to the Eden Project every day as a volunteer but will get his benefit if he goes and if he does well he will get - wait for it - training to become a horticulturalist and a permanent position.

No grit so we lose wages or risk it and lose our lives like my friend Rache who was airlifted to hospital when she risked going to work. But mopeds aplenty and dream jobs for serial abusers. I mean wtf!

 

[Winker]

Does this mean you support people being allowed to use class A drugs in their own lawful property?

Your local GP may very well be prescribing worse to your neighbour, but that's ok isn't it? Methadone and other opiates are regularly handed out to drug users to take legally behind closed doors. So in effect we do allow the use of class A drugs in their own lawful property

 

[Storm™]

Does this mean you support people being allowed to use class A drugs in their own lawful property?

Class A drugs - illegal
Cigarettes - legal

So do people eating, drinking and using their 'phone pay more attention because they know it not as easy?

Phones - Talking, concentrating on conversation, dialling, very distracting.
Drinking - lawful I believe.
Eating - not sure I dont do that.

 

[The Cumbrian]

Class A drugs - illegal
Cigarettes - legal

That situation is only because currently that is how the law stands. There is no reason why it shouldn't be changed. I am sure that various drug users over the years have argued about their personal freedoms on their lawful property when a new drug became illegal.

Phones - Talking, concentrating on conversation, dialling, very distracting.
Drinking - lawful I believe.
Eating - not sure I dont do that.

Again only because the law allows it currently, and I know a lot of people who would change the law with regard to eating and drinking.

I also believe that you can be "done" for without due care and attention for eating and drinking while driving. If this is the case then it is currently unlawful. Drinking I suggest is more risky than eating - most in car drinking at some point requires you to tip your head back taking your eyes off the road.

 

[The Cumbrian]

Your local GP may very well be prescribing worse to your neighbour, but that's ok isn't it? Methadone and other opiates are regularly handed out to drug users to take legally behind closed doors. So in effect we do allow the use of class A drugs in their own lawful property

But not when that "lawful property" is a car. It is an offence to drive under the influence of drugs even (i believe prescription drugs).

 

[Storm™]

That situation is only because currently that is how the law stands. There is no reason why it shouldn't be changed. I am sure that various drug users over the years have argued about their personal freedoms on their lawful property when a new drug became illegal.

Yes but that wasnt the question you asked was it. And there is a reason that the law shouldnt be changed (I dont want it to and I wont be the only one). However being serious for a moment are you equating Class A drug use (mind altering/behaviour altering) to smoking a cigarette in my own private property. Because in no way are they the same thing and hence why one is legal and the other not. I dont think you can compare the two. And to re answer your original question NO i dont agree to people being allowed to use Class A drugs because they are in their property, for the reasons mentioned above. But it is kinda obvious......

I also believe that you can be "done" for without due care and attention for eating and drinking while driving. If this is the case then it is currently unlawful. Drinking I suggest is more risky than eating - most in car drinking at some point requires you to tip your head back taking your eyes off the road.

Agree you can. But being prosecuted for that offence is different from being done isnt it. Being done is pulled and accused. But that would be an opinion from the officer concerned. If you have been driving without due care and attention ... fair do's. If its to satisfy a quota (and they do have them), then its a dubious charge. And then you can appeal against the decision. In the absence of proof - opinion counts for naff all. A magistrates court is a surprisingly airy fairy place.

How many of my mates have been done for speeding and argued the case. Oh and look what happened .... nothing. One letter asking to see the calibration records for the camera .... bye bye so sorry to have bothered you Sir. 3 so far.

 

[The Cumbrian]

Yes but that wasnt the question you asked was it. And there is a reason that the law shouldnt be changed (I dont want it to and I wont be the only one). However being serious for a moment are you equating Class A drug use (mind altering/behaviour altering) to smoking a cigarette in my own private property. Because in no way are they the same thing and hence why one is legal and the other not. I dont think you can compare the two. And to re answer your original question NO i dont agree to people being allowed to use Class A drugs because they are in their property, for the reasons mentioned above. But it is kinda obvious......

The point I was making (perhaps a little heavily) was that just because it is your lawful property there is no reason why laws aren't passed to prevent things which are deemed to be anti social.

Perhaps having seen my Dad in a wheel chair and eventually die due to smoking gives me a rather one sided view of things.

[QUOTE}
Agree you can. But being prosecuted for that offence is different from being done isnt it. Being done is pulled and accused. But that would be an opinion from the officer concerned. If you have been driving without due care and attention ... fair do's. If its to satisfy a quota (and they do have them), then its a dubious charge. And then you can appeal against the decision. In the absence of proof - opinion counts for naff all. A magistrates court is a surprisingly airy fairy place.

How many of my mates have been done for speeding and argued the case. Oh and look what happened .... nothing. One letter asking to see the calibration records for the camera .... bye bye so sorry to have bothered you Sir. 3 so far.[/QUOTE]

The colloquialism must be different in your part of the world to mine "done" to me is convicted.

All I was trying to point out is that the things you suggested were legal weren't under the correct circumstances.