# Ban on smoking in cars



## FM001 (Nov 16, 2011)

The BMA are calling on ministers to ban smoking in cars http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/16/smoking-cars-ban-bma  the BMA's reasoning is sound and truly hope that the government implement a ban asap.

On Radio 2 before there was an interview with a guy from Forest who represent the interests of smokers, he was saying that smoking in a car with children isn't harmful to their health - couldn't believe what I was hearing


----------



## novorapidboi26 (Nov 16, 2011)

This time last year I probably would object..................

Not anymore though, but only as it does not concern me.......

If there are other non smokers in the vehicle then yeah, but if your on your own I dont see a problem.............but I suppose they could not enforce that scenario, it would really need to be a complete ban.............


----------



## Caroline (Nov 16, 2011)

I don't smoke, and it has been a long time since I did. I think if it is just adults who use the car, then fine, but if they have children in the car then they should not smoke.

Slightly off topic, as a non smoker I wont allow people to smoke in my home, they have to stand outside to smoke even if it is raining or snowing. I find all sorts of things make me cough and I don't want to put little feller at risk either.


----------



## novorapidboi26 (Nov 16, 2011)

Caroline said:


> Slightly off topic, as a non smoker I wont allow people to smoke in my home, they have to stand outside to smoke even if it is raining or snowing. I find all sorts of things make me cough and I don't want to put little feller at risk either.



As soon as the misses was preggers, smoking in the house stopped, for everyone, now I have stopped all is good.......


----------



## robert@fm (Nov 16, 2011)

I wish the law would drop this "enclosed spaces" nonsense and just ban smoking in public -- full stop (pun not intended).  There are far too many smokers who either don't realise, or don't care, that "enclosed public spaces" includes bus shelters and building entrance lobbies -- the exact word is "enclosed", not "indoor"; if it has a roof then it's enclosed.

And incidentally, FOREST does *not* "represent the interests of smokers"; it's a front organisation for the tobacco pushers, and those are the only interests it really represents.


----------



## Hazel (Nov 16, 2011)

ban smoking
ban drink
ban chocolate
ban sex

OK I am being silly


----------



## Copepod (Nov 16, 2011)

I do object to drivers and passengers throwing lit cigarettes out of car windows and nearly hitting me, causing me to swerve when cycling to work on a hospital campus!


----------



## Catwoman76 (Nov 16, 2011)

toby said:


> The BMA are calling on ministers to ban smoking in cars http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/16/smoking-cars-ban-bma  the BMA's reasoning is sound and truly hope that the government implement a ban asap.
> 
> On Radio 2 before there was an interview with a guy from Forest who represent the interests of smokers, he was saying that smoking in a car with children isn't harmful to their health - couldn't believe what I was hearing



Even when I did smoke, I never, ever smoked in a car  When Graces dad picks her up he sometimes stinks of cigarette smoke .  I know he has smoked in the car first, then put Grace in the car.  As for the Idoit DH on radio 2, if he wants to smoke he will do what ever he wants, when he wants and 2 fingers up to anyone who challenges him.  A BIG time plonker.  Sheena


----------



## Catwoman76 (Nov 16, 2011)

Hazel said:


> ban smoking
> ban drink
> ban chocolate
> ban sex
> ...



Well, I don't do three out of the four, even without them being banned lol  Sheena


----------



## Andy HB (Nov 16, 2011)

I think this is a step too far.

By all means recommend that people not smoke in cars, but putting someone through the courts (or whatever), is pushing it a bit.

Anyway, what if someone is smoking in a convertible with the roof down. Please don't tell me that can be a health risk to anyone but the smoker? (unless they're distracted or not in control of the car and mow a pedestrian down).

Andy 

p.s. This'll be no different to the 'law' banning the use of mobiles in a car. No-one pays any attention to that as far as I can see.


----------



## Caroline (Nov 16, 2011)

robert@fm said:


> I wish the law would drop this "enclosed spaces" nonsense and just ban smoking in public -- full stop (pun not intended).  There are far too many smokers who either don't realise, or don't care, that "enclosed public spaces" includes bus shelters and building entrance lobbies -- the exact word is "enclosed", not "indoor"; if it has a roof then it's enclosed.
> 
> And incidentally, FOREST does *not* "represent the interests of smokers"; it's a front organisation for the tobacco pushers, and those are the only interests it really represents.



It is horrible walkingpast the smokers having their last fag outside station entrances before they run almost causing accidents in their haste for the train. I have seen station staff stop people smoking and a couple of times call in the police to abusive selfish people who will not stop.


----------



## Ellie Jones (Nov 16, 2011)

For crying out loud, NO the government shouldn't be allowed to depict whether an individual may choose to smoke in their car...

Firstly it's impractical as there is no way of policing it..  

But more to the point...

Where is the actually evidence that any smoking ban has made any impact on health after all some countries have had smoking bans for over 10 years!  In some states and cities in America they started bans in the 90's so if a ban worked then the evidence should start to show by now!

I do smoke but I don't smoke in the car if I've got a none smoking passenger, and I wouldn't dream of lighting up in a none smokers house, either I go outside or not bother to have one..  Oh and when I got none smoking visitor to my house then I re-frame from smoking while they are here..  

But what angers me is the nanny state and the unfairness of it all...

I'm told when and where I may smoke with ever decreasing options and choice, treated with disdain and made to feel like a criminal yet I pay a heavy Tax duty..

How ever if I chose not to smoke and gorge on foods either unhealthy or otherwise causing myself to become obese then I'm to be pitied and exonerated from blame for causing various medical conditions that could require medical and social support...  Yet choosing this lifestyle I'm not requested to pay any extra Taxation for the errors of my ways...


----------



## FM001 (Nov 16, 2011)

Catwoman76 said:


> Even when I did smoke, I never, ever smoked in a car  When Graces dad picks her up he sometimes stinks of cigarette smoke .  I know he has smoked in the car first, then put Grace in the car.  As for the Idoit DH on radio 2, if he wants to smoke he will do what ever he wants, when he wants and 2 fingers up to anyone who challenges him.  A BIG time plonker.  Sheena




Gets my back up when I was driving to work and you would see parents on the school-run smoking often with the windows closed - not that it matters  During the discussion on R2 they were saying many of the toxins released during smoking remain in the car, so even stumping out a cigarette before  passengers get in still endangers their health.


----------



## Catwoman76 (Nov 16, 2011)

Ellie Jones said:


> For crying out loud, NO the government shouldn't be allowed to depict whether an individual may choose to smoke in their car...
> 
> Firstly it's impractical as there is no way of policing it..
> 
> ...



My neighbours brother continues to smoke, even though His leg has been amputated because of circulation problems.  He has a mobility scooter, gets fussed about at the pharmacy, I.ve seen it for myself.  My neighbour, this mans brother, has now got a walking stick, because he is going in exactly the same way because of smoking, but he says, " no ones telling me to give up" even though his brother lives just yards away getting about on his scooter.  Smoking is literally killing these men, and when even bigger medical problems occur, they will be first in the queue expecting treatment.  I know this ISN'T about smoking in a car, unsure if they do, but children breathing in all that smoke, in a car, in a room etc is shocking.  I know all about this, as I was a smoker for many. many years and know the harm it can do.  Aren't we supposed to protect our children?  If people smoke, them it's down to thwm, but don't make children smoke too.  Would someone go to their local shop and buy the child ten fags?  I think not.

I do agree with it turning into a big brother state at times, but something has to be done.  I doubt if Smoking will never be banned all together in our lifetime.  Sheena


----------



## Steff (Nov 16, 2011)

If its a company car its upto the company if its your own personal car do as you will, before long they will have smokers cowering i there own toilet with no where else left to smoke


----------



## cherrypie (Nov 16, 2011)

I think it is irresponsible of smokers to smoke in their cars if their children are in the car with them.  Most smokers that I know ask permission to smoke around me and the answer is always no.
There is an equal threat to health for pedestrians from the cars themselves especially in our towns and cities.  
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/exhaust_emissions.shtml


----------



## Andy HB (Nov 16, 2011)

cherrypie said:


> I think it is irresponsible of smokers to smoke in their cars if their children are in the car with them.  Most smokers that I know ask permission to smoke around me and the answer is always no.
> There is an equal threat to health for pedestrians from the cars themselves especially in our towns and cities.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/exhaust_emissions.shtml



Simple answer ..... Ban Cars, bring back the horse!! 

(it'll do wonders for our rose gardens too!)


----------



## Twitchy (Nov 16, 2011)

My dad always smoked when I was a kid, albeit usually banished to the attic, which he had converted as a kind of snug/study/smoking hole...the whole house (& probably us too) used to stink of stale smoke though.  He also used to smoke with us kids in the car, despite our protests, assuring us that 'the smoke all goes out the window"...but I never thought it did!   He only gave up smoking after having a heart attack that the docs said was solely down to smoking - numerous of the males in our family have died that way unfortunately.  One thing that noone has mentioned is that if someone can be prosecuted for eating an apple whilst driving (driving without due care and attention), how on earth can it be thought safe to drive whilst lighting/smoking/extinguishing a cigarette? Numerous times dad nearly had an accident because hot ash dropped in his lap/onto the car seat & started smoldering!   Scary childhood memories lol...

On a more sobering point - I'd urge anyone diabetic not only not to smoke but please, please also avoid second hand smoke where possible - when I was researching retinopathy (whilst the hospital I was at were mistreating my eye problems) I found out that even just 2nd hand smoke can make retinopathy 24% worse - I for one don't feel the need to run any more risks with my sight or risk making it worse at all!


----------



## ypauly (Nov 16, 2011)

It is a case of what else can we ban. Like Novarapidboi I gave up in may but I still have to go through clouds of smoke to get into any buildings (like my workplace) as the smokers are all outside, buildings that have very good ventilation systems so the smoke wouldn't linger inside and probably seperate smoking areas.
  Thousands and thousands of pubs and clubs have closed since the ban, with many landlords claiming it is the biggest reason all those jobs lost all those livelyhoods destroyed many of which provided seperate areas and air conditioning just for smokers. Most resturants didn't allow it anyway.

 Whatever happened to common sense and the right to choose, anybody stupid enough to smoke in a car with children could quite easily have been dealt with under existing laws that protect children. Anybody who didn't want to go into a smoke filled pub didn't have to and probably didn't and still don't due to it's closure or the fact that everybody else is outside. The world is going slowly madder as the state gets slowly bigger and infringes further.

Insane and bonker meddling in something that just doesn't need it.

And just incase you are unaware smoking, eating an apple, using a phone and even changing the CD are allready illegal in a car. There are allready plenty of laws that are not used and the reaosn for that is mostly they are stupid.


----------



## Copepod (Nov 16, 2011)

ypauly said:


> And just incase you are unaware smoking, eating an apple, using a phone and even changing the CD are allready illegal in a car. There are allready plenty of laws that are not used and the reaosn for that is mostly they are stupid.



Not quite - the offence is "driving without due care and attention" - such activities are only illegal if the result is careless driving. Using a mobile phone unless hands free is a specific offence.


----------



## ypauly (Nov 16, 2011)

Copepod said:


> Not quite - the offence is "driving without due care and attention" - such activities are only illegal if the result is careless driving. Using a mobile phone unless hands free is a specific offence.



It could and has been successfully argued in court that just the act alone results in the offence.

Thier have been cases when even people in stationary vehicles have been successfully prosecuted on the ground that they were not in full control of the vehicle.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/la...ts_in_crackdown_on_driving_offences_1_3116306

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070309




http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/legal-advice/smoking-and-driving.html


It certainly does NOT require any further legislation.

I wish I could find the story of a woman prosecuted fro dring from a pop bottle while sat at traffic lights. It did make national news too.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4469879.stm


----------



## FM001 (Nov 16, 2011)

Andy HB said:


> Simple answer ..... Ban Cars, bring back the horse!!
> 
> (it'll do wonders for our rose gardens too!)






In an ideal world

Last month my wife was stood waiting outside the local hospital waiting for me to pick her up, there was a patient that came outside in a wheelchair dressed in his pyjamas and dressing gown and started to light-up. They started chatting and he told my wife that he'd just had his right leg removed after previously having the left leg removed last year, he said his doctor warned him that there was a chance he would lose his legs if he didn't stop smoking, even after losing the left leg last year he still continued to smoke.

Smoking is a drain on the nhs, yes there are huge amounts paid to the government in tobacco taxes but the truth is smoking wrecks lives and it's the families and the nhs who pick up the pieces, any measures introduced to make smoking harder and protect the innocents gets the thumbs up with me.


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 16, 2011)

As a never-smoker, I'm not sure how practical it is to put bans on smoking in certain situations. Either ban it or leave things as they are.

Sadly though, as pointed out, smoking is not just a personal choice but one that's inflicted on innocent bystanders. Alcohol generally only rots the drinker's liver. Drugs tend not to kill people who don't take them. But smoking is a bit like playing loud music through speakers. You can't do it without sharing it.

If it was left to common sense, no-one would smoke. But maybe it can be made so socially unacceptable that more people will give up. Hope so.

As for horses, we've got loads round here. All you need is a shovel and bucket.

Rob


----------



## casey (Nov 16, 2011)

Copepod said:


> I do object to drivers and passengers throwing lit cigarettes out of car windows and nearly hitting me, causing me to swerve when cycling to work on a hospital campus!




I do agree with the above. A while ago i was cycling when a passenger in a car in front of me threw a lit cigarette end out of the window. It hit me in my eye causing me to jump and fall off my bike. Luckily i fell in towards the pavement, i dread to think what could have happened if i had fallen the other way, out in front of the traffic.


----------



## robert@fm (Nov 16, 2011)

Catwoman76 said:


> Aren't we supposed to protect our children?



There was once an anti-smoking slogan, "Protect children -- don't make them breathe your smoke".  I saw a graffito paraphrase this as "Protect children -- kill a smoker". 



Andy HB said:


> Simple answer ..... Ban Cars, bring back the horse!!



But the traffic fumes would be horrendous.


----------



## Northerner (Nov 16, 2011)

I have a video somewhere of late-Victorian London - the horse drawn traffic is truly alarming!

I smoked for 20 years, I would say that around 7 in 10 of my friends smoked as I was growing up in the '70s. I stopped 15 years ago, and I thanked my lucky stars I did when I was diagnosed with a suspected heart attack and had an angiogram to see if I needed stents in the arteries to my heart. Thankfully, I didn't, in fact the consultant said my arteries were 'pristine' and probably so due to my running. I'f I'd continued smoking through those 15 years though I doubt I would have had such good news. Moreover, I did not have to go through the extremely difficult task of trying to stop at a time when I was trying to come to terms with my diabetes diagnosis.

Stopping smoking was very hard for me, but it was the single best thing that I have ever done for my health. I don't object to people smoking if they choose to, but I don't see the point - and these days it is such a huge expense. When you smoke you really don't realise how it smells to a non-smoker. About a year after I stopped I was still in the habit of vicariously inhaling from smokers in my vicinity, now I do my utmost to avoid it. It has nothing to commend it whatsoever, although I really do appreciate what a powerful addiction it is. 

My take on the 'banning', from what I have seen and read, is that public places like pubs and public transport and workplaces are much cleaner. Apparently many hundreds of thousands of people have stopped because of the bans, so I believe it IS working.


----------



## Andrew (Nov 16, 2011)

*Smoking -- total ban please --*

HI

I have never smoked -  I have suffered from asthma sine age 7 - 
Due to smokers I have had sessions camping in oxygen tents, 
Needed to avoid any location where there is smoke, pubs, cinemas, trains, buses, Cafes, restaurants, 
I would applaud a total ban on smoking in any and every public place.

If those inconsiderate enough, to smoke wish to,  they should do so behind closed doors in a privately owned container reserved for that purpose. Not be allowed under any circumstances to pollute clean air for decent people to breath


Due to my long term experiences with Asthma I would declare myself to be a dedicated anti smoker.    My health is more important than any smoker. Why should I get another camping session in an oxygen tent just so the weak willed, and inconsiderate smokers can spoil the air for every one?


----------



## ypauly (Nov 16, 2011)

Andrew said:


> inconsiderate smokers can spoil the air for every one?



How does stopping somebody smoking while alone in the comfort of thier own car help anybody else?


----------



## ypauly (Nov 16, 2011)

Northerner said:


> Apparently many hundreds of thousands of people have stopped because of the bans, so I believe it IS working.



As a percentage of population smoking was reducing long before then ban, I suspect taxes had more to do with the figures.

http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/smoking/#percent

I cant find the chart I was looking for showing the decline levelled off after the ban, but the interesting thing is parliament still allows smoking.

Definitly one law for them one law for us lol


----------



## trophywench (Nov 16, 2011)

One point about driving and due care and attention that no-one has made yet on here, is should you change a cassette or change the channel, fiddle with the volume knob or indeed any other knobs on your car radio whilst driving along?

OK a lot of these are on the steering wheel or one of the stalks - but not all of them - eg the hazards on my car.  It's somewhere on the lower dash - I'm really not in the habit of hitting it and it isn't something I'd ever think, best check that I know exactly which button it is, before setting off to Tesco's this morning ......

Is one in full control of one's vehicle when doing any of these things, or when sneezing for instance?


Best ban sneezing in cars then, and ban wasps too while yer on with it .....


----------



## ypauly (Nov 16, 2011)

trophywench said:


> One point about driving and due care and attention that no-one has made yet on here, is should you change a cassette or change the channel, fiddle with the volume knob or indeed any other knobs on your car radio whilst driving along?
> 
> OK a lot of these are on the steering wheel or one of the stalks - but not all of them - eg the hazards on my car.  It's somewhere on the lower dash - I'm really not in the habit of hitting it and it isn't something I'd ever think, best check that I know exactly which button it is, before setting off to Tesco's this morning ......
> 
> ...


I once filled up with petrol in a station by a roundabout, I came out of the roundabout and as usual reset the trip computer. The only problem was to press the reset button I had to put my hand through the steering wheel which isn't a good idea when going around a roundabout lol
 I nearly broke my arm in panic and ended up doing an emergency stop as I was head for a bus that was about to pull out.

This proves you can't legislate for idiots lol


----------



## will2016 (Nov 16, 2011)

i can see all sides, i never smoke with kids/non smokers in the car, but booze and drugs do affect others, my dad was a drinker and used to thump my tiny wee  mum when he was drunk, according to the Police the scum who burgled my house were almost certainly drug addicts, so  the misery caused hardly makes them whiter than white, since the interview with the Police we have heard nothing, we were promised more Police patrols, that hasnt happened, there have been more burglaries in the area, smokers are largely law abiding people, but no doubt the councils will retrain loads of snoopers to grass the smoker in their cars at great expense and use it as a money making scheme, so ban the fags totally, and the booze, bang up the druggies and we can all live in Utopia!   
(this is mostly tongue in cheek, well almost)


----------



## Andrew (Nov 16, 2011)

*Ban smoking*

Hi 
People changing Tapes or CD's - using mobile phones - eating - drinking- smoking (lighting - stubbing ? dropping (one of my school friends driving dropped a ?fag? down her dress, she now has an artificial foot)) have all caused accidents, all accident prevention is very desirable in any intelligent persons mind. anyone carrying out any of these activities while driving could be prosecuted under existing due care and attention laws.   

Only smoking in the privacy of one?s own home is acceptable in my view, I can not see how I and others can object to that one.






ypauly said:


> How does stopping somebody smoking while alone in the comfort of thier own car help anybody else?


----------



## rhall92380 (Nov 16, 2011)

toby said:


> During the discussion on R2 they were saying many of the toxins released during smoking remain in the car, so even stumping out a cigarette before  passengers get in still endangers their health.



One of the toxins in cigarette smoke is cyanide

Richard


----------



## Ellie Jones (Nov 17, 2011)

The actual risk for a non-smoker of getting lung cancer is 0.01% and the non-smoker would have to be constantly passive smoking to raise this risk by 16-17% (these are WHO figures) these figures were collated back before smoking bans were brought in... So the risk factor raises to a max of 0.0117%

Strange isn't it people kick up stink about a child being put into a car where somebody has smoked, but couldn't care a toss of all the health problems when the feed their child a poor diet, teach it unhealthy eating practices which leads to a child hitting reception class as obese!  Already 25% of boys and 33% of children between 2-18 are overweight or obese!  Studies has shown that constantly all cancers risks increase at the BMI increases!

So I think some people should be more concerned obesity in their darling off spring rather than hammering whether I choose to smoke in my car or not..

Fairs Fair..

If you are going to fine and criminalise an individual for endangering lives because the have a fag in their cars...  Then parents who allow their children to become obese by giving them unhealthy foods and teaching them unhealthy eating practices should also be held accountable for the gross endangerment of their child's life's!


----------



## trophywench (Nov 17, 2011)

Hear Hear EJ, well said!

They can't stop people using their phones anyway so to think they are gonna be able to stop people smoking, eating their lunch, applying their make-up or anything else they shouldn't be doing whilst driving along, is pie in the sky.  Plus there IS that extra tax thing associated with smoking, whereas I don't see an extra tax being placed on eg mobile phone owners, to pay for the mayhem the irresponsible of their ilk cause!

This is another one of them thar circular arguments, methinks ......


----------



## FM001 (Nov 17, 2011)

Previous employer banned smoking in company vehicles around 5 years ago, gone were the days of getting into a car or works van and they'd be fag-ash over the steering wheel and seat meaning you'd arrive at your destination smelling of smoke and draped in ash.  At the time there was a few objections by those that smoked but in time they soon accepted the company rules.

One of the best things about the ban on smoking in public places is knowing you can dine out with the family without having to pick and choose your place of eating.  Many a time we have been out for day with the kids and we'd spot a nice country pub to eat, once entering the premises you were struck by the mixture of smoke and food in the air, as I would never subject my children to cigarette smoke it meant we would turn around and look for a place which had a no-smoking restaurant.

The more places that smoking is banned the more anti-social it will become and my hope is that this will give people the incentive to stop smoking, I know since the ban came in there was 3 co-workers of mine stopped due to the inconvenience of having to go outside to smoke so the more places it's banned the better chances we have of a healthier nation.


----------



## vince13 (Nov 17, 2011)

You can quote all the figures you like about smoking not being the cause of death etc and, yes, obesity is a shame too, but to my mind smoking is unpleasant to be near and costs the individual too much of their hard-earned (or benefit given) cash so it's a no-brainer to me.  

Having said that it's none of my business what people spend their money on - just keep smokers away from me and my family thank you.


----------



## Mark T (Nov 17, 2011)

I'm with Vince here - what you do to yourself is your own right but I don't want it anywhere near me.

Banning smoking is cars would of course be difficult to enforceable (short of having every manufacturer fit a smoke sensor) but not impossible.


----------



## heasandford (Nov 17, 2011)

ypauly

I cant find the chart I was looking for showing the decline levelled off after the ban said:
			
		

> Where did this come from? no they can't, as it's a public place -
> 
> _SMOKING BAN: Where you can smoke
> 
> ...


----------



## ypauly (Nov 17, 2011)

I  Have just googled the question a parliament and the first five responses say the houses of parliament are exempt. I cant read fully or dowmload the PDF as i am on phone but from what i see it is legal to smoke in parliament.


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 17, 2011)

And I quote...



> From The Guardian: "While the Houses of Parliament are technically exempt from the new law, both the Commons and the Lords have agreed to make all enclosed parts of the Palace of Westminster smoke-free from tomorrow." http://money.guardian.co.uk/workweekly/s?


 
Rob


----------



## ypauly (Nov 17, 2011)

thanks rob.

so it isn't illegal then.


----------



## Raymond (Nov 17, 2011)

Smoking is a terrible affliction that most people took up when they were young and "bulletproof". Whom of us did not do something stupid when young? I have smoked longer than I have not smoked and am desperately trying to give up after my diagnosis. I have had some success and have cut down to only a couple a day and hope to completely stop very soon, however to be called weak-willed and not a decent person grates on the nerves. I don't drive but have to breathe in fumes from cars and buses etc everywhere I go. Are drivers weak-willed for not getting to their destination by foot? Apportioning blame isn't the answer. Education is and it's getting there. Unfortunately it will just take time.


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 17, 2011)

Agree with Heasandford. If it were just about solitary smokers in their own cars smoking alone, it wouldn't be an issue.

I feel they're aiming at the people who do smole in the car with their kids in the back and feel no need to compromise. Whatever the WHO statistics might suggest, there is a very real high risk of health problems associated with passive smoking. 
It's not a necessity and needs to be made socially unacceptable.

Rob


----------



## cherrypie (Nov 17, 2011)

cherrypie said:


> I think it is irresponsible of smokers to smoke in their cars if their children are in the car with them.  Most smokers that I know ask permission to smoke around me and the answer is always no.
> There is an equal threat to health for pedestrians from the cars themselves especially in our towns and cities.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/exhaust_emissions.shtml



I posted this earlier in the debate.  All anti smoking car owners don't seem to want to comment about the pollution from their cars.  Is that an acceptable risk for pedestrians and cyclists?


----------



## Mark T (Nov 17, 2011)

cherrypie said:


> I posted this earlier in the debate.  All anti smoking car owners don't seem to want to comment about the pollution from their cars.  Is that an acceptable risk for pedestrians and cyclists?


This is a valid comment - but... modern cars are not so bad since the catalytic convertor reduces most of the dangerous gases to negligible quantities and certainly the modern exhaust is less carcinogenic then a smoker (although the carbon dioxide cat's produce is toxic in high quantities - thus the issue for cyclists in busy roads).

If the car lobby wanted to take the moral high ground, possibly they ought to ban any vehicle not using a catalytic convertor  for a starter


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 17, 2011)

cherrypie said:


> I posted this earlier in the debate. All anti smoking car owners don't seem to want to comment about the pollution from their cars. Is that an acceptable risk for pedestrians and cyclists?


 
It depends how you view the motor vehicle. If you see it as a luxury that people can easily do without (ie. an indulgence), then I agree. But as Mark says, steps have been taken to reduce emissions and cleaner cars pay less tax and are more efficient.

But there is certainly a wider problem with pollution than just smoking. It's just that smoking is literally "in your face", isn't necessary and does cause a lot of health problems to a lot of people. 

I'd love to see tighter controls on a lot more polluters.

Rob


----------



## Raymond (Nov 17, 2011)

Robster65 said:


> It depends how you view the motor vehicle. If you see it as a luxury that people can easily do without (ie. an indulgence), then I agree. But as Mark says, steps have been taken to reduce emissions and cleaner cars pay less tax and are more efficient.
> 
> But there is certainly a wider problem with pollution than just smoking. It's just that smoking is literally "in your face", isn't necessary and does cause a lot of health problems to a lot of people.
> 
> ...



Sorry Robster, don't see the relevance in how the motor vehicle is viewed. Basic fact is that it emits fumes dangerous to health and alot of the time is not a necessity. The fact that smoking is "in your face" heightens its visibility and becomes an easy target but I completely agree with you that it's pollution that should be targeted, I just take offence at being singled out when in actual fact there are many things out there that are harmful to us but just not as visible. There are better ways to educate people.


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 17, 2011)

Raymond said:


> Sorry Robster, don't see the relevance in how the motor vehicle is viewed. Basic fact is that it emits fumes dangerous to health and alot of the time is not a necessity. The fact that smoking is "in your face" heightens its visibility and becomes an easy target but I completely agree with you that it's pollution that should be targeted, I just take offence at being singled out when in actual fact there are many things out there that are harmful to us but just not as visible. There are better ways to educate people.


 
For many (most?) people, the car is a necessity. Smoking is always a choice, as is drinking alcohol, gambling, etc.

Driving isn't something one can very often make a conscious choice about. If you need to get to work 20 miles away, some could cycle but not that many. Buses are often non-existent or overly expensive.

Rob


----------



## Copepod (Nov 17, 2011)

But refusing to consider cycling and "demanding" the right to drive 3 miles to work, for example, is much more difficult to defend than Rob's 20 mile journey in a rural area without public transport. 

As an example, one of my jobs starts at a location 3.5 miles from my home. In over 9 years working there, at least 4 times per month, I have only driven about 10 times, and that was because of carrying very heavy or bulky items in one direction eg hay bale. I have cycled with large empty animal fee buckets and plastic crates of maps, for example. On the way, just 1.5 miles from the workplace, I pass the end of the road where a colleague lives - who always drives her gas guzzling 4WD. It's on a main road, so always gritted in winter, while I sometiems have to leave the uncleared cycle path to use the road in winter. It's a different matter for another colleages who lives 15 miles away in an other direction - obviously she drives and so would I most times if I lived there.


----------



## Caroline (Nov 17, 2011)

Copepod said:


> But refusing to consider cycling and "demanding" the right to drive 3 miles to work, for example, is much more difficult to defend than Rob's 20 mile journey in a rural area without public transport.
> 
> As an example, one of my jobs starts at a location 3.5 miles from my home. In over 9 years working there, at least 4 times per month, I have only driven about 10 times, and that was because of carrying very heavy or bulky items in one direction eg hay bale. I have cycled with large empty animal fee buckets and plastic crates of maps, for example. On the way, just 1.5 miles from the workplace, I pass the end of the road where a colleague lives - who always drives her gas guzzling 4WD. It's on a main road, so always gritted in winter, while I sometiems have to leave the uncleared cycle path to use the road in winter. It's a different matter for another colleages who lives 15 miles away in an other direction - obviously she drives and so would I most times if I lived there.



On a similar note, when my big boy was at school we used to walk to school, about a 10 minute walk or 1 stop on the bus. As a family we don't have a car and on the occiaisions we need to get to hard to reache places we ask a favour or get a cab. Some one in big boys class lived about a 5 minute walk from school and ALWAYS got a lift and was ALWAYS late.

Cars have their benefits as do walking and cycling. I do think some people feel just because they have a car they have to use it even for short journeys.


----------



## trophywench (Nov 17, 2011)

Awfully difficult to manage without a car round here.  I live just outside Coventry.  You would think there would be a really good bus service to the hospital, situated at one of the furthest outposts of the city from the centre.  And there is, it takes approx 40 mins from the city centre, and runs every 20 minutes or so.

So I could get on the bus right outside my house - every 20 minutes in the week daytime - and go into Coventry, swap buses and go to the hospital.  The two bus jouneys add up to an hour and twenty minutes, but of course they don't join up very well on the timetable, so add another half hour to allow for that.  So travelling time of getting on for 4 hours for 2 x 25 minute journeys in the car, cos I'd go down the M6 from home and not touch the city centre with a bargepole.  Only snag with the car and going there, is it takes you nearly as long to park as it does to get there ...... so you still have to allow a full hour to get there!  LOL

Doesn't exactly endear me to the place!


----------



## FM001 (Nov 17, 2011)

Caroline said:


> On a similar note, when my big boy was at school we used to walk to school, about a 10 minute walk or 1 stop on the bus. As a family we don't have a car and on the occiaisions we need to get to hard to reache places we ask a favour or get a cab. Some one in big boys class lived about a 5 minute walk from school and ALWAYS got a lift and was ALWAYS late.
> 
> Cars have their benefits as do walking and cycling. I do think some people feel just because they have a car they have to use it even for short journeys.




Brings back memories when my kids were at Infant and Junior school.  The schools were a mile away from home and we'd walk them to school come rain or shine, some parents who lived with a 5 - 10 minute walking distance would take their kids by car and then pick them up again, didn't matter if it was a beautiful summers day.  Granted some parents drop the kids off on the way to work, but most days when I was walking back I would see the same cars pull into the drives with or without kids.

What was more annoying than anything was the limited parking spaces around the school taken up by these parents, as the only school within 5 miles those that travelled furthest couldn't get parked


----------



## Caroline (Nov 17, 2011)

trophywench said:


> Awfully difficult to manage without a car round here.  I live just outside Coventry.  You would think there would be a really good bus service to the hospital, situated at one of the furthest outposts of the city from the centre.  And there is, it takes approx 40 mins from the city centre, and runs every 20 minutes or so.
> 
> So I could get on the bus right outside my house - every 20 minutes in the week daytime - and go into Coventry, swap buses and go to the hospital.  The two bus jouneys add up to an hour and twenty minutes, but of course they don't join up very well on the timetable, so add another half hour to allow for that.  So travelling time of getting on for 4 hours for 2 x 25 minute journeys in the car, cos I'd go down the M6 from home and not touch the city centre with a bargepole.  Only snag with the car and going there, is it takes you nearly as long to park as it does to get there ...... so you still have to allow a full hour to get there!  LOL
> 
> Doesn't exactly endear me to the place!




Even living in London, it takes me an hour and two buses to get to one hospital and two hours and two buses to get to the other.


----------



## Andy HB (Nov 17, 2011)

I tend to find that the people who think cars are essential, usually have one and those that don't ..... don't. 

I also tend to find that people with cars live miles from their places of work whereas those without cars live walking distance from work (or have really good public transport links).

Funny that!

Andy 'generalising excessively' HB


----------



## will2016 (Nov 17, 2011)

Raymond said:


> Smoking is a terrible affliction that most people took up when they were young and "bulletproof". Whom of us did not do something stupid when young? I have smoked longer than I have not smoked and am desperately trying to give up after my diagnosis. I have had some success and have cut down to only a couple a day and hope to completely stop very soon, however to be called weak-willed and not a decent person grates on the nerves. I don't drive but have to breathe in fumes from cars and buses etc everywhere I go. Are drivers weak-willed for not getting to their destination by foot? Apportioning blame isn't the answer. Education is and it's getting there. Unfortunately it will just take time.



good luck on kicking the habit, you have done really well thus far, so inspire me to join you!


----------



## Ellie Jones (Nov 17, 2011)

Andy it's the same with non-smokers

In general people are pretty much hypocrites..

Do the non-smokers actually consider how I feel when I'm faced with the stench of stale alcohol, or the fact speaking to somebody is an unpleasant experience having a waft of alcohol, or how over powering it is to be confined in a car with even just one individual who's had a couple of drinks and how long it takes for that smell to go!  

Why can't I demand to go into a pub, and not be faced with the obnoxious fumes and stink of stale alcohol after all I might only drink soft drinks but I still want to go into a pub and socialise with people!

See I don't actually drink, and I find the smell of alcohol gut wrenching, I won't even kiss my husband if he's had a drink and if I had a spare bed then I would sleep there rather than put up with the smell of alcohol being expelled as he sleeps..

So all of those people who moan about the smell of smoke, whether you can take a child in a pub, whether people should or shouldn't be prosecuted for smoking in a car they own etc...  Spare a thought for the likes of me the NON-Drinker your disgusting habit also impacts on other peoples lives, you are exposing your children to a drug that is just as destructive as tobacco both on individual themselves and those around them... With a greater impact daily to society than tobacco probably has!  

But unlike some I'm not a hypocrite, moralistic or judgemental about other peoples choices, I allow people to make their choices and don't enforce my personal opinions on others..


----------



## Raymond (Nov 17, 2011)

will2016 said:


> good luck on kicking the habit, you have done really well thus far, so inspire me to join you!


Cheers!! and good luck yourself!!


----------



## Andy HB (Nov 17, 2011)

Smoking has a different 'passive' effect to drinking though (unless someone decides to pour a pint over someone else).

I know what you mean about the smell of alcohol on the breath though. I hate that too (but only in others!).

Andy


----------



## Andy HB (Nov 17, 2011)

Raymond said:


> Cheers!! and good luck yourself!!



Good luck to you both!

I gave up over ten years ago now and it was one of the best things I ever did both health and financially-wise.

Andy


----------



## Robster65 (Nov 17, 2011)

Ellie Jones said:


> Andy it's the same with non-smokers
> 
> In general people are pretty much hypocrites..
> 
> ...


 
But I've never smoked, barely drink (1 unit per week at the very most) and certainly don't wish to inflict my views on others.

The point is that non-smoking doesn't actually harm anyone or have any effect on anyone.

Smoking does. So, by choosing to smoke around others (whether strangers, family or friends) the freedom of choice of the non-smoker is removed. They are forced to inhale the smoke. As with your analogy of drinkers. Although I'm not sure your health can be damaged by the stale fumes of an alcoholic's breath. So the analogy isn't really suitable. One is a matter of distaste, while the other is a matter of health.

I've no wish to impose my views on others. Unless their choice of self-indulgence has an adverse effect on others without their informed consent.

Rob


----------



## squidge63 (Nov 17, 2011)

Personally I think smoking should be banned everywhere, inside, outside and when driving, the only space smokers should be allowed to smoke it in their own homes, they can they pollute their space and not everyone else's...

I hardly ever drink, maybe once or twice a year, I agree that stale alcohol is disgusting, but as far as I know drink fumes haven't harmed a non-drinker.


----------

