“we just want to give our kids a choice”… but to be perfectly honest, we don’t care if anyone else has a choice.

I have to be honest; I would never smoke in the same car as my kid, and I don’t even have kids. I guess that doesn’t effect me yet. But, the part that really bugs me is the beaches and the parks. If we can’t smoke outside, and the new tax kills all the lounges, where can those of us who live in apartments smoke? Those of us who chose not to smoke indoors, where does that put us? This is going to be like the prohibition all over again. It didn’t work the first time, and I just hope they remember that lesson.

Barry:
Good article. I am a member of CRA and belive like you that we should fight vigorusly against anti smoking legislation.

I also feel we should pick our fights.

I do not have a problem with giving a fine to someone smoking in a car with someone under 14. Smoking in a car by yourself is fine. I do it often but when I have a non smoker with me I wouldn’t even dream of it. I am not that insensitive or addicted that it can’t wait.

The arguement by Assemblywoman Nettie Mayersohn “we just want to give our kids a choice”. Is weak and just an attempt drive the argument.

Your counter argument of saying “if Junior says “I dont mind if Mommy/Daddy smokes” will this be the choice needed to get you out of the fine?” While a good argument technique of testing the logistics of the law is wrong headed. Someone who smokes in a car with kids in it is a passive aggressive bully and I sure the “victim” would say it was OK with them that mommy or daddy smokes.

I do agree with you about the rest of the story we cannot have pseudo science running the debate. Everyone should have to prove their numbers.

See. This is exactly how it’s done. Death by a thousands cuts.

It always starts with everything being done for the sake “of the children.” People fall for that crap every single time, man. Be on the lookout for it as we start getting soda, sugar and fats food taxes.

And I can see people not being opposed to the law, like Pappy. But you should be. This is merely a first step. And of course you don’t smoke with kids or non-smokers in the car. It’s because you are courteous and conscientious…but do you really think there needs to be legislature and fines and the use of police officers to enforce this?

The real issue here is the outside smoking ban. Always look two steps beyond. I understand picking your battles but when you lose this one, it’s gonna be a lot harder to win the others coming done the pike. And we are losing battle after battle…quickly.

I mean this is right on the heals of the the 92% tax …Oh wait– I’m sorry that was “compromised” down to only 75%. Bait and switch. Two steps ahead. It was never meant to be 92%. This goes through and then they’re emboldened to do the outdoor ban. Quicker than you can say “renew my CRA membership.”

And of course the science here is crap. Name 5 people in the history of the world who have died from second hand smoke. The hysteria the anti-smokers have created is unreal. We’re literally at a point in history that people think if they smell smoke they’re going to get cancer.

And why 14? That’s a rather arbitrary number. Why not 18 since they are not adults yet? So it’s cool for 14 year olds to be around smoke. I don’t get it.

Ok. Off my soapbox. My brain is melting.