Alright, this is a little too much from me... (Smoking ban with kids in car)

[BuzzardsWife]

Originally Posted by Azure

Disagree with what? That 3/4 people that are found at Mickey D's eat there 5-6 times per week? And in certain areas, 75% of those people come from low-income families?

Give me proof. And statistics are not always correct. Statistics are taken in many different forms. I find it hard to believe that poor people can afford to feed their family rotten ronnies 3 times a week.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BuzzardsWife

Give me proof. And statistics are not always correct. Statistics are taken in many different forms. I find it hard to believe that poor people can afford to feed their family rotten ronnies 3 times a week.

Compared to what?

Fresh Veggies and lean meat? You do realize that the price of those items has inflated itself many times over the past 40 years? While junk food and fast food have stayed relatively low-priced?

If you want proof, read 'Fast Food Nation' by Eric Schlosser.

[BuzzardsWife]

Originally Posted by Azure

Compared to what?

Fresh Veggies and lean meat? You do realize that the price of those items has inflated itself many times over the past 40 years? While junk food and fast food have stayed relatively low-priced?

If you want proof, read 'Fast Food Nation' by Eric Schlosser.

You said the statitistics state, in certain areas. To me that could mean 2 towns in the U.S. I can't be convinced of this, so my argument is over. To me I'm right, to me you're wrong. Sorry.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I still think the government is going about this the wrong way ... just like the rest of their anti-smoking legislation. Legislation against smoking in vehicles is an indirect way of attacking smoking. As you've pointed out, it's really a legislation against stupidity as much as it is against smoking.

If the government wants to stop smoking, make it illegal. If that's really their goal, why not take direct legislative action against smoking itself, rather than indirect legislation that often targets individual rights and lifestyle choices. I'd rather see the government just make tobacco use illegal than establish precedent setting individual rights and lifestyle legislation. Failure to legislate against smoking directly makes me wonder if governments are too addicted to tobacco taxes to have the will to actually make it illegal.

For what it's worth ... I'm a casual cigar smoker, not a non-smoker or an anti-smoker.

I suppose the obvious answer is that if the government made tobacco illegal we'd be witnessing the birth of the largest/newest black market in North America, probably worth 10's or 100's of billions of dollars. If some people think marijuana dealing/use is prevalent, wait until cigarettes are illegal! Tobacco hydro grow-ops!

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BuzzardsWife

You said the statitistics state, in certain areas. To me that could mean 2 towns in the U.S. I can't be convinced of this, so my argument is over. To me I'm right, to me you're wrong. Sorry.

In certain areas, you know....California as opposed to Washington State. Texas, as opposed to Colorado.

Overall consensus is that low-income families eat at Mickey D's a LOT.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by BuzzardsWife

Give me proof. And statistics are not always correct. Statistics are taken in many different forms. I find it hard to believe that poor people can afford to feed their family rotten ronnies 3 times a week.

You might want ot look at this article.

Nutritional Status of Low-Income Families

"Limited-resource families often lack food preparation skills. As a result, increased numbers of limited-resource families report eating meals away from home on a regular basis. An increase in the number of meals consumed in restaurants not only drains the family’s minimal resources for food, but also exposes family members to larger portion sizes and often higher fat food choices."

http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/fcs/pdfs/nut.pdf

[Azure]

^^^Exactly my point.

And when you lack basic food knowledge, and have no idea how dangerous fast food is, obviously you're going to eat at Mickey D's instead of the Keg because its a heck of a lot cheaper.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

^^^Exactly my point.

And when you lack basic food knowledge, and have no idea how dangerous fast food is, obviously you're going to eat at Mickey D's instead of the Keg because its a heck of a lot cheaper.

Also add to the fact that these families are often working 2 or more jobs to put a roof over thier heads. With the stress of trying to find quality time with family, eating out/take out becomes the easy solution.

[ken0042]

Ontario passes ban on smoking in cars with kids under 16

[Boblobla]

Heh, I would be so mad if I was driving with my 16yr old and they pulled me over and ID'd my kid.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

Heh, I would be so mad if I was driving with my 16yr old and they pulled me over and ID'd my kid.

I get really mad when I get pulled over for anything, but if the law comes a callin, you you have to do as they say.

I'd hazard a guess that most cops would be looking more for children in cars with a smoking driver, rather than a 14 - 6 year old.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I get really mad when I get pulled over for anything, but if the law comes a callin, you you have to do as they say.

I'd hazard a guess that most cops would be looking more for children in cars with a smoking driver, rather than a 14 - 16 year old.

Probably. I am just looking for potential flaws.

ie: A 15 year old smoking in a car. Can you give him/her a ticket for endangering himself?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

Probably. I am just looking for potential flaws.

ie: A 15 year old smoking in a car. Can you give him/her a ticket for endangering himself?

Yeah, that definitly is a potential flaw, but like i said, you'd probably have to meet a real dick cop for that part of the law to actually be tested.

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Yeah, that definitly is a potential flaw, but like i said, you'd probably have to meet a real dick cop for that part of the law to actually be tested.

I have never encountered any other kind tbqh...

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

I have never encountered any other kind tbqh...

I had a really pleasant exchange with a bicycle cop the other night which resulted in me not getting a ticket for jay-walking. Of course, I had to lie and say I had just moved here from Toronto...

[Locke]

Well, if its already passed elsewhere I guess we'll see how it shakes out.

[Claeren]

Originally Posted by Boblobla

Probably. I am just looking for potential flaws.

ie: A 15 year old smoking in a car. Can you give him/her a ticket for endangering himself?

How is that scenario possible without someone having broken A law?

That 15 year old either:
1) Had an adult buy them smokes - crime by adult
2) used fake ID - crime by teen
3) was not ID'd - crime by store
4) stole them - crime by teen

And whichever adult is driving would have to be answering some serious questions since the 15 year old child in their care is breaking the law in their vehicle.

Not saying it would be a common problem, just that there is no issue for enforcement of the law for police. I am sure they can deal with it if it did come up.



Claeren.

[ericschand]

Originally Posted by Claeren

How is that scenario possible without someone having broken A law?

That 15 year old either:
1) Had an adult buy them smokes - crime by adult
...
And whichever adult is driving would have to be answering some serious questions since the 15 year old child in their care is breaking the law in their vehicle.

Not saying it would be a common problem, just that there is no issue for enforcement of the law for police. I am sure they can deal with it if it did come up.

Claeren.

Not actually knowing the answers, can a parent be charged for buying
cigarettes for their own kid? What if the parent is smoking and driving,
but so is the 15 year old kid, with parent's consent?

ers

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Claeren

How is that scenario possible without someone having broken A law?

That 15 year old either:
1) Had an adult buy them smokes - crime by adult
2) used fake ID - crime by teen
3) was not ID'd - crime by store
4) stole them - crime by teen

And whichever adult is driving would have to be answering some serious questions since the 15 year old child in their care is breaking the law in their vehicle.

Not saying it would be a common problem, just that there is no issue for enforcement of the law for police. I am sure they can deal with it if it did come up.

Claeren.

Sure it is illegal to buy them, or buy them for the kid but once the kid has them the police can do SFA to make them not smoke them. What if it is the kids 17 year old brother who is driving?

I know this is pretty ######ed 'what if' situation but I am extremely bored.

[Phaneuf_Rules]

Its against the law to beat your children, why shouldnt it be against the law to force them to inhale second hand smoke. I understand that some people put the windows down to make it less bad, but some people also use a belt instead of a wrench. Abuse is abuse.