Alberta bans smoking in cars with minors present.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Lionel Steel

Didn't see this answered, but isn't smoking in a car already banned?

Didn't see it answered yet but no smoking is not covered by distracted driving law. Smoking while driving is legal.

[moon]

Originally Posted by blankall

I think plenty of people will stop once they start handing out tickets. I hardly see people texting while drivign anymore. I also don't see anybody smoking in bars anymore. Same principle.

I think all smokers know this is bad for their children. Some just need a kick in the pants to properly adjust their behaviour.

Really?

Maybe it is a Lethbridge/Calgary thing but I see people talking on their phone all the time while driving. Seems to me there was a slight decrease when the law first popped up but now it doesn't seem to stop people from what I have seen.

As for smoking in bars that is because the owners of the bars enforce it. Not sure that any tickets have even been given out for smoking in a bar in Alberta, from what I have been told certainly haven't been any in Lethbridge. Unfortunately in this case we don't have bar owners driving in cars with these people to ensure they don't smoke.

[the-rasta-masta]

Originally Posted by moon

Didn't see it answered yet but no smoking is not covered by distracted driving law. Smoking while driving is legal.

So smoking is okay, but I can't turn up the volume on my radio?

[Knalus]

Isn't it wonderful how confusing and arbitrary these great new laws are?

[moon]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

So smoking is okay, but I can't turn up the volume on my radio?

Here is a list of what is and isn't allowed:

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...teddriving.htm

[Knalus]

Highlights:

• Restricts drivers from:
  • using hand-held cell phones
  • texting or e-mailing
  • using electronic devices like laptop computers, video games, cameras, video entertainment displays and programming portable audio players (e.g., MP3 players)
  • entering information on GPS units
  • reading printed materials in the vehicle
  • writing, printing or sketching, and
  • personal grooming
• Complements the current driving without due care and attention legislation
• Applies to all vehicles as defined by the Traffic Safety Act, including bicycles
• Applies to all roads in both urban and rural areas of the province
• The fine for this new offence is $172

[blankall]

Originally Posted by moon

Really?

Maybe it is a Lethbridge/Calgary thing but I see people talking on their phone all the time while driving. Seems to me there was a slight decrease when the law first popped up but now it doesn't seem to stop people from what I have seen.

As for smoking in bars that is because the owners of the bars enforce it. Not sure that any tickets have even been given out for smoking in a bar in Alberta, from what I have been told certainly haven't been any in Lethbridge. Unfortunately in this case we don't have bar owners driving in cars with these people to ensure they don't smoke.

The better example is seatbelts. Prior to seatbelt laws, it was common for people not to wear them. Now virtually everyone does.

Even if the ban doesn't stop smoking with kids in cars all together, it will decrease it.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

There is an infringement on liberty that will be inherent with any group that decides to live together and form society. I think it is to be expected and have no problem with it. Something like our current system of zoning land is a great thing. It absolutely infringes on my right to use my land in many different ways but it is also necessary to avoid the chaos of having my neighbor erect a factory on his property.

Completely agree, in any society there will be a need for liberty in its purest sense to be sacrificed. The question is always one of degree. The sacrifice should always be proportional to the need, which coincidentally is a large part of the review courts conduct over such cases. It actually makes Constitutional law very fascinating in many ways, the balancing of competing interests is always a difficult task.

[burn_this_city]

Does picking your nose count as personal grooming?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Knalus

Isn't it wonderful how confusing and arbitrary these great new laws are?

What's confusing.

You. Cannot. Smoke. In. A. Car. With. A. Minor. Present.

Still confused?

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by valo403

What's confusing.

You. Cannot. Smoke. In. A. Car. With. A. Minor. Present.

Still confused?

But. Is. It. Distracted. Driving.

Some people were just discussing their confusion.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by Dion

I think you're fear mongering if you think it will go that far.

I think you're blind if you havent paid attention to what been changing around you in the past 10 years when it comes to people legislating change because of what 'they' think is better for you. Strangely enough its apparently happening slow enough that many people (you included) don't see it. So yeah, it will go that far. Less control is better

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Un-thanks for a surprising lack of logic on your part.

Did you bang your head?

I just dont see the point man. I understand its a bad thing, but at the same time what real effect is this going to have? So they dont smoke in the car with their kids but just hotbox their house once they get home? Progress!

If you want to have an impact on the safetey of people who cant protect themselves then I think other measures are going to have to be implemented, this law to me seems like trying to empty Lake Ontario with a teacup.

I understand the 'logical fallacy' of; 'if we cant do everything then we shouldnt do anything' but at the same time, the effort and expense of doing something incredibly minor and likely largely ineffective seems like an inefficient method to cure the root cause.

You want to protect kids, thats great, what real, measureable effect is this going to have towards that goal? If the answer is; 'very little' then maybe people should keep looking for a better way.

I also understand that its 'something' and that 'something is always better than nothing' but if the cost of something outweighs its own benefits then maybe instead of blindly and unthinkingly doing it anyways, the resources would be better served finding a more suitable alternative.

[crazy_eoj]

Well it seems to be a clear majority of people who support the government stepping in to stop people from smoking in a car with minors. But in reality, we don't spend much time in a car.

Should the government make it illegal to smoke in a house if you have children? What about neigbors... should the government make it illegal for people to smoke that have neighbors with children in apartments and condo's?

What about breastfeeding mothers? Should we make it illegal for breasfeeding mothers to smoke and/or drink? It clearly can cause hard to the child, and some people still do it. Will making the government responsible for everything solve these issues as well?

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by valo403

What's confusing.

You. Cannot. Smoke. In. A. Car. With. A. Minor. Present.

Still confused?

What about having a lit cigarette in the car but you didn't, ar, inhale?

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

What about breastfeeding mothers? Should we make it illegal for breasfeeding mothers to smoke and/or drink? It clearly can cause hard to the child, and some people still do it. Will making the government responsible for everything solve these issues as well?

I think having specific coded laws kind of defeats the benefits of the common law system.

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Aleks

I think you're blind if you havent paid attention to what been changing around you in the past 10 years when it comes to people legislating change because of what 'they' think is better for you. Strangely enough its apparently happening slow enough that many people (you included) don't see it. So yeah, it will go that far. Less control is better

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

Can you give us an example of what you mean and how it has affected you?

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Can you give us an example of what you mean and how it has affected you?

I can.

A law put in place that required kids to wear a bike helmet while riding a bike resulted in my brother no longer riding his bike.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by Aleks

I think you're blind if you havent paid attention to what been changing around you in the past 10 years when it comes to people legislating change because of what 'they' think is better for you. Strangely enough its apparently happening slow enough that many people (you included) don't see it. So yeah, it will go that far. Less control is better

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

I think you may be missing the point in this particular instance. This law isn't about goverment determining what "they" think is better for you. The law isn't telling you to stop smoking. Hell, smoke 3 packs a day if you want.

What it does say is that innocent children who don't have a say should not be exposed to the pollutants of cigarette smoke because of your choices.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Knalus

I can.

A law put in place that required kids to wear a bike helmet while riding a bike resulted in my brother no longer riding his bike.

They tried to mandate bike helmets for adults here in Lethbridge a year ago.....

Thankfully that didn't go over too well.