Skip to comments.Bill would ban people from smoking while children in the car. (Louisiana legislature lunacy)
Posted on 05/05/2006 6:11:02 AM PDT by BerniesFriend
Bill would ban people from smoking while children in the car
BATON ROUGE, La. -- Parents would have to stub out their cigarettes while their kids are in the car, under a bill headed to the Senate for debate.
The bill would prohibit anyone from lighting up a cigarette, cigar or pipe in a vehicle while a child required to be in a booster seat or car seat is riding along _ a child up to 60 pounds, or up to about eight years old.
The House approved the bill in a 66-31 vote.
Rep. Gary Smith, D-Norco, said he introduced the measure because he wants to prevent health problems that children can have from second hand smoke inhalation. He said children don't get a choice in whose cars they ride.
"I'm just trying to protect those who cannot protect themselves," he said.
Rep. Carla Dartez, D-Morgan City, said the bill infringes upon parents' rights to raise their children.
"I just think you're going a little too far in this Legislature when we can't allow parents of their own children to take care of their own children," she said.
House Bill 1010 can be found at http://www.legis.state.la.us
"And if parents"
So, your automatic assumption is that smokers "blow smoke in their children's lungs" but when it comes to other toxic items you would want to only take action "if" the children can be proven to be harmed.
This just shows that your rhetoric is emotional, without logic or thought behind it. Much like the loony left's hate Bush platform, when you wish to rule by emotion you have no firm position and decisions are made with the consistency of the wind.
Your emotional rhetoric is an enemy of personal liberty and freedom.
It was a woman who made this stupid statement. And a parent who smokes around children is not "protecting them" from harm, it is inflicting harm on them.
That would be a good first start. I have parents, I do not need a government nanny for myself or my child.
Enough is enough with the government interferring in our lives.
At this particular point in time, there are more than likely quite a few more important things for the Louisiana Legislature to be worrying about, wouldn't you agree?
Do you think Rush will be all over this today?
"Rep. Carla Dartez, D-Morgan City, said the bill infringes upon parents' rights to raise their children"
At least she has it right. All this is about is CONTROL. If they can get this far, soon they'll be knockin' on your backdoor.
THIS ISN'T ABOUT TOBACCO. It's a convieient excuse,(because we must protect you from evil tobacco users) to give them a reason to get their foot in the door of your home. "We must protect the children", is code for "we will rule every aspect of your miserable little lives."
And once they're in, they will be harder to get rid of than a colony of cockroaches.
IT'S BUSH'S FAULT! IT'S THE SMOKERS FAULT!
Sound familiar? What side of the fence screams THIS garbage? heh!
It was not a stupid statement - it is a valid gripe that it is not up to the government to control every aspect of everyone's lives.
The adherence to this idea "there outta be a law" is what is dumbing down this country and causing even the most intelligent and sincere amongst us to agree that what government says is best.
Okay, Einstein, I'll explain it to you with small words, so you might understand it. Smoking around children increases their risk of harm. That is a bad thing. We should rightly describe it as "child abuse," but don't out of a misguided notion that it might offend the junkies who like to inhale shit into their lungs. I am opposed to harming children, even if it inconveniences these same drug addicts, on a pragmatic, intellectual and moral basis. Should another action cause similar harm (such as feeding children arsenic, running over them with a car, hitting them with a shovel, or damaging their bodies by using poison for cleaning products), I would oppose these other things for the same pragmatic, intellectual and moral reasons.
just wondering....How many of you grew up breathing in cigarette smoke and are still alive????!!!
Boy, you sure are an ignorant nasty one, aren't you? For a FReeper! CSM can understand a lot more then you might think! Jerk.
Quite a few of us. And we are ALL going on the FReeper Cruise! Yahoo!!!!!!!!!!!
I am opposed to my kids bull riding a nuclear missle, like Slim Pickens in doctor strangelove. Other than that, I'll decide how to raise my kids, not you, or the miserable government. Hell, the government can't even fix it's own problems, let alone mine.
It has been demonstrated that most smokers see no problem in subjecting their kids to smoke. Some actually think its a healthy thing. Smoker's kids need to be protected from actions coming from this ignorance.
Nearly everyone I know, as a matter of fact........both smokers and non-smokers.
"Smoking around children increases their risk of harm."
Transporting children in automobiles is a greater increase in the risk of harm for children. In addition, explain how the rates of asthma and allergies in children have increased as the smoking rates decrease. Based on that correlation alone, then not smoking around children increases their risk of contracting harmful life long health problems. We better mandate that all parents smoke around their children.
Isn't lifestyle projection great!
Would you suggest we leave an innocent child with a child-rapist parent?? Can't have the "nanny government" step in...
How about if "mommy dearest" likes to discipline the child by putting her hand to a red-hot stove? Hey, she has a mother, no need for anyone else to get involved...
Or maybe if the parent feeds the kid poison? Oh, wanting to help the kid is just emotionalism. The Legislature has other things to do...
It's only the natural progression of a movement based on unfounded science and unbridled arrogance, for, make no mistake about it, the state always feeds on the arrogation of power and wherever power is gained there is a concomitant loss.
Not all of us are going on the FReeper cruise.............I do not do cruises. Been there, done that and once was enough.
Excellent idea. Nothing worse than having to be around a smoker. What an awful addition. Killing children is not to be found anywhere in the Constitution.
It was a stupid statement. The junkies are so hooked on their addiction, they don't care if they hurt their kids, so long as they get their fix.
"just wondering....How many of you grew up breathing in cigarette smoke and are still alive????!!!"
As of 11:01 AM, I am still here.
Let me correct that for you.........
All children need to be protected from actions coming from overzealous fanatics and their ignorance.
There, much better.
"It has been demonstrated that most smokers see no problem in subjecting their kids to smoke. Some actually think its a healthy thing. Smoker's kids need to be protected from actions coming from this ignorance"
Ray, you are one of the most amazing souls I have ever met.
You should become a motivational speaker.
You have changed my life, for the better.
All the child-rapist parents are cheering for more people like you in this world...
No one has ever proven that exposure to SHS or ETS causes people harm, even children. Several studies have tried and failed. You only FEEL like it causes harm, therefore you are emotionally charged about the issue.
"All the child-rapist parents are cheering for more people like you in this world..."
The mear fact that you have to equate smoking with raping children shows the ludicrousness of your stance. If you had a legitimate argument you wouldn't need to exaggerate to make that point.
Why is it that you nanny-statists so enjoy mixing apples and oranges?
Nothing you mention is in anyway in relation to the topic of discussion. Equating parents who smoke with child rapists is beneath contempt, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
I think Katrina showed the politicians of Louisiana are not the smartest on the proverbial block.
These are the same people who sat back and argued while thousands of their constituents were maimed and killed.
Then these same idiots had the gall to go crying to the public and blame the president for their stupidity and graft.
All ready the politicians are proving that they can not be trusted with public money.
Before this is over lots of good ole boys (Democrats) will get rich off the backs of the poor black plantation dwellers.
No, it wasn't. This, OTOH:
The junkies are so hooked on their addiction, they don't care if they hurt their kids, so long as they get their fix.
....is a fine example of a stupid statement.
"Or maybe if the parent feeds the kid poison? Oh, wanting to help the kid is just emotionalism. The Legislature has other things to do"
I believe that is already illegal.
Last I checked, poisoning was murder.
The difference, of course, being that there is absolutely no benefit to the child derived from the junkie filling his lungs around the kid. So the increase in the risk of harm of an activity with beneficial aspects to it is irrelevant to this question.
In addition, explain how the rates of asthma and allergies in children have increased as the smoking rates decrease. Based on that correlation alone, then not smoking around children increases their risk of contracting harmful life long health problems.
That's the dumbest, most ignorant, illogical, inane and ridiculously stupid statement I've read on FreeRepublic in a while. Holy crap, it's like the perfect storm of mindless idiocy. I mean, you have to be REALLY stupid not to see the fallacy in that statement. (Here's a hint: if other causes of allergies and asthma increase at a greater rate than the rate of smoking decreases, do you think the rate of allergies and asthma would increase, decrease, or remain the same?)
is it just me or does all the politicians in Louisiana seem to have a 'D' by their name?
We could be related.....
Did you know that if you move to Louisiana and go to register your cars, the state of Louisiana requires you to pay the sales tax on your cars AGAIN to them? I'm still in shock over that news!
Oh, oh, catch that buzz, love is the drug, I'm thinking of... Roxy Music
"All the child-rapist parents are cheering for more people like you in this world..."
Yeeeeeeeeeesssssssss!!!! You are learning. I didn't think anyone could inspire me like ray does, but, here you are.
YOU ARE GRRRRRRRRRRRREAT!!!!!!!!
"....being that there is absolutely no benefit to the child derived..."
So, you want to limit allowable behaviour to those that have measurable benefits? Who gets to do the measuring, or who gets to define benefit?
"Holy crap, it's like the perfect storm of mindless idiocy."
Nice admission that using correlation to push a platform is not appropriate. Now, how do you explain your use of correllations to push government control of parental activity?
Actually, I saw a tv program where this action was pending. The school's physician, nurse and coach were irate that the parents of the child were not adhering to the diet and exercise regimen they recommended for the child. They turned the parents over to CPS for neglect.
Both my parents smoked when I was a kid, and I loved the smell of cigarette smoke.
"That's the dumbest, most ignorant, illogical, inane and ridiculously stupid statement I've read on FreeRepublic in a while. Holy crap, it's like the perfect storm of mindless idiocy."
Hello, Madame. It's another beautiful day in anti-land, isn't it?
I am not at all in disagreement with you. I wasn't saying I thought it was good law. Just good sense. On the other hand, prohibiting smoking in a barroom is senseless to me.
Look at his acolytes who've appeared on this thread.
Who wouldn't want to be just like them??!!
If I can improve my life to be only 1/10th as virtuous as Raycpa and WildHorseCrash, why then the loss of personal freedoms is a small price to pay.
For the children.
As for me, I'd rather my kids not be in a smoke-filled car or bar. I'll take my chances with video games warping their minds.
I love the smell of hysteria in the morning.
Funny, but Eric and Dylan were big into gross video games.
You are 100% correct.