The Glade 4.0

It wasn't supposed to turn into an argument....it started as a rant about regret I have about exposing my son to second-hand smoke when he was a toddler, and now anger and frustration that his Dad exposes him to it constantly and my son is always sick.

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

It is absurd to inflict the cost of prosecuting such cases on society, and the emotional and economic costs of criminal conviction ont he parent and the emotional trauma of having aprents taken away from them or go to jail on children over secondhand smoke.

Yes, it's bad for kids. Lots of things are. Children do not need to be protected from everything. The idea that children should never experience anything negatice as a result of their parents' decisions is silly.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

This, very much this.

Well after the minor spelling correction that is...

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

You know, this:



in conjunction with this:



Warrants a good ol' "In Yo Face".

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

oh lord... my fingers pwnt me... my bad.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Frederick Seitz said "there is no good scientific evidence that passive inhalation is truly dangerous under normal circumstances" and given his credentials, he has got to be correct.

Why would passive inhalation be any different than active inhalation? It's the same **** entering your lungs. Just because it's less concentrated and/or comes from further away doesn't make it less bad for you.

Especially when you are young and your lungs are still forming/growing.

My mother died of lung cancer having lived her entire adult life in the presence of my father, who smoked almost all of his adult life (until just before my mother died).

Pretty sure Tele was being sarcastic. Could be wrong, I suppose. Also, why should children suffer consequences for their parent's actions?

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

They do every second of every day, should "we" intervene every time "we" feel that the child will suffer negative consequences for their parents' actions?

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Midgen, sorry to hear about your Mom, that sucks. As Monte guessed, however, I was being sarcastic; I always forget to include the rolling eyes face to make it more obvious.

The fact that it is less concentrated definitely makes it less dangerous. That's why people die from smoke inhalation in burning buildings, but not from being in a bingo hall with a few dozen cigarette smokers.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Cuz that's life, dude. They also benefit from their parent's actions.

I actually find it frightening that someone would ask such a question. People need to keep their grubby hands and noses away from my kid. I know what's best for my kid.

This!! 100 times this!!!!

_________________
"Said I never had much use for one, never said I didn't know how to use one!"~ Matthew Quigley

"nothing like a little meow in bed at night" ~ Bruskey

"I gotta float my stick same as you" Hondo Lane

"Fill your hand you son of a *****!"

Just a thought...

How is this any different from the law requiring children to be buckled into a carseat...

To those who think there should be no protection of children from being in a smoke filled environment, should there also be no law requiring carseats?

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Putting a child in a carseat doesn't inhibit you from driving your car whereever you please. It doesn't even restrict the manner in which you drive any more than other traffic laws already do. There's also the fact that car accidents can be caused by people other than you, and when they involve injury, that injury is much more immediate and directly attributable to the car accident than problems second-hand smoke causes. Just because a child has been exposed to second-hand smoke doesn't mean any given problem is directly related to that.

Restricting smoking around a child restricts the manner in which you use your house, and your home is your castle while your car is not. It does so in a manner above and beyond what other laws preventing criminal conduct in general do to restrict your home; for example you cannot beat your wife in your home but you can't do that anywhere else either.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

The majority of posters in this thread should be ashamed of themselves. They should be appalled at their willingness to use government force to prevent other adults from making their own choice. I understand that the general opinion is that smoking is a vile, evil habit. I get that the majority know or have known someone who is dying from said habit. I understand that is has palpable and visceral negative effects, even if it never causes COPD or Lung Cancer in a particular individual. But, honestly, just another "think of the Children so we can ban something we don't like" thread isn't constructive. It's not even valid.

So, let me give all of you the flip side. I've definitely got COPD from my 20 years of smoking. I've definitely got particulate triggered chronic asthma from my parents years of smoking. I've definitely got enough trouble breathing a dusty day is likely to keep me in bed for 10 hours. And, you know what? It's ok to persecute smokers. It's ok to say oh Smokers can't do this; Smokers can't do that; Smokers made their choice. But god forbid someone say, Let's Regulate Homosexuality; Let's Regulate Polyamory; Let's Regulate Liberals; Let's Regulate Conservatives; Let's Regulate Driving even further; Let's Regulate Video Games ...

We don't need more laws. We don't need more government and increased governance ... We need someone who will stand up and pop the **** out of that jackass in McDonald's who lit a cigarette. We need business owners who will say, "Take your cigarettes outside on the deck." We don't need governments to enforce common sense. And if a parent wants to smoke in a car with their kid, well that's their decision. And while it sucks for the kid, it'll pay them back tenfold in medical bills and other problems. And if they want to smoke in their house, well they're being stupid there, too. But for ****'s sake ...

Stop trying to use the government to enforce common sense. Stop trying to use the government to protect people from their own stupidity. Stop trying to use government to solve (mostly) social problems you don't think are being solved fast enough. That's not why it exists; that's not government's purpose. Grow the **** up; grow a spine; and learn to respect everyone else's ability to choose for their own selves. There are consequences to everything, and maybe, just maybe, if we let people suffer the consequences of their own actions without government intervention at every corner ... MAYBE people might get a clue.

P.S. If you disagree with all of that, which is fine, I want extra taxes and fines on Prius's to pre-pay the cost of heavy-metal battery collection and disposal.

_________________

I don't want more laws. I don't want the government intruding in our lives for every little thing, but there needs to be a way, somehow, to protect those who can't fend for themselves.

Laws aren't the way, but it sucks that people can get away with whatever behaviours they wish when it is to the detriment of another, especially if that person can not speak up or act out against said behaviour. Or they just don't know how dangerous it is to be exposed to it.

I don't want more laws, but I do want children to be protected when they can't protect themselves.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

This isn't a "protecting those who can't protect themselves" issue. Obviously children can't (or as the get older aren't yet permitted to) protect themselves. Against anything. Some parents don't ensure their children go to sleep at a decent hour, don't make sure that they wear adequate cold-weather clothing, adequate (or any) sunscreen, allow them to play on the computer or watch the TV too much, let them have too much pop, candy, cookies, or fast food, or don't pay any attention to their schoolwork, or don't get them vaccinations (and no, those people are not exclusively religious so lets not go off on that tangent again).

I could go on and on. The number of things parents can do that might negatively affect their children is huge. There's nothing particularly special about smoking.

The fact of the matter is that being a child doesn't entitle you to parents who make all the right decisions. It doesn't matter that it may have lifelong consequences. A lot of those things I mentioned can have them, and there is simply no reason to try to force people to stop doing them or regulate them or whatever just so that children can grow up without "being affected by someone else's decisions". Part of growing up is understanding that people can make their own decisions and just because we don't like them and they may have some effec on us doesn't mean we automatically get a say in them.

Some children get born alcoholic, addicted to drugs, or with AIDS. That's far worse than second-hand smoke and no one thinks its feasible to start prosecuting people for that.

Social pressure is sufficient. Yes, some people will smoke around their kids anyhow. Deal with it. If the kid grows up with athsma.. tough ****. People grow up with chronic health problems all the time; a lot of them having nothing to do with parental behavior. There's no reason that kid should get special consideration.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Foamy:

So, you don't want exactly what you're asking for, which is more laws? How's that cognitive dissonance working out for you?

_________________

Give me a break. I think you are smart enough to understand what I am getting at.

Call it wishful thinking. I wish there were some way that children could be better protected from idiot parents. Sure life is not fair, but less so when defenseless children are subjected to the whims of their parents whether they are dangerous or not.

I know I can't have it both ways. Perhaps, as you suggested, there should be less laws against, say, punching someone in the face who lights up in a public place. Or maybe if people had more courage to speak up to the parent who they witness blowing smoke in their infant's face...

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Ah, the romantization of the good old days. When men were men and stood up for what was right and a knuckle sandwich to the face cured all the worlds ills.

Aizle:

Who said anything about nostalgia?

Foamy:

Somewhere in the 1960s the United States ceased to understand what violence really is. It has also completely forgotten how societal change evolves. In the Generation of Me and the Country of Instant Gratification, the U.S. asks for legislative force to swell the ground and change the sea. Something has to have to have the power to make life better NOW. The irony being it took some 50 or 60 years of government "problem solving" to cultivate that norm.

_________________

Earlier than that. We ceased to appreciate violence when our ability to defend the continent became essentially insurmountable.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Diamondeye:

What do you consider the most violent organization in the United States?

_________________