Board logo

Smoking in cars illegal when carrying children
r1_pete - 11/2/14 at 08:34 AM

I don't smoke, and I don't think I have ever had a child in my last 2 cars, but what do we think of THIS BAN

My immediate though is what a waste of public money debating and passing the bill, how on earth can it be policed, using mobiles whilst driving is illegal, but every other car on the motorway has some numpty behind the wheel on a hand held.

Just a deeper dive into nannydom IMO

[Edited on 11/2/14 by r1_pete]

Jon Ison - 11/2/14 at 08:46 AM

I have to disagree to be honest, whilst I accept policing it is impossible I think banning it will stop some people doing it, I don't like to see it myself.

Ben_Copeland - 11/2/14 at 08:50 AM

Anything that forces people to stop smoking is a good thing

motorcycle_mayhem - 11/2/14 at 09:04 AM

I agree Ben, I'd also like to see lots of other things banned (since the meaning of such words as 'responsibility' and 'moral' are now banned to

Kit cars (dangerously fast, unnecessary, not Type Approved, no ENCAP...)
Driving of any kind on the road (really dangerous).
Motor racing
Horse riding(dangerously uneccessary)
Skiing
Motorcycles
Hang Gliding
Walking
Stairs
Baths
Windows
Hot Coffee

List is endless, but we must legislate and protect.

Continuous surveillance by the Gummit is really the only way forward here, backed up by several volumes of legislation, all to suit the ruling classes......

Government knows best.

Jon Ison - 11/2/14 at 09:14 AM

Emotive subject and take your points, however non of the list above can be compared to placing a baby in a confined space and filling it with smoke, what the answer ? Do nothing ?

eta, if the law is passed I don't expect to see camera vans looking out for it, I would hope it would put some moral pressure on some not to sit a young child in a car full of smoke and for me that's the purpose of it.

[Edited on 11/2/14 by Jon Ison]

Duncan36 - 11/2/14 at 09:23 AM

While i agree that smoking in a car where a child is present just isn't on. It should be a matter of common sense and morals rather than the slippery slope of making it law. Unfortunately alot of people have little of either and have to be forced to do the right thing.

Throwing cigarette butts out of the car window is classed as littering and really bugs me, but you never hear of anyone getting done for it. I did think it was illegal to light or extinguish a cigarette while driving, but that must of been an old wives tale.

femster87 - 11/2/14 at 09:26 AM

I must admit,it does really annoy me when i see parents with windows up smoking away and kids sat at the back

Peteff - 11/2/14 at 09:57 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Duncan36Throwing cigarette butts out of the car window is classed as littering and really bugs me, but you never hear of anyone getting done for it. I did think it was illegal to light or extinguish a cigarette while driving, but that must be an old wives tale.


Throwing anything out of the car window is littering, we followed a Bentley up the M18 the other day and he threw a triangular sandwich container out of the window at 70mph then continued to crack open a can of pop and hold a conversation on his phone. I reckon he must have had auto pilot engaged. Smoking in cars should be banned full stop, I used to smoke and while you are fiddling about lighting and flicking into the ashtray you are not paying full attention to what you are doing.

nick205 - 11/2/14 at 10:16 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Ben_Copeland
Anything that forces people to stop smoking is a good thing



My sentiments also.

adithorp - 11/2/14 at 10:26 AM

It should be illegal to smoke in the presence of children. Long term that'd be a lot more effective than the current restrictions.

hughpinder - 11/2/14 at 10:36 AM

I recently had to attend a speed awareness course. During the course the guy giving it (accident investigator for the region) says all the speed vans around hull are now testing trial software that can tell if you are holding a phone to your face "and some other things", and are pretty much 100% accurate, so expect the automated 'using phone while driving' fines o start dropping through the door shortly. I would expect it will be quie easy to adapt the image recognition software for smoking detection.
Hugh

Duncan36 - 11/2/14 at 10:52 AM

Couldn't agree more Pete. I hate littering of any type, i booted someone out of my car for doing it when i was young, in hindsight it wans't a clever thing to do on the A38 in Devon, but i bet they thought twice about doing it again.

Just before christmas a guy in a van in front of me was throwing litter out of the window, so i took photos and put it on his own social media, twitter and facebook as well as the well used facebook page for the village. Hopefully that got the message across.

twybrow - 11/2/14 at 10:58 AM

I support it. Yes it would be nice to think that common sense and morals would be enough to ensure people don't smoke in a car with children, but the reality is you see it all the time, and I deplore it. I am not expecting the police to suddenly start nicking people for it (has anyone been done for middle lane hogging since the law was brought in?), but I do expect it will start to make a difference, and start to make people change their habits. Eventually it will be like dog poo - when I was young, it was everywhere and it was socially accepted to let your dog crap where it wants. Nowadays, it is not socially acceptable, and the change in behaviour is quite clear to see. I hope the same is true for smoking in cars (and in any other confined spaces with children present).

joneh - 11/2/14 at 10:59 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Duncan36
While i agree that smoking in a car where a child is present just isn't on. It should be a matter of common sense and morals rather than the slippery slope of making it law. Unfortunately alot of people have little of either and have to be forced to do the right thing.

Throwing cigarette butts out of the car window is classed as littering and really bugs me, but you never hear of anyone getting done for it. I did think it was illegal to light or extinguish a cigarette while driving, but that must of been an old wives tale.


As you said, unfortunately the people who smoke in cars with children have neither common sense or morals. I blame health and safety laws that have kept these people alive, whilst polluting the human gene pool. Luckily websites such as neck nominate are trying to counter act this!

jeffw - 11/2/14 at 11:21 AM

The people who care about being caught doing this are already (by and large) not smoking in childrens presence. The people who don't give a toss will continue as they don't care about being caught. All a bit silly really.

BangedupTiger - 11/2/14 at 11:41 AM

If people don't have the common sense not to smoke when kids are in the car, I doubt they have the common sense to follow the law.

But it's virtually impossible to police. Not to mention a huge waste of police time.

swanny - 11/2/14 at 11:48 AM

agree with most of the above. cant see how they will police it. I still see kids roaming about in the back of cars not belted in. (saw one last night in fact)

is it illegal to eat whilst driving?
if so how is it legal to hold/light a smouldering piece of paper/dried leaves?

if I lit a candle whilst driving would I get done?

paul

twybrow - 11/2/14 at 12:18 PM

quote:
Originally posted by swanny
agree with most of the above. cant see how they will police it. I still see kids roaming about in the back of cars not belted in. (saw one last night in fact)

is it illegal to eat whilst driving?
if so how is it legal to hold/light a smouldering piece of paper/dried leaves?

if I lit a candle whilst driving would I get done?

paul


It is illegal to do any of that if the police can show you were distracted by it. People have been prosecuted for eating a sandwich (or similar) as they were distracted (and hence driving without due care and attention) was the charge. You can be done for the same by lighting a cigarette if you are seen to be distracted by it (like those who drop the smouldering end in their crotch, and panic!).

sdh2903 - 11/2/14 at 12:25 PM

As much as I agree with the sentiments of the law it will never stop the numptys who actually do it. The same with mobile phones, I see more people driving whilst on the phone now than ever before.

coyoteboy - 11/2/14 at 01:13 PM

quote:

is it illegal to eat whilst driving? if so how is it legal to hold/light a smouldering piece of paper/dried leaves?


It's illegal to faff with the stereo if it distracts you from the road and the police catch you at it. The key is that it used to be down to police discretion and sense, now it's being hard wired because people can't follow common sense. Same with smoking in a car with a kid, if people can't use their brains they'll have it forced on them.

And the poor police have to keep up.

steve m - 11/2/14 at 01:14 PM

ive never been caught shaving, while on the way to work

Mr Whippy - 11/2/14 at 01:14 PM

Considering loads of young mothers to be still smoke while pregnant to deliberately stunt their baby’s growth so that they will have an easier birth, I’m sure it will accomplish absolutely nothing, as some folk care little about their own health far less that of others.

jeffw - 11/2/14 at 01:53 PM

My Mother (as did all of them in that generation) smoked all through pregnancy with me (and my Sisters) and none of us can be considered to be stunted. Different times....

twybrow - 11/2/14 at 03:44 PM

quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
My Mother (as did all of them in that generation) smoked all through pregnancy with me (and my Sisters) and none of us can be considered to be stunted. Different times....


And the Victorians used to lick lead and arsenic for health reasons - but our knowledge and understanding of the impacts grows and changes our behaviour (I am not saying you are condoning smoking during pregnancy)!

jacko - 11/2/14 at 04:45 PM

quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
As much as I agree with the sentiments of the law it will never stop the numptys who actually do it. The same with mobile phones, I see more people driving whilst on the phone now than ever before.

I bet most would stop if they had there car taken off them and band them from driving for 3 years
Jacko

sdh2903 - 11/2/14 at 05:00 PM

quote:
Originally posted by jacko
quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
As much as I agree with the sentiments of the law it will never stop the numptys who actually do it. The same with mobile phones, I see more people driving whilst on the phone now than ever before.

I bet most would stop if they had there car taken off them and band them from driving for 3 years
Jacko


Very true. It should be a 6 point penalty, or 12 for texting.

It enrages me that much that my step son has just got his first car and Ive just fitted it with a parrot handsfree before he even hits the road. I've also told him I will smash his phone to bits and break his fingers should I ever catch him using it when driving

Harsh maybe, but he got the point.

matt_gsxr - 11/2/14 at 05:03 PM

quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
My Mother (as did all of them in that generation) smoked all through pregnancy with me (and my Sisters) and none of us can be considered to be stunted. Different times....


Most sons grow up to be taller than their dads.
These are generation on generation increases.
It isn't genetic (as there is no real natural selection), so it must be environmental.


I remember when seat belts became compulsory and all the old people cried "but I want to get thrown free of the wreckage, not be strapped into the fireball". Now its just common sense to put a seatbelt on.


Similarly smoking. You have to legislate to protect the children who can't protect themselves.

morcus - 11/2/14 at 05:45 PM

I don't think they should bother, I don't think it's the governments place to make rules based on morality but mostly because as above it's a waste of time and probably already illegal.

For a start, smoking in a car or van used for work is illegal under the existing smoking ban, I'm not going to look up the exact wording but I'm pretty sure smoking in a work van (even if you own it) is illegal but how often do you see guys in vans smoking? Same if your house is registered as a business address for council tax purposes (Though I believe only in rooms deemed to be for work). Basically people are already smoking illegally in vehicles and noone seems to do anything about just like people using phones.

two, it is already socially unacceptable to smoke in the car with children so on that ground I don't think it will do anything. I don't think people should be smoking in cars, I want to make that clear, I just don't think it should be the law.

I actually think most of the smoking bans effects have been negative, more people getting ill from exposure to outside, everywhere outside smells of smoke, everywhere inside smells of people, loads of people now sucking on unregulated artificial cigarettes and most other anti tobacco laws have in no way made things better. Ban all advertising so now all the companies make more money, same with plain packets as theres less expenses.

I really think the money being spent on this would be better spent educating people on why they shouldn't be doing this.

On the same note I dissagree with compulsory seat belt use and child seats until the age of 12. I think people should be wearing seat belts but I think it should be upto the individual.

sdh2903 - 11/2/14 at 05:57 PM

quote:
Originally posted by morcus

On the same note I dissagree with compulsory seat belt use and child seats until the age of 12. I think people should be wearing seat belts but I think it should be upto the individual.


What utter bollox

Would you be saying that if your 15 stone mate was propelled into the back of your head in an accident because he chose not to wear his belt? No you wouldn't be saying anything because you'd be dead!!!

wylliezx9r - 11/2/14 at 06:07 PM

quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
quote:
Originally posted by morcus

On the same note I dissagree with compulsory seat belt use and child seats until the age of 12. I think people should be wearing seat belts but I think it should be upto the individual.


What utter bollox

Would you be saying that if your 15 stone mate was propelled into the back of your head in an accident because he chose not to wear his belt? No you wouldn't be saying anything because you'd be dead!!!


Plus 1 ! Utter rubbish

morcus - 11/2/14 at 06:11 PM

Like I said, people should be wearing the seat belt, but in that situation it would be my fault for not making him wear one still, just as the law says it would be now, only difference is I'd not be breaking the law.

by the same token would you be happy to pay a fine and get some points when you mate in the back took off his seat belt to take his coat off while you stuck in city traffic not going anywhere?

Mark Allanson - 11/2/14 at 06:16 PM

Anyone who does smoke with their kids in the car will be shortening their own lives and the lives of their children. Whilst knowing this (they cannot be unaware?), the must be of a lower mental order, and by genetic presumption, so must their offspring.

So, let let Darwin have his theory and allow the human race to improve its gene pool by allowing this self culling to continue.

Quick summary - If chavs want to poison their kids, let 'em.

Alfa145 - 11/2/14 at 06:17 PM

Not wearing a seatbelt - Illegal....but you still see plenty doing it..... poorly policed
Using mobile phone - Illegal...but you still see a huge amount of people doing it....poorly policed
And others...all the same

Now Smoking in a car with kids....won't make naff all difference as they're aren't enough coppers out there to police this and the myriad of other offences.

Why are they poorly policed? Probably because thy have been subject to the multitude of cuts by the government. So you get one copper in a car to cover hundreds of miles of roads.

Also it's easier to see a missing seatbelt or a phone in the hand....but you can't always see a kid in a child seat in a car, so do you pull over all smokers just in case there is a baby seat in the back?

sdh2903 - 11/2/14 at 06:33 PM

quote:
Originally posted by morcus
Like I said, people should be wearing the seat belt, but in that situation it would be my fault for not making him wear one still, just as the law says it would be now, only difference is I'd not be breaking the law.

by the same token would you be happy to pay a fine and get some points when you mate in the back took off his seat belt to take his coat off while you stuck in city traffic not going anywhere?


No I wouldn't and that's exactly how the law works, anyone over 14 it's their responsibility, anyone under 14 it's the drivers responsibility and that's fair enough in my eyes. My car don't move til everyone has a belt on.

I really don't get your point of view on this

jossey - 11/2/14 at 06:36 PM

one of the only good ideas I see from the government. I was on the m62 the other day. There was a young couple in a car smoking with the windows up and a young kid in the back. I just don't get it......

ashg - 11/2/14 at 07:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Duncan36
Throwing cigarette butts out of the car window is classed as littering and really bugs me, but you never hear of anyone getting done for it.


my brother got pinched for it. cost him a £100

ashg - 11/2/14 at 07:27 PM

just ban smoking or a much more sensible idea, take all the smokers children away! being smokers they are clearly unfit to be parents. it has to be much better putting them into social care where they can be messed up fully rather than just a little bit by their parents.


now being serious. i know its not a good idea to smoke and its also not good to expose others to your smoke but! when i was a child everyone smoked everywhere pubs, restaurants, cars....................you name it! I'm still alive! heck i remember when i did my very first week of work experience at 13-14. everyone at the place smoked indoors at work! you couldn't even see the other side of the room it was that smoky in there! again............................. still alive!

At the end of the day its all just political BS and a complete waste of tax money. MP's need to come up with silly poo like this to keep themselves in jobs. If they didn't we could say hey maybe we don't need so many of them and save a bit more money! Lets face it they don't want that to happen!

the sort of people that smoke in cars with their kids on board are hardly the type that will give an ass about what the gov are saying. As mentioned before, like mobile phones its virtually impossible to enforce. My bro and his wife to be, both smoke. They have a two year old, being good parents they don't smoke in the house, car or anywhere near the baby!


why don't they take the money for this stupid idea and use it to build some make shift flood defences, then go pump a few more peoples houses out! that would be a good idea



[Edited on 11/2/2014 by ashg]

red22 - 11/2/14 at 08:09 PM

Totally pointless law, if it gets on the books. What's the point of being all high and mighty about smoking in cars while ignoring the fact the child will be going home at some point.

The Government of the day should either ban smoking outright or stop pretending to be making healthy choices for us when it treats smokers as cash cow.

FWIW I don't smoke.

JoelP - 11/2/14 at 08:37 PM

I'm in favour. It might be unenforceable but it at least makes the point and puts some social pressure on people who do it.

The solution for smoking is just increased taxation to discourage kids from starting. Seems to be working!

steve m - 11/2/14 at 09:27 PM

Were I live its more likely the kids smoking with their Parents in the front
is that going to be illegal ?

Fwiw ive never smoked, nor my parents, and ive never managed to find out what the attraction is to smoking

whitestu - 11/2/14 at 09:40 PM

Just get parent to hand over their kids to the government at birth and abdicate all responsibility.

mark chandler - 11/2/14 at 09:48 PM

If wearing a seat belt was not a legal requirement then most people would not bother, hopefully by making smoking illegal with children in the car this will have the same affect.

I'm in favour, if it stops a couple of hundred people poisoning their or other peoples children then it's worth the effort.

coyoteboy - 12/2/14 at 11:30 PM

quote:

now being serious. i know its not a good idea to smoke and its also not good to expose others to your smoke but! when i was a child everyone smoked everywhere pubs, restaurants, cars....................you name it! I'm still alive! heck i remember when i did my very first week of work experience at 13-14. everyone at the place smoked indoors at work! you couldn't even see the other side of the room it was that smoky in there! again............................. still alive!


Unfortunately the "im still alive" argument doesn't pan out. Single data points are not valid. (inter)National statistics show there's significant impact and cancer rates are closely linked, and that we're effectively sitting on a cancer timebomb as a side effect. You might be still alive now, but what if it accelerated a chain of events? What if you're not affected but 9 people out of 10 are unlucky with it?

Remember, single data-points and anecdotes are invalid argument points. Policy is (or at least should be) set by statistically significant, independently variable analysis of all available data.

ashg - 13/2/14 at 12:34 AM

quote:
Originally posted by coyoteboy
quote:

now being serious. i know its not a good idea to smoke and its also not good to expose others to your smoke but! when i was a child everyone smoked everywhere pubs, restaurants, cars....................you name it! I'm still alive! heck i remember when i did my very first week of work experience at 13-14. everyone at the place smoked indoors at work! you couldn't even see the other side of the room it was that smoky in there! again............................. still alive!


Unfortunately the "im still alive" argument doesn't pan out. Single data points are not valid. (inter)National statistics show there's significant impact and cancer rates are closely linked, and that we're effectively sitting on a cancer timebomb as a side effect. You might be still alive now, but what if it accelerated a chain of events? What if you're not affected but 9 people out of 10 are unlucky with it?

Remember, single data-points and anecdotes are invalid argument points. Policy is (or at least should be) set by statistically significant, independently variable analysis of all available data.



possibly..... i just happen to work for a company that makes equipment for treating cancer. in fact my life is devoted to developing products to treat cancer. the sad sad fact is that cancer caused by smoking is a minor drip in the ocean of all causes of cancer.

when it comes to smoking related death, other illness caused by smoking statistically make up over 50% of the death rate. cancer related smoking deaths are 28% of the death rate. BUT! that 28% is calculated by saying "they died of cancer did they smoke? ok thats a smoking related cancer death! regardless of if it was lung cancer or little toe cancer(silly example). If you take that 28% and dig into it only 40% of that 28% are smoking related area cancers e.g lung mouth throat..... which equated to around 28000ish people last year vs 170,000ish that died from other non cancer smoking illness.

obesity actually kills more people than smoking related cancer! 34000 last year! we should ban take aways!

the real issue with smoking is that long term exposure really messes up you whole body, it doesn't just cause cancer, i know people that have got phd's in this area, a bit of exposure now and then isn't going to kill you. its not ideal and should be avoided but its not going to kill you and your body will recover.


all that that said, i do agree that its unacceptable to expose your children and others to a smokey atmosphere that they do not have a choice of leaving. the problem with the law they are trying to pass is it wont really achieve anything. the sort of dicks that smoke in a car/house with children are not going to stop. even if they occasionally get caught and fined they still wont stop, there just isn't enough resource to police it. banning smoking in cars would actually be easier to spot and police! as your only looking for a smoker and not a smoker + child. but i doubt we even have the resource to do that. we are certainly not very successful at policing mobile phones! and they are several times the size of a cigarette

[Edited on 13/2/2014 by ashg]

jeffw - 13/2/14 at 06:32 AM

Agree with Ash (!)

There point I would make about cancer deaths is....We are not dying of other diseases or accidents first. The tidal wave of cancer related deaths are, by and large, replacements for deaths by TB etc etc.

The rise in Dementia cases is a also directly related to this, live longer and you are more likely to get Dementia. The cost to the country of all these people surviving to get cancer in old age and/or Dementia is enormous and is having a big impact of NHS/Social spending.

Certainly children should be protected where possible but an in-car smoking ban is unenforceable. I often see HGV drivers on their phones or texting or, indeed, watching videos on laptops and they don't seem to get caught, what chance of making any impact on the number of people who smoke in cars with children by making it illegal?