Another stupid law

Status
Not open for further replies.

brandxj

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
25
Bill Pushed to Stop Drivers From Smoking By JEFF LINKOUS, Associated Press Writer
Mon Jul 25, 3:41 AM ET



Ashtrays have been disappearing in cars like fins on Cadillacs, and so could smoking while driving in New Jersey, under a measure introduced in the Legislature.

Although the measure faces long odds, it still has smokers incensed and arguing it's a Big Brother intrusion that threatens to take away one of the few places they can enjoy their habit.

"The day a politician wants to tell me I can't smoke in my car, that's the day he takes over my lease payments," said John Cito, a financial planner from Hackensack with a taste for $20 cigars.

Those cigars, pipes and cigarettes would become no-nos for drivers. Offenders would be stung with a fine of up to $250, under the measure, whose sponsor said it's designed more to improve highway safety than protect health.

Some states, including New Jersey, have considered putting the brakes on smoking while children are in the car. But none have gone for an outright ban on smoking while driving, according to Washington, D.C.-based Action on Smoking and Health, the country's oldest anti-tobacco organization.

Smokers, feeling like easy targets, say enough already. They argue they've been forced outside office buildings, run off the grounds of public facilities, and asked to pony up more in per-pack excise taxes when states feel a budget squeeze.

"With smoking, it's becoming increasingly fashionable to target legislation or prohibitions," said George Koodray, a member of the Metropolitan Cigar Society, a 100-strong group that meets in Paterson for dinner and a smoke.

Assemblyman John McKeon, a tobacco opponent whose father died of emphysema, sponsored the legislation. He cites a AAA-sponsored study on driver distractions in which the automobile association found that of 32,000 accidents linked to distraction, 1 percent were related to smoking.

The measure, co-sponsored by Assemblywoman Lorretta Weinberg, a fellow Democrat, was introduced last month just before lawmakers' summer break. It faces some improbable odds for passing.

Some lawmakers may fear the bill is frivolous compared with more pressing issues like taxes, said political analyst David Rebovich.

And there's this to consider: Traffic safety groups acknowledge motorists now widely ignore the state's year-old law against using hand-held cell phones, so why would smoking be any different?

Mitchell Sklar, of the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police, said police departments may balk at enforcing such a law. "In general, we'd rather not try to incrementally look at every single behavior and make those a violation," he said.

-don't politicians have better things to do like securing the borders!!!
 
There are two groups of people that are targeted by deliberate discrimination, and are vigorously and publically attacked by many federal, state, and local government agencies, with many attempts and efforts to legally subject the members of these two groups to harsh penalties, exclusion from public services and areas, restrictions on access to public or private venues, and harrasment through regulation, taxes, restrictions of thier legal rights, and unspoken attempts at complete expulsion from thier communities and homes. These two groups are law abiding gun owners and smokers....
 
Guys, is the State makes a law like this, you can be sure it's for your own good. Don't you know smoking is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.? :banghead:
 
Don't forget us pyros! :evil:

And there's this to consider: Traffic safety groups acknowledge motorists now widely ignore the state's year-old law against using hand-held cell phones, so why would smoking be any different?

My gosh. It actually makes a decent point... :scrutiny: :eek:

What was that about laws only restricting people who abide by them? :confused:






;)
 
He cites a AAA-sponsored study on driver distractions in which the automobile association found that of 32,000 accidents linked to distraction, 1 percent were related to smoking.
So what about the other 99%? Are they going to ban those activities also?

This is not about safety or health, is it purely about control.
 
I hope it passes and becomes law.
1) I don't live in NJ
2) I don't smoke

so it won't affect me at all.
 
Yes, it sounds familiar.

Inspired by their success at making it illegal to use a handheld phone in a car, the anti-everything brigade moved on immediately to a call to ban smoking in cars when children were present, under the child abuse laws.

That quickly escalated to a call for a total ban on smoking in cars.

While the impetus for this is still gaining strength, the latest call is for a ban on DVD players in cars, since the screens may "distract drivers in cars going past". :banghead:

Add to that a call to ban roo bars (don't know what you call them) anywhere except in the country, and a call for the introduction of a licensing system for 4WDs that would require a prospective purchaser to satisfy police as to "need" before being "allowed" to own a 4WD, and you have a jolly little police state.
 
I live in NJ and if the smoking ban is as effective as the cellphone ban, you should all buy stock in Philip Morris if this passes.
 
Did you know that 52 percent of the people in Newark and 40 percent of all NJ citizens are completely illiterate? They lack the ability to read traffic signs, fill out job applications or read a macdonalds menu without pictures.

How messed up is that? Is it any wonder these mouth breathers want government handouts?

Oh here is a neat "how to predict whether a city will vote democratic" list of the most illiterate cities in the US. Note that the only ones missing are SF and NYC.

1. Miami FL: 63%
2. East LA CA: 57%
3. East St. Louis IL: 56%
4. Compton CA: 55%
5. Newark NJ: 52%
6. Brownsville TX: 50%
7. Union City NJ: 50%
8. San Fernando CA: 49%
9. Camden NJ: 49%
10. Detroit MI: 47%
11. Laredo TX: 47%
12. East Orange NJ: 46%
13. Gary IN: 46%
14. East Palo Alto CA: 45%
15. Orange NJ: 45%
16. Passaic City NJ: 45%
17. Paterson NJ: 45%
18. Augusta GA: 43%
19. Elizabeth NJ: 42%
20. Atlantic City NJ: 42%
21. Miami Beach FL: 41%
22. Hartford CT: 41%
23. East Chicago IN: 41%
24. South Miami Heights FL: 40%
 
RileyMc,

Sarcasm duly noted, and message understood.

Now let's see who else gets it, or who the first person is to publicly flame you. :neener:
 
Hey, let's think this through all the way. Smoking is a distraction for 1% of drivers, so let's ban it. Cell phones have already been addressed. BUt, I saw a study by Joe Blow University that siad the problem with cell phones isn't the phone, but the listening. So, we should get rid of radios, CD players, etc. Then again, I saw a study from The University of Moronic Studies that said cell phone problems were due to the conversation, so we should ban talking in cars, as well. And, I talked to a trooper once who handled a case where a teenage boy rear-ended another car when he was distracted by a very attractive woman walking down the sidewalk in tight jeans, so we better outlaw tight jeans. And so on. And so on. And so on. :barf:

You know, if we just banned cars, we'd have fewer traffic fatalities. :rolleyes:
 
Someone should sue for discrimination. Gay people have successfully won cases. How about smokers? The 2nd hand smoke argument is most all BS. There are thousands of things that are more harmfull to the human body. Just throwing out ideas.
 
I think this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. My biggest distraction driving is my teenage son's music lol....and I spend more time reaching for the volume knob on the radio than I do smoking in my car. But I don't think that music should be banned. At any rate, as a smoker I can respect not smoking on public transportation where it disturbs others, but in MY OWN CAR ??? I think NOT ! If they don't like it, don't ask me for a ride ! :cuss:
 
...And, I talked to a trooper once who handled a case where a teenage boy rear-ended another car when he was distracted by a very attractive woman walking down the sidewalk in tight jeans, so we better outlaw tight jeans....
That is EXACTLY what happened to me about 10 years ago - rear ended a car while ogling the scenery. What was worse was calling for PD on the CB, (cell phones not wild yet), and looking up to see my MOTHER looking in the drivers side window....she had been 5 cars behind...gah...
Ban cars, mass transit only, oh, wait, bombs...guess everyone is walking or in horse and buggie, since horses will ignore a drunk driver's commands to ram.
 
RileyMc,

Sarcasm duly noted, and message understood.

Now let's see who else gets it, or who the first person is to publicly flame you.
Oh yeah! I get it now!

I'll admit, it went right over my head first time. Must be the heat.

This is just another typical day in the N.J. legislature. This is the type of government meddling that the people of N.J. apparently want. Anyone else notice that all the bridges charge you to leave the state?
 
smoking is stupid, but people should be allowed to smoke in thier cars. drinking and cell phones can be done away with though. thier useage in cars, that is.

~TMM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top