Should smoking in cars with Children be banned?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You won't find a study that says 100% of children that are spoonfed arsenic are killed by it either. Those sorts of absolutes don't exist anywhere in science.

On the other hand, no doctor in the world can guarantee your kid will end with lung cancer by the time they're 18 even if they themselves smoke like a freight train from the time they're 8. Hell I know people who've for 30 years and not gotten lung cancer.

And that's the whole thing, the kids are only going to get lung cancer if they themselves start to smoke because when you're 18 years old(and no longer legally obligated to stay in the house with smokers) your lungs are still developing and working to repair themselves. And if the kids are both smokers and vulnerable to lung cancer then they're going to get it anyway. It's a choice on the children's part as to whether or not they risk dieing from smoking because it's up to them as to whether or not to take up smoking themselves.

So yes you can say that the parents are endangering the health of their child(as health problems may develop), but you can't say that they're "killing their children".

Originally posted by darthgoober
Ok no study, how about a statement? Because I can almost guarantee that any doctor will tell you that if start to spoon frequently feed arsenic in moderate doses to an 8 year old they'll die before they're 18 100% of the time.

On the other hand, no doctor in the world can guarantee your kid will end with lung cancer by the time they're 18 even if they themselves smoke like a freight train from the time they're 8. Hell I know people who've for 30 years and not gotten lung cancer.

Actually smoking around very young children is known to increase the odds of SIDS. A bullet isn't guaranteed to kill someone either, that's not an excuse for putting a person in the line of fire.

Originally posted by darthgoober
So yes you can say that the parents are endangering the health of their child(as health problems may develop), but you can't say that they're "killing their children".

I disagree. Knowingly placing someone in danger simply because you're an addict is at most only a very small step from killing them.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Actually smoking around very young children is known to increase the odds of SIDS.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A bullet isn't guaranteed to kill someone either, that's not an excuse for putting a person in the line of fire.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I disagree. Knowingly placing someone in danger simply because you're an addict is at most only a very small step from killing them.

Originally posted by darthgoober
And that's the whole thing, the kids are only going to get lung cancer if they themselves start to smoke because when you're 18 years old(and no longer legally obligated to stay in the house with smokers) your lungs are still developing and working to repair themselves. And if the kids are both smokers and vulnerable to lung cancer then they're going to get it anyway. It's a choice on the children's part as to whether or not they risk dieing from smoking because it's up to them as to whether or not to take up smoking themselves.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I think when this sort of debate comes up, we're delving into realms that are just silly. I mean, a lot of things that kids are exposed to are unhealthy - should there be a law that makes parents not feed their children fast food for example?

So, there should also be a law that says that children are not allowed to eat at McDonalds 4 or 5 times a week, right? Or maybe a law that prevents soda from being loaded with high-fructose corn syrup? Maybe we should only be allowed to buy soda after we've all turned 21.

I think gays shouldn't be allowed to drive cars, personally. The flamingness can steam up the windshield and cause an accident.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I think gays shouldn't be allowed to drive cars, personally. The flamingness can steam up the windshield and cause an accident.

Yeah, but the cars are usually parked in an alley or outside a Republican senator's office when that happens. So, if the car ain't moving, it shouldn't be a problem. Rhythmic swaying doesn't count, if you're wondering.

... whatabout erratic swaying? That can mess up the suspension.

Originally posted by darthgoober
What's an SIDS?

Sudden infant death syndrome (ie dead baby).

Originally posted by darthgoober
But is a bullet's potential to cause harm/death sufficient to warrant banning them from being in the same the room as a child? Wouldn't it make more sense to say keep your guns and ammo locked up(don't let you kids get into your cigarettes) and don't point them at the kids(roll down the window and keep the air circulating)?

I didn't say you shouldn't have cigarettes in the same room with a child, just that you shouldn't be allowed to place the child at risk by smoking around them when they don't necessarily have a way to leave. Maybe outright banning people from smoking around their kids is extreme, that doesn't mean there's any justification for doing it.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Danger of bad health, not danger of immediate death. As I already pointed out...

And I already pointed out that it shouldn't matter how slowly you kill someone. You're still killing that person.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Sudden infant death syndrome (ie dead baby).

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I didn't say you shouldn't have cigarettes in the same room with a child, just that you shouldn't be allowed to place the child at risk by smoking around them when they don't necessarily have a way to leave. Maybe outright banning people from smoking around their kids is extreme, that doesn't mean there's any justification for doing it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
And I already pointed out that it shouldn't matter how slowly you kill someone. You're still killing that person.

Originally posted by Devil King
So, there should also be a law that says that children are not allowed to eat at McDonalds 4 or 5 times a week, right? Or maybe a law that prevents soda from being loaded with high-fructose corn syrup? Maybe we should only be allowed to buy soda after we've all turned 21.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, I completely agree that such laws are silly.

I dont think there should be a law against parents smoking around their kids, but like someone mentioned, its probably something they shouldn't do of their own accord. Whether secondhand smoke has been conclusively shown to increase the risk of lung cancer or not, as a parent I wouldn't want to take that gamble with my own kid.

smoking should be banned outright, all cigarette company's closed.

Mind you I would say that I´m a non smoker.

Children shouldn't be anywhere near cigarettes!!.. Think about our future and how I dont think that we want our children Die early with lung cancer.. Be smart.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I think you've got the wrong end of the stick, I completely agree that such laws are silly.

I know you do. I'm just using your statement to make my own point; taking the insanity even further.

NO MORE SMOKING WHAT SO EVER!

Originally posted by MrJoe815
Children shouldn't be anywhere near cigarettes!!.. Think about our future and how I dont think that we want our children Die early with lung cancer.. Be smart.

You're right. My God man, you are so right. Still, I'd rather have them die of lung cancer and have good grammer.

Hurry up and edit it out, Scot.

Originally posted by Takion
Childrens = Before they can drive

Recently I was looking at a debate and a popular topic was being debated, should smoking in cars with children be banned?

I would like to know your reasonings if it should or shouldn't be.

whats next, making it illegal to smoke in your home?

My opinion is that the Government must ban smoking in cars with Children. As its harmful for child's health and it will be a bad effect on the behaviour of a child.

They should ban smoking outright, disgusting habit!!