All this business about ways to harm children (e.g. poor diet) is irrelevant to children being harmed by smokers in cars, for quite simply, two wrongs do not make a right. Whether a parent feeds a child so that the child becomes morbidly obese does not make smoking in a confined space with a child right.
Religious indoctrination can be unlearned. Long term health problems related to inhaling second hand smoke can be debilitating and lead to life threatening problems like asthma, lifelong nuisances like allergies, or lifelong addictions because kids whose parents smoke are more likely to suffer the addiction as adults. All that shit costs money which is an unfair burden to pass down to an innocent kid.
Parents have to go outdoors to smoke at work, they don’t smoke in stores or restaurants, in public transportation or at the doctor’s office, post office, or any other public business office. Seems like they’d show their kids the same consideration of giving them a fucking break while trapped in the car. It’s not like the kids have any power or alternatives to avoid the stench and the poison. Name one kid saddled with asthma, allergies, or frequent respitory infections who deserves their disease. Name one kid who wants to go to school smelling like a garbage can.
I didn’t say to take children away, but I admit my call to jail second hand smokers was excessive and a knee-jerk reaction. I amended my sentiment when presented with alternatives.
Well, since no one, not even the original poster, agrees with the subject under discussion, perhaps it’s time to ask a mod to close the thread.
It absolutely doesn’t. But why should we legislate one and not the other?
Then they can fucking go outside and do it.
No one is expecting anyone to be a perfect parent. What’s happening is “civilization”; we are becoming more aware of the negative consequences doing certain things have. I don’t think it’s bad to do something that has negative consequences, as long as you are willing to change that after becoming educated about it. The problem here is deliberate ignorance. People smoked in cars in the 1900’s, fine. It wasn’t great, but I can’t really blame them because you guys weren’t very much aware of its negative consequences. Now, in 2013 (well for the past few years), since we have realized the harmful effects smoking in the car has on your child(ren), I can blame you for being a deliberately ignorant asshole because you should know better after all the awareness that has been spread.
Now come on, don’t tell me you didn’t learn to “learn from your mistakes”. That’s exactly what’s going on here, but it’s not the individual learning from his/her own mistakes - it’s the population (at least the population in developed countries) that is learning from their mistakes. The target of this Pit thread is people who are reluctant to stop smoking in the car even after being educated and aware of its negative consequences.
Smoking in the car is avoidable. As I said, get your lazy ass up and do it outside the car. This doesn’t “have to be negotiated in some way”.
Yeah, I wouldn’t jail them. I think they should be fined, though.
Agreed.
+1
Overreaction much? All April R did was renounce one of her statements, which is that these parents should be jailed. She didn’t change her opinion on the subject as a whole. Her opinion is the same: smoking in the car with your children is an idiotic, assholic, and moronic move.
See, now you are making me like you AU… 
That’s inevitable, too. Why wouldn’t it be? The CDC recommends against letting children ride in the back of trucks or in trunks, recommends against smoking in cars or homes with children, the elderly and infirm, and recommends a balanced daily diet. We know we shouldn’t poison our kids with carbon monoxide, nicotine, or food. Whether due to pressure from insurance providers, employers, or government action due to the rising cost of healthcare, there will be a line drawn for all of these. Isn’t it best just to provide the best environment possible for your kids up to and including smoking outdoors just as you do at work, at restaurants, at the mall, at friends’ house, etc?
Feel free to open threads for what ever legislation you propose or oppose, but don’t clutter up this tread with something that is absolutely irrelevant.
I don’t expect you ever to like me, but I endorse this pitting. I’d love it if smoking parents got pulled over and issued a citation. Just like parents who fail to buckle their kids up (in some states). No need to burden CPS.
Which has already been shown to have little or no effect on the amount of nicotine, etc. the children are exposed to. :rolleyes:
Since your first sentence was so stupid, I didn’t bother reading the rest. Also I put you on ignore because you’re one of the most useless posters on the board. Have a nice day.
I’ll like you anyway 
Mistake. The kid is growing, learning, and contributing. April R and I don’t like each other, but we still participate in threads and hear one another out because despite her religious affiliation and my lack thereof, we can bear to listen to an opinion which differs from ours. But hey, don’t take my word for it. Put me on ignore, too, you bitter old ha
Did you bother reading the link that mufatango posted? Here, I’l help you:
It doesn’t matter where the parent smokes- indoors, outside, around the kids, not around the kids, in the car, running along beside the car while the kids are driving- there will be negative effect on the child regardless of exposure level, because residue remains on the individual smoking in addition to the exhaled vapour/burning cigarette. The only 100% positive way to not impact your kids is to not smoke. So… you want to go ahead and start on the nanny-state legislation for that?
How about this as a corollary, since obesity isn’t doing it for you: letting your kids play outside without proper sun protection. We know for a fact that repeated sun exposure leads to an increased risk of skin cancer. One or two significant sunburns (the kind where you blister and peel) and your skin cancer rate goes up even more. Yet parents take their kids outside all the time without wide-brimmed hats, they don’t follow the directions for applying/re-applying sunblock, they let kids float around in the pool for hours with non-water-resistent sunblock, etc., etc. Oh, sure, back when I was a kid people slathered themselves and their kids with OIL before going outside.. they encouraged kids to get a good base burn at the beginning of the summer so that they could build up a nice tan, they practically never heard of sunblock, but we know much, much more about the negative effects of sun exposure now. Is it child abuse if a parent takes their kids to the beach for two weeks every summer and the child ends up sunburnt? After all, the parent didn’t NEED to go to the beach, and certainly didn’t need to expose the kid to all those cancer-causing agents. Even worse.. my former vet’s 12-year-old daughter had four cancerous growths removed from the top of her head because she did a lot of outdoor sports, which not only did her parents encourage, but they didn’t make her use sunblock on her head while doing it. For shame.
I reiterate, I am NOT in favor of parents smoking around kids, particularly during pregnancy. I and my lung issues are the product of a father who smoked like a chimney. But there is no way I can justify stretching an already stretched too thin CPS department or local/state police chasing down someone who is actually engaging in a legal behavior (like it or not) just because they had the poor sense to reproduce prior to overcoming their addiction.
You mean that 1999 study with uncited sponsors from a college in Turkey, the sixth largest producer of tobacco? Got anything more recent or relevant to cling to?
I think it takes 51 years to develop those diseases.
I love you
2010, Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics okay with you? Otherwise you can choose any of the first ten links that pop up in a Google search of “cotinine levels in children.” I think y’all’ll like this one, though- it’s all knee-jerky and “ZOMG, BAN SMOKING IN APARTMENTS!!”
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/1/85.abstract
But you think the negative effects from being exposed to residue and stench from smoking are comparable to directly inhaling second-hand smoke? That stench/residue isn’t second-hand smoke; it is third-hand. Second-hand smoke is inhalation of cigarette smoke after it enters the atmosphere. That residue and/or remains of cigarette smoke on items, individuals, is third-hand smoke. So don’t you think the negative consequences of second-hand smoke are considerably more severe than from third-hand smoke? My point is that even if going outside to smoke doesn’t eliminate all the potential negative effects on children, I think it does minimize them quite a bit as opposed to your children actually being exposed to second-hand smoke.
The OP’s religion is, at best, a red herring in this debate. You know better.
And I was a child who was fortunate to not have to endure horrible things like physical, sexual, or mental abuse, but my mom did smoke around me all the time. I spent my entire childhood with asthma, debilitating allergies, and virtually constant bouts of pneumonia and bronchitis. After moving away from her at 16, I have minimal allergies, no asthma, and have had bronchitis once in 11 years-- my quality of life has substantially improved being away from daily smoke. As others have pointed out though, these examples are just anecdotes-- the real data is in the studies which pretty conclusively prove how dangerous second hand smoke is to kids.
No one is diminishing your experience and I truly and sincerely am sorry for what happened to you-- no one should ever have to suffer that kind of abuse, particularly a child and especially at the hands of the people they should be able to trust most. I really do mean that genuinely. That said, smoking around kids can still be awful and potentially abusive without being as awful and abusive as rape or beatings. There are shades of grey here and the brightline for abuse doesn’t lie squarely at the foot of rape and nowhere else. Further, social norms for what constitutes abuse also change over time-- frequent whoopings with a belt would be viewed quite differently on the abuse spectrum in 1950 than in 2013.
I agree with the others- I wouldn’t send CPS out on this unless a person gets cited for it tons of times or something. But give out tickets-- sure, it doesn’t catch everything, but it’s a good step in the right direction.
I lol’ed.