Australia considers ban on smoking in cars

Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm

Australia mulls car smoking ban
By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney

Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
to consider banning smoking in cars.
A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
passengers, particularly children.

(snip)

Similar laws have been proposed in parts of the United States and
Germany, but were rejected on privacy grounds.

The New South Wales government said there would have to be far more
public debate before any new measures were brought in.

This type of smoking ban has been rejected by the state parliament on
two previous occasions.

Supporters of the legislation have argued that research into the
dangers of passive smoking has proved that change is urgently needed.

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote in
:

> Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern
> shoudl be safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the
> drivers on cell phones.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>
> Australia mulls car smoking ban
> By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>
> Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South
> Wales, are to consider banning smoking in cars.
> A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive
> smoking on passengers, particularly children.

You forgot to blame Bush, psycho. You're slipping.

--
From: (Fredric L. Rice)
Subject: Pray for DeLay "suicide" 9/28/05

"Wouldn't it KICK ASS! if he were found face down
in his corn flakes in the morning, a victim of
another bizarre Republican "suicide?""

"Sweet baby Jesus, I'd throw a ****ing party in
the nearest park and put up signs giving thanks
to Jesus."

"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>
>
> Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
> safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>
> Australia mulls car smoking ban
> By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>
> Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
> to consider banning smoking in cars.
> A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
> passengers, particularly children.
>
> (snip)
>
> Similar laws have been proposed in parts of the United States and
> Germany, but were rejected on privacy grounds.
>
> The New South Wales government said there would have to be far more
> public debate before any new measures were brought in.
>
> This type of smoking ban has been rejected by the state parliament on
> two previous occasions.
>
> Supporters of the legislation have argued that research into the
> dangers of passive smoking has proved that change is urgently needed.
>
>
>

Wouldn't the real answer be to outlaw tobacco out-right? Just another
stupid suggestion...

BFaux ;-)

> B Faux:
> Wouldn't the real answer be to outlaw tobacco out-right? Just another
> stupid suggestion...

Yeah, just what we need: another item for the freedom fighters in this
nation to put in their reprehensible bag of tricks...

--
"Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what
do freedom fighters fight????"
--George Carlin

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:03:18 GMT, "B Faux" > wrote:

>
>"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
>> safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>>
>> Australia mulls car smoking ban
>> By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>>
>> Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
>> to consider banning smoking in cars.
>> A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
>> passengers, particularly children.
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> Similar laws have been proposed in parts of the United States and
>> Germany, but were rejected on privacy grounds.
>>
>> The New South Wales government said there would have to be far more
>> public debate before any new measures were brought in.
>>
>> This type of smoking ban has been rejected by the state parliament on
>> two previous occasions.
>>
>> Supporters of the legislation have argued that research into the
>> dangers of passive smoking has proved that change is urgently needed.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Wouldn't the real answer be to outlaw tobacco out-right? Just another
>stupid suggestion...


Wouldn't the real answer be to just beat fascist pigs
senseless with a rubber hose ...

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>
>
>
> Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
> safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>
> Australia mulls car smoking ban
> By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>
> Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
> to consider banning smoking in cars.
> A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
> passengers, particularly children.
>
> (snip)
>
>


There's a couple off suggestions floating round regarding the ban. One
is to ban smoking in cars completely, which will never happen. The
other is to ban smoking in cars when children are on board, which I
think has more merit.

While I have no problem with people smoking in their cars, as a member
of the NSW State Emergency Service, nothing ****s me to tears more than
seeing downright fkn morons throwing cigarette butts out of their car
windows whilst driving through the most flammable continent on the
planet. I do make it a habit of telling them exactly what I think of
them if I get a chance at the next set of traffic lights.

IMHO, the primary positive outcome to an outright ban is it would stop
the lowest common denominator of the population from throwing their
butts out the window.

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:25:42 -0500, necromancer
> wrote:

>> B Faux:
>> Wouldn't the real answer be to outlaw tobacco out-right? Just another
>> stupid suggestion...
>
>Yeah, just what we need: another item for the freedom fighters in this
>nation to put in their reprehensible bag of tricks...

What do you need freedom for if you're not doing anything wrong?

Dave

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:15:12 +1100, Sir Lex > wrote:

>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
>> safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>>
>> Australia mulls car smoking ban
>> By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>>
>> Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
>> to consider banning smoking in cars.
>> A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
>> passengers, particularly children.
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>
>
>
>There's a couple off suggestions floating round regarding the ban. One
>is to ban smoking in cars completely, which will never happen. The
>other is to ban smoking in cars when children are on board, which I
>think has more merit.
>
>While I have no problem with people smoking in their cars, as a member
>of the NSW State Emergency Service, nothing ****s me to tears more than
>seeing downright fkn morons throwing cigarette butts out of their car
>windows whilst driving through the most flammable continent on the
>planet. I do make it a habit of telling them exactly what I think of
>them if I get a chance at the next set of traffic lights.
>
>IMHO, the primary positive outcome to an outright ban is it would stop
>the lowest common denominator of the population from throwing their
>butts out the window.

Don't you have littering laws already? Cigarette butts count as
litter, at least in the US.

I can't believe the NRA isn't jumping all over this. If cigarettes
can get banned because of their involvement in another crime then what
chances do guns stand?

How about banning cars to prevent accidents. **** the economy, lets
all walk everywhere!

Oh, and you'll need a helmet on at all times. And full body armor.
Even in July in Nevada. Oh, and getting a suntan will be illegal, to
prevent you from skin cancer. We should also ban McDonalds, because
people can become fat, or even worse, feed that **** to their children
or pets!

Oh, and we'll have to ban rock and/or roll. It's bad for the hearing
and for the soul.

Dave
---
Like Roads? http://www.davidphogan.com/sdroads

SD Dave wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:15:12 +1100, Sir Lex > wrote:
>
>
>>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
>>>safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>>>
>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>>>
>>>Australia mulls car smoking ban
>>>By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>>>
>>>Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
>>>to consider banning smoking in cars.
>>>A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
>>>passengers, particularly children.
>>>
>>>(snip)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>There's a couple off suggestions floating round regarding the ban. One
>>is to ban smoking in cars completely, which will never happen. The
>>other is to ban smoking in cars when children are on board, which I
>>think has more merit.
>>
>>While I have no problem with people smoking in their cars, as a member
>>of the NSW State Emergency Service, nothing ****s me to tears more than
>>seeing downright fkn morons throwing cigarette butts out of their car
>>windows whilst driving through the most flammable continent on the
>>planet. I do make it a habit of telling them exactly what I think of
>>them if I get a chance at the next set of traffic lights.
>>
>>IMHO, the primary positive outcome to an outright ban is it would stop
>>the lowest common denominator of the population from throwing their
>>butts out the window.
>
>
> Don't you have littering laws already? Cigarette butts count as
> litter, at least in the US.

We do, however throwing a lit cigarette into long dry grass on the side
of the road is a tad worse than throwing a paper wrapper.

Different laws apply if someone throws a butt out their window and it
starts a fire. Punishments in this case range up to 14 years
imprisonment if said fire ends up killing someone.

> I can't believe the NRA isn't jumping all over this. If cigarettes
> can get banned because of their involvement in another crime then what
> chances do guns stand?
>
> How about banning cars to prevent accidents. **** the economy, lets
> all walk everywhere!
>
> Oh, and you'll need a helmet on at all times. And full body armor.
> Even in July in Nevada. Oh, and getting a suntan will be illegal, to
> prevent you from skin cancer. We should also ban McDonalds, because
> people can become fat, or even worse, feed that **** to their children
> or pets!
>
> Oh, and we'll have to ban rock and/or roll. It's bad for the hearing
> and for the soul.
>

When I said that an outright ban would have a positive effect in that
the lowest common denominator would be forced to stop tossing butts, I
was also trying to imply that such a law would not be fair on the
majority of people who normally do the right thing and put their butts
in their cars ash tray. Though I realise that in my OP that was not
clear at all. My bad.

> Dave
> ---
> Like Roads? http://www.davidphogan.com/sdroads

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 13:01:20 +1100, Sir Lex > wrote:

>SD Dave wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:15:12 +1100, Sir Lex > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Their concern is with passive smoke but the real concern shoudl be
>>>>safety. Smoking drivers are as deadly as the drivers on cell phones.
>>>>
>>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4757498.stm
>>>>
>>>>Australia mulls car smoking ban
>>>>By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
>>>>
>>>>Authorities in Australia's most populous state, New South Wales, are
>>>>to consider banning smoking in cars.
>>>>A parliamentary inquiry will look at the effects of passive smoking on
>>>>passengers, particularly children.
>>>>
>>>>(snip)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>There's a couple off suggestions floating round regarding the ban. One
>>>is to ban smoking in cars completely, which will never happen. The
>>>other is to ban smoking in cars when children are on board, which I
>>>think has more merit.
>>>
>>>While I have no problem with people smoking in their cars, as a member
>>>of the NSW State Emergency Service, nothing ****s me to tears more than
>>>seeing downright fkn morons throwing cigarette butts out of their car
>>>windows whilst driving through the most flammable continent on the
>>>planet. I do make it a habit of telling them exactly what I think of
>>>them if I get a chance at the next set of traffic lights.
>>>
>>>IMHO, the primary positive outcome to an outright ban is it would stop
>>>the lowest common denominator of the population from throwing their
>>>butts out the window.
>>
>>
>> Don't you have littering laws already? Cigarette butts count as
>> litter, at least in the US.
>
>We do, however throwing a lit cigarette into long dry grass on the side
>of the road is a tad worse than throwing a paper wrapper.
>
>Different laws apply if someone throws a butt out their window and it
>starts a fire. Punishments in this case range up to 14 years
>imprisonment if said fire ends up killing someone.
>
>> I can't believe the NRA isn't jumping all over this. If cigarettes
>> can get banned because of their involvement in another crime then what
>> chances do guns stand?
>>
>> How about banning cars to prevent accidents. **** the economy, lets
>> all walk everywhere!
>>
>> Oh, and you'll need a helmet on at all times. And full body armor.
>> Even in July in Nevada. Oh, and getting a suntan will be illegal, to
>> prevent you from skin cancer. We should also ban McDonalds, because
>> people can become fat, or even worse, feed that **** to their children
>> or pets!
>>
>> Oh, and we'll have to ban rock and/or roll. It's bad for the hearing
>> and for the soul.
>>
>
>When I said that an outright ban would have a positive effect in that
>the lowest common denominator would be forced to stop tossing butts, I
>was also trying to imply that such a law would not be fair on the
>majority of people who normally do the right thing and put their butts
>in their cars ash tray. Though I realise that in my OP that was not
>clear at all. My bad.

Thanks for the honest response. I think we're on the same page, since
a few years ago I watched my neighbors houses burn during San Diego's
Cedar fires.

I just was worried you were another nut trying to ban smoking entirely
because of a few bad apples. I'm all for punishing them, but there
are many smokers that go out of their way to not cause litter or
problems for others.

Dave
---
http://www.davidphogan.com/sdroads
Amature Ass(phalt) and more!