NJ Proposes Banning Smoking While Driving

[Shane]

Jul 24, 2005 11:01 am US/Eastern
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) 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 tearing into the idea as 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.

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, one percent were related to smoking.

In the past, McKeon has also sponsored legislation to prohibit smoking in college dormitory rooms.

His latest measure, co-sponsored by fellow Democrat, Assemblywoman Lorretta Weinberg, comes on the heels of a proposal to ban smoking in bars, restaurants and the state’s casinos. The smoking while driving ban shifts the smoking debate to private property.

The measure, introduced last month just before lawmakers’ summer break, 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.

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.

Earlier this year, lawmakers in Germany proposed a ban on smoking while driving as a traffic safety measure.

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.

A driving ban, said suburban Chicago smoker Garnet Dawn Scheuer, is “completely asinine. It’s unbelievable that they want to try it. People have been smoking in their cars since cars were invented.”

Scheuer, who tracks anti-smoking measures in the Midwest and Northeast for the New Hampshire-based Smokers Club Inc., disputes the distraction argument.

“You don’t have to look at a cigarette to light it,” she said.

Cito, who’s also a member of the cigar society, was more blunt.

“They put it all under the ruse of this other crap. It’s government interference. What’s next my house?” he asked.

"Maybe," said Assemblyman McKeon, “If your house was on four wheels and going 70 mph, you’re right I would.”

http://kyw.com/Local%20News/local_story_205134803.html

What the hell? We've been chased out of every other possible place to smoke, now they want to attack us on our own property? Mark my word, the day will come when there are smoking speakeasys.

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Shane

What the hell? We've been chased out of every other possible place to smoke, now they want to attack us on our own property? Mark my word, the day will come when there are smoking speakeasys.

What's the problem?, it's just a proposal, you can still plug your lungs up with all the garbage tobaco products produce.
I just wish, they raise the taxes on tobacco products to pay for all the damages caused by their use. Everyone else has to pay their fair share in taxes, and insurance, for what they do, I don't see why tobacco users are exempt from that concept.

[Mac in SD]

Originally Posted by bruce

What's the problem?, it's just a proposal, you can still plug your lungs up with all the garbage tobaco products produce.
I just wish, they raise the taxes on tobacco products to pay for all the damages caused by their use. Everyone else has to pay their fair share in taxes, and insurance, for what they do, I don't see why tobacco users are exempt from that concept.

Bruce, I'm a little surprised at this coming from you. I quit smoking a few years ago (actually, 2 years, 4 months and 20 days...I don't miss it or anything, though. ) But I've got to say, the taxes on tobacco are already very high, and insurance rates for smokers are also higher than for non-smokers.

But let me ask you something: how would you feel if something YOU did for fun/pleasure (I don't know...modifying cars for performance, probably increasing emissions, certainly driving faster than the average bear in testing and tuning) had people saying you should pay more in taxes and insurance. You've got to agree that those activities cause more "damages" to society (air pollution, accidents, more tires produced, whatever) than Joe Eco driving his hybrid at 55. Should "society" crack down on you? Do you ski? Ride a motorcycle? A bicycle? A boat? How's your diet? All that sedentary time on in front of the test bench or the PC? All pretty risky behaviors that cost the rest of us money, if you ask me. Are you paying your fair share?

[Jbenn911]

Very typical political B.S....As a cop for the last 14 years, I dont think I've EVER had an accident were smoking was the problem..If the fool wants to ban smoking in cars, why not add women putting on makeup, eating your fast food, children in cars(how many times have you seen Soccer Mommy in her never been off road SUV, TURNED AROUND WHILE DRIVING and yelling at her kids), drinking coffee(have to tilt the cup in front of your face a bit, dont ya??)..Maybe if I were allowed to stop people for all those other offenses, we would generate enough income for the state that taxes on all pleasurable activities could be reduced..Wonder if this jerk is up for election soon ???

[turbojimmy]

Originally Posted by Jbenn911

Very typical political B.S....As a cop for the last 14 years, I dont think I've EVER had an accident were smoking was the problem..If the fool wants to ban smoking in cars, why not add women putting on makeup, eating your fast food, children in cars(how many times have you seen Soccer Mommy in her never been off road SUV, TURNED AROUND WHILE DRIVING and yelling at her kids), drinking coffee(have to tilt the cup in front of your face a bit, dont ya??)..Maybe if I were allowed to stop people for all those other offenses, we would generate enough income for the state that taxes on all pleasurable activities could be reduced..Wonder if this jerk is up for election soon ???

How would you know if smoking were the problem? No one is going to admit it, just like causing a wreck because you're on a cell phone. I agree with you that there are plenty of other things to focus on, though. It's crazy to zero in on cigarettes. In NJ, smokers pay higher auto insurance premiums because of the alleged additional distraction (depends on the company).

I sit in bumper-to-bumper traffic daily on my commute from NJ to NYC and I see lots of crazy stuff from my high perch in the bus. Smoking is the least offensive in my mind. I've seen people with newspapers spread across the steering wheel, laptops, makeup, shaving, clipboards, maps, cellphones and writing at the same time (steering with their knee). Hell most drivers in NJ are barely equipped with the sense needed to perform just one of those functions by itself, never mind combined with driving.

Now you can replace your radio with an aftermarket DVD player. WTF is that? And on one of the other boards I frequent there's people swapping 'cheat' codes to unlock their factory navigation screens so that they can watch DVDs while they're driving. It's crazy. If NJ needs to focus on anything it's nipping that bullsh*t in the bud. There's no need to have any sort of DVD player in the dash. When the cop asks what caused the accident, they're not going to say "I was watching Star Wars".

Jim

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Mac in SD

Bruce, I'm a little surprised at this coming from you. I quit smoking a few years ago (actually, 2 years, 4 months and 20 days...I don't miss it or anything, though. ) But I've got to say, the taxes on tobacco are already very high, and insurance rates for smokers are also higher than for non-smokers.

But let me ask you something: how would you feel if something YOU did for fun/pleasure (I don't know...modifying cars for performance, probably increasing emissions, certainly driving faster than the average bear in testing and tuning) had people saying you should pay more in taxes and insurance. You've got to agree that those activities cause more "damages" to society (air pollution, accidents, more tires produced, whatever) than Joe Eco driving his hybrid at 55. Should "society" crack down on you? Do you ski? Ride a motorcycle? A bicycle? A boat? How's your diet? All that sedentary time on in front of the test bench or the PC? All pretty risky behaviors that cost the rest of us money, if you ask me. Are you paying your fair share?

I used to smoke, and quit ~12 years ago.
I've also was in a wheel chair, and O2 for a couple years due to lung problems. Then while waiting for a lung transplant, lived in a ward full of people with respiratory problems. Yes, all that has effected the way I think about smoking, the life's lost, the family members having to deal with watching a loved one suffocate, time missed from work, grief of surviving relatives, etc., etc..
My 3rd day *on the waiting list*, a middle age gal walked into my room, sat down, and just broke out in tears, she sat there and weep, like you just can't imagine, for most of an hour. As she ran out of tears, she started to tell me about her husband and best friend of 25 years had just died. I doubt anyone other then someone that's been though that, can begin to understand the pain she was in. Yes, that's effected me, and yes, I get profoundly sad, even typing this. If someone wants to risk inflicting that on a family member, well, excuse me if I don't don't hold them in too high of reguard. If someone things fighting lung cancer is something to be taken lightly, well, IMO, they just ain't been at the effect of it. Oh, BWT, you can't even get a lung transplant if you have lung cancer, since the odds of servival are so low, die to such high reoccurance rates of lung cancer, post surgery. See, once you go on the drugs post transplant you don't have much of an immune system, ie 0 defense against any cancers.
Healty people tend to be in denile about what the effects are of smoking, and there sure ain't enough said about how it damages one's life, and their family members, IMO. BTW, my problem was genetic, and I would have had to go thur all of this anyway, but the smoking sure didn't help matters. IMO, and as evidenced by the **Tobacco Settlements*, the costs are monumential, and the taxes, sit aren't a drop in the bucket for the true loses. I'd wager there'd be alot fewer smokers, if they'd seen 1% of what I have about the negative effects of smoking. There, IMO, just isn't enough that can be said about slowing just day by day suffocating, and struggling for ever breath.

I've paid increased rates for when I had tickets on my record, and the higher rates due to being younger, so yes, I consider myself to have paid my dues. As far as emissions, and air, well, I put alot of effort into the DIY-WB project (as well as numberous others), and we'll just say, alot (thousands) of those have been built, and there's been a flurry of econo WBs that have come into existence since the DIY-WB, hit the internet. Not to mention, that some (DIY-WBs) were used in commercial shops. If you look back at the DIY prom history, Mike Pitts, and Scott Sealander were the first ones to Public Domain a hac, and then there was the Promgramming 101 at the DIY_EFI list that me and a few other guys spent hundred of hours on, to reveal alot about what the $42 code was about. BTW, I was completely sedentary when I was doing that since I was confined to a wheel chair at that time. Oh, and the public domaining of the $58 was well over a year's worth of work on my part. So as far as clean air goes, I've contributed more then *may fair share*, in that reguard.

While somewhat *sedentary*, that's in large part, now forced on me by my condition. I dare say thou, there's alot of healthier people that don't approach how much I work at staying active. Diet, other then a bag of chips, once in a while, or when traveling, I'm at least conscience about it, and eat intelligently.

And, I'm not bragging, or ranting, but rathter only just answering your questions. Obviously, I just have strong feelings about the matter, and if someone wants to smoke, fine, but, IMO, they should bear all the costs involved, and be aware of what they're really doing, not only to themselves, but to others.

PS, in road trip driving my GN, has routinely gotten 27 MPG, and my truck is getting 50% better MPG since doing some chips for it. So as being evirono friendly, I can sleep well.

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Jbenn911

Very typical political B.S....As a cop for the last 14 years, I dont think I've EVER had an accident were smoking was the problem..

How would you even know, if it was a factor?. How would you know if it was just a matter of *smokers cough*, and the driver, just had a resulting moment of brain fade, and zigged, when they should have zagged?.

[Jbenn911]

Originally Posted by bruce

How would you even know, if it was a factor?. How would you know if it was just a matter of *smokers cough*, and the driver, just had a resulting moment of brain fade, and zigged, when they should have zagged?.

You wouldnt, and that's really the point....Unless you happen to see a burn on the person or the butt burning somewhere or they were dumb enough to tell you ,we wouldnt know...If they want to pick on something, pick on something that's more easily identified by witnesses or through the accident investigation.. The man is simply posturing for someone and it'll get defeated...If he cited an AAA report at ONE PERCENT of 32,000 accidents attributed to distractions were smoking related, why hasnt he proposed legislation against the other 99% of the accidents causes..Why not go after the liquor companies or raise booze tax again or, or , or , or.... ?? I can understand that having lost a father to a lung disease may motivate him a bit, but there are so many other "targets" he could go after, though we all know smoking is an easy one...ahhh..could debate this one forever...i've given my $.02...

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Jbenn911

You wouldnt, and that's really the point....Unless you happen to see a burn on the person or the butt burning somewhere or they were dumb enough to tell you ,we wouldnt know...
If they want to pick on something, pick on something that's more easily identified by witnesses or through the accident investigation..

The man is simply posturing for someone and it'll get defeated...If he cited an AAA report at ONE PERCENT of 32,000 accidents attributed to distractions were smoking related, why hasnt he proposed legislation against the other 99% of the accidents causes..

Why not go after the liquor companies or raise booze tax again or, or , or , or.... ?? I can understand that having lost a father to a lung disease may motivate him a bit, but there are so many other "targets" he could go after, though we all know smoking is an easy one...ahhh..could debate this one forever...i've given my $.02...

Oh, I'd bet a simple test could be invented for determing the nicotine content in one's saliva easy enough, especially it there's money involved. ie just like the photo cameras for *dangerous trafficlights*.

Seatbelt laws started with posturing.

Like you said, Tabacco is the current *sin*.

[broke1]

Yea Bruce,and I suppose someone were holding a gun to your head the whole time you smoked

YOUR actions caused your medical problesm,dont go trying to blame someone else.It was your choice to smoke and you did.

Who the **** are you or anyone else to tell me what my morals are when it comes to putting things in MY body on MY property??

Ill bet youve put worse **** in the enviorment when testing your car than I could put in a lifetime of smoking.

Id like to see a real comparison on the 2 but then theyd outlaw hot rods...

Smoking is no more worse for you than working in alot of fields(good example coal miner,spraying pesticides,etc)

You and other people just want to be *******s and center in on smokers because its the "hip" thing to do.

Hell,obesity is ALOT more of a problem than lung cancer in America,why not make food illegal for fat people??I dont like looking at fat people like most dont like looking at smokers.

Then again,im sure if 60% + of Americans smoked,this wouldnt be an issue at all.

[bruce]

Originally Posted by broke1

Yea Bruce,and I suppose someone were holding a gun to your head the whole time you smoked
YOUR actions caused your medical problesm,dont go trying to blame someone else.It was your choice to smoke and you did.

Who the **** are you or anyone else to tell me what my morals are when it comes to putting things in MY body on MY property??

Ill bet youve put worse **** in the enviorment when testing your car than I could put in a lifetime of smoking.

Id like to see a real comparison on the 2 but then theyd outlaw hot rods...

Smoking is no more worse for you than working in alot of fields(good example coal miner,spraying pesticides,etc)

You and other people just want to be *******s and center in on smokers because its the "hip" thing to do.

Hell,obesity is ALOT more of a problem than lung cancer in America,why not make food illegal for fat people??I dont like looking at fat people like most dont like looking at smokers.

Then again,im sure if 60% + of Americans smoked,this wouldnt be an issue at all.

Here's a snippet about Alpha-1-Antitrypsin deficiency. Mind you this is just an extremely simple definition about it. It also can generate serious liver problems. Serious as in the only cure being a liver transplant.

From:
*http://www.lung.ca/diseases/alph1.html*
" What is Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency?
Alpha-1 Antitrypsin deficiency is an inherited disorder that may cause lung or liver disease. Normally, the protein alpha-1 antitrysin, is released into the bloodstream and travels to the lung where it protects the lungs from the destructive actions of common illnesses and exposures, particularly tobacco smoke. People with a deficiency of this protective protein often suffer from progressive lung damage known as emphysema. Unlike the common form of emphysema seen in otherwise healthy individuals who have smoked for many years, this alpha antitrypsin deficiency form of emphysema may occur at an unusually young age and after minimal exposure to tobacco smoke."

Just to clarify the comment about exposures, that means any pollen, any form of any smoke, any particulate matter, any type of mold, and in this case ANY means ANY. We'll forgo any details about how being in the military contributed to the progression of my disease, other then to say, it was significant. When your system lacks the ability to cleanse the lungs, every thing you do, contributes to the progession of the disease.

Where did I say you should be denied being able to smoke?. Please point out where I said anyone should be stopped from smoking, or having smoking outlawed?.

What have you done, to try and clean up the air we breath?. For openers. I'd bet my car is running alot cleaner then your's. I've at least made an effort to make a difference, have you?.

I'm not opposing smoking, just explaining some of the facts, you want to overlook. If you and the rest of the world want to smoke, go ahead, I could care less, unless I'm forced to breath any direct second hand smoke. Your want to smoke shouldn't over ride my want, to not inhale your smoke.

The issue on this post is smoking, if you want to dodge that and talk about obesity, how about starting another thread?.

You really really need to reread what I said, if you want to risk lung cancer, or any one of several diseases that can ruin your life, your family, go right ahead. All I've been trying to point out is the damage you do to yourself, and your family. If you don't care about your friends, or family, I could careless, I just wish you'd think about them, when thinking about why you smoke. Like I said, smoke all you want, I just don't care.

Using the concept of popularity, IMO, is just an excuse to bypass using any logic.

And as I highlighted and repeated, it's only a proposal.
And, IMO, raising the taxes on them should cover the expenses of using them. That is only fair.

[Mac in SD]

Bruce, I was a little bit worried that you might take my post as some sort of personal criticism, but then decided you'd know I was just trying to make a point. However, I see I have to tell you that I wasn't trying to impugn your tuning or DYI projects, or imply that your DIY stuff wasn't useful, and I didn't know about your health issues. Also, I'm sure you're a healthy eater.

That's why I added all those other activities like skiing, cycling, etc. My point was that LOTS of activities and habits are dangerous and / or unhealthy at times, and add to society's costs. Thousands of kids get hurt playing football, some paralyzed, some killed: do we outlaw it? Make the kids pay all the costs of broken bones, etc? Or should their parents' health coverage take care of it (making your rates go up as well, BTW.) What about all those reckless people in cold northern climes who venture out of doors without mittens clipped to their coat sleeves? Or spend any time in the sun without SPF97?

And don't get me started on flouridated water...

Where do we draw the line? That was my point. Signing off now.

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Mac in SD

Where do we draw the line? That was my point. Signing off now.

Ah.
Thou, in most of the cases you mentioned, ie games, private insurance takes care of those injuries. So the public isn't absorbing the costs. When you get into serious illnesses, they get incredibly expensive.

Yes, where you draw the line is an issue, but again, I'll take the positon of it's not that critical in some respects, as long as people are will to pay the Piper, for what they do. IMO, I'd rather see that, then the poiticians, outlawing the *evil act of the day*.

[Jbenn911]

Originally Posted by bruce

Ah.

IMO, I'd rather see that, then the poiticians, outlawing the *evil act of the day*.

Very good point, Bruce...I guess in my own sleep deprived way, I was trying to get at that..Though, I cant see the ACLU or anyone else allowing an "invasion of privacy" like getting someones spit for nicotine levels...

[bruce]

Originally Posted by Jbenn911

Though, I cant see the ACLU or anyone else allowing an "invasion of privacy" like getting someones spit for nicotine levels...

Some states, say you have to give a blood or urine sample if charged with driving impared. No sample, and it's an automatic lose of driving priviledges.

[Drew L]

how would you feel if something YOU did for fun/pleasure (I don't know...modifying cars for performance, probably increasing emissions, certainly driving faster than the average bear in testing and tuning) had people saying you should pay more in taxes

This doesn't represent doing what one likes to do for fun/pleasure elsewhere

smoking ALWAYS moves the user to another location

i.e. smoking bans


It has little to do with paying more taxes..................paying more "sin" taxes has solved nothing, NOTHING . heck how much does a pack of cigs cost to make vs what they are sold for?

liquor taxes?



does cirrhosis mean alcoholism?
consider the diabetic, happens %10 of the time yet when we think cirrhosis we think of the drunk.

I could go on but you get the point, disease and contributing factors don't always equal especially in bruces case