General Chat

Call to ban smoking in vehicles
Last Updated: Wednesday, 24 March 2010, 06:19 GMT- Search: Passive smoking children

Call to ban smoking in vehiclesDoctors have called for a ban on smoking in all vehicles after a new report revealed passive smoking causes at least 22,000 new cases of asthma and wheezing in children every year.
The report from the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) found more than 20,000 chest infections, 120,000 bouts of middle ear disease and 200 cases of meningitis in youngsters are also thought to be linked to the effects of second-hand smoke both inside and outside the home.
Furthermore, 40 babies die from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDs) every year caused by passive smoking - one in five of all SIDs deaths.
Professor John Britton, chairman of the RCP's tobacco advisory group, said legislation to ban smoking in the home would be "unenforceable" so instead views of "what is acceptable" had to be changed to protect the two million children who live in homes which allow smoking.

But a total ban on smoking in cars and vans would be easier to police than the current situation which expects enforcement officers to differentiate between business and private vehicles, he said.
"We would recommend a ban on smoking in all vehicles," he said.
A Populus survey last year found around three-quarters of children whose parents smoked in their car wanted them to stop (73%) and were worried about the effect on their own health (76%).
Professor Britton said even drivers who never had child passengers should get out of their cars before lighting up for reasons of road safety. Current smoke-free legislation is due for review this year and Professor Britton said it was an opportunity to "close remaining gaps".
Richard Ashcroft, a professor of bioethics at Queen Mary, University of London, who contributed to the report, said the review also gave opportunities to clamp down on smoking in public places frequented by children, like play areas and outdoor swimming pools.
Professor Britton said this could include banning parents from smoking around the school gates but added it would be difficult to legislate for situations like family barbecues in private gardens. "Adults need to think about who's seeing them smoke," he said.

As we don't have children in the cripmobile and if we did I wouldn't smoke anyway I am working on the assumption that they won't apply this to consenting adults who are driving in their OWN vehicle!!!!

Sue

'Professor Britton said even drivers who never had child passengers should get out of their cars before lighting up for reasons of road safety.' !!

So if I am sitting alone in my OWN car, legally parked up waiting for someone, I have to get out before I light up? Road Safety?

When smokers were allowed to smoke inside, in designated areas, they were less likely to be seen doing so by children. Inside my car I am less visible!

In my opinion all this publicity is more likely to tempt children to smoke than not, we all know that teenagers rebel against rules.

why dont they ban smokers, from having children?

Nanny state.....!!

have you noticed that most laws are there, to STOP you from doing something?

not many laws to give the RIGHT to carry on, are there?

When any non smokers are in my car, which is very rarely, I do not smoke. I also do not have any young children travelling in my car and if I did, I definitely wouldn't smoke in it, but as you have already said, it is my car, paid for by me and, as far as I am concerned, I should be allowed to smoke in it whenever I want to.

Val

This is daft, OH doesn't smoke anymore and he doesn't object to me smoking in the car. If I had to get out so would he as I have to be hauled out myself. So me smoking in the car doesn't affect OH's driving!

When daughter became pregnant I no longer smoke in the house if she visits (I am at the open back door, freezing my bum off).

I think most of us have consideration for others, certainly indoors, outdoors that's different - every man/woman for themselves!!

I am sick to death of blanket dictats without proper consultation.

Sue x

Another of these stupid nanny state ideas.

My answer........Its my car & I'll smoke if I want to. If someone doesn't like it, then they dont have to get in.

Also, I don't have any kids.

I think they should concentrate on the menace of people driving whilst using their mobiles.

Steve
:o)

I 've been trying to find any info on the web that might indicate the smoking ban etc is having an effect on the amount of tobacco products being sold.

I've found the link below ( which seems to indicate that if any thing tobacco sales are on the increase )






http://news.scotsman.com/health/Cigarette-sales-up-despite-quit.6090991.jp

It would appear that no amount of government interference is actually going to stop folk puffing away if they want to ( or stop new people starting for that matter ).

If everyone suddenly stopped smoking the chancellor would have a heart attack!!!!

Sue x

Shut it Lynda...lol you couldn't resist could you?

Sue x

We will be told when to go to bed and when to get up next.
why can't they just ask us smokers to think about where we
light up i.e around children and other none smokers.

most smokers do consider none smokers so why do these
bans keep popping up all the time. my car is taxed,insured and mot
and i own it so i for one will smoke in my car but never with children
in it.

Well the 'know alls' have to produce a ridiculous proposal every so often to justify their pay and position.

Perhaps the problem would be solved far more quickly by arming plod and having smokers shot on sight.

That'll:
a) decrease the overpopulation
b) ease the housing shortage
c) reduce NHS expenditure
d) increase business for undertakers, churches, florists etc

Hmmmm perhaps I'll petition No.10

Sue

Well I wish I could have grown up in a smoke free house and car...........mightn't have had pneumonia twice then and been prone to chest infections or my sister bronchitis. As a child I worried that it couldn't be good for you to sit in a room or car full of smoke and it seems 50 years later 76% of children still do worry, yet parents still don't care. Never mind parents' rights, what about a child's rights?

Also, when did it become as safe to drive a car holding a lighted cigarette as without one?

Sorry if I offend, only children do not have the choice like their parents.

I dont think they should totally ban smokers from lighting up in cars, but I do think if they have a child under 16 in their car the ban should apply .

Ive been in a car myself when passengers have lit up on short journeys. It stinks & its suffocating & you can taste it at the back of your own throat. Children shouldnt be put through this for the sake of their parents pleasure.

Theres no need to light up when you can have a fag before a short journey & after. On a long journey have plenty of rest & fag stops.

If your on your own or are in a car full of adults then it should be your choice to light up in the car, and the choice of the other adults to object or not.

But kids they just put up with it as its normal for them if their parents smoke in their car, despite the risks to their kids health...

I don't think you will find a smoker on here that disagrees with not smoking around children BUT I am going to smoke in my own car because OH doesn't object and it is our personal space.

As for driving with a ciggie or without it's no different to people who steer one handed or fiddle with the radio/cd player, sip a drink, unwrap a sweet, adjust the mirrors or scratch their head. The powers that be can't even stop drivers talking on a mobile which IS patently dangerous, they aren't going to be able to flag down every smoker!

Sue

They cant stop people useing their phones in cars .....HOW are they going to stop them smoking?????

The number of people we see driving along with a mobile clamped to their ears......if the police cannot uphold the law on hands-free in cars, how can they possibly police smokers.....

Perhaps they will install fag cameras!!!!

Sue x

Edit: that's my deletion below as it double posted!

This bit intrigued me:

"Richard Ashcroft, a professor of bioethics at Queen Mary, University of London, who contributed to the report, said the review also gave opportunities to clamp down on smoking in public places frequented by children, like play areas and outdoor swimming pools."

So they want to ban smoking outdoors now because (apparently) children will breathe in second hand smoke.

Just think for a moment - where is the exhaust on a car? About
face height for a child in a pushchair - and the majority of exhaust pipes point towards the pavement!
So exhaust fumes don't affect health then? Children (and pedestrians) aren't breathing in second hand car fumes - that are hundreds, indeed thousands of times more toxic than second hand fag smoke?

Not so much a Nanny state - more a bloody dictatorship put forward by people who seem to get paid to do selective research!

...and i bet a lot ot the money for this 'research' came from tax on cigarettes!

Good point Maggie, but hey picking on the addict diverts attention from the appalling living conditions that some children suffer through mismanagement of funds for social housing, inadequate parenting through either age or education (not picking on anyone in particular), dreadful diet because food manufacturers have a license to print money not food nutrition, the constantly changing advice re what's bad for you etc., etc.,

Come on, get back to picking on the drinkers!!

Sue x

As good an incentive as any to have a mass no-smoking week, Sue, lolol ;¬)

Love

Daff xxx