Another bill too far

I am far from a fan of tobacco use or smoking.  Very far from one.  That said, there are occasions where I've been known to enjoy the occasional cigar, especially in cold weather, especially on the occasion of a Ravens home game.   I'm an adult and I am fully aware of the health risks involved in using tobacco.  And among those risks is the danger of secondhand smoke.

All that said, I have a bit of a problem with a bill making its way through the General Assembly, which is described in this post.  It has passed the Senate and is now making its way through the House of Delegates.

So this bill would make smoking inside a motor vehicle with a child age 8 or under inside of it a non-moving offense, with a penalty of a fine of $50.  The intent of the bill is to protect young children from secondhand smoke.  Certainly a noble intent.

But the problem I have is that someone's vehicle is private property.  Moreover, unlike the use of alcohol, the use of a tobacco while driving has not been clinically shown to impair one's ability to drive.

So I am not loving legislation that would prohibit someone from engaging in legal (albeit stupid) behavior inside their private property.  Fairly clear to me that the intent is to eventually ban all tobacco use inside one's vehicle.  And, once that's accomplished, what the hey, let's just ban tobacco use in one's yard, and eventually, inside their homes?

Something inside my gut tells me this bill is a little over the top.  Education into tobacco abstinence and the dangers of secondhand smoke where children are concerned would seem to be to be a better thing to do.

Comments

[macsmom]

Is it illegal to dispense poison to one's child in a moving vehicle? It doesn't adversely affect one's driving, and it is private property, after all.

[Marshmallow Man]

Someone's vehicle that they own IS their property, thanks for reinforcing my point. But knowingly giving anyone poison is attempted murder, which is definitely illegal.

I think we're on the same page with respect to the behavior, but differ as to whether it should be legislated. I differ because I see the slope here. Why not just make smoking illegal in all motor vehicles? I am totally fine with it being illegal in public transit vehicles, motor coaches, school buses, and even vehicles that can be used to carry passengers short distances such as tow trucks. I simply draw the line at personal vehicles.

I do like your line of thinking of substituting other items for "smoking", such as poison. Would anyone want there to be drinking of alcohol in a moving vehicle. Of course not. That is also against the law.

Of course, it is OK for people to consume alcohol-- for my money, a more lethal poison than nicotine-- in front of children in public places. Those places are called restaurants.

[marylander]

Intrusive Big Brother no matter how noble is a problem. At what point are citizens considered adults with free will and common sense? You cannot legislate common sense any more than you can legislate responsibility or intelligence. I know what is next; it is licensing the ability to have children.
If you are too uncaring that you smoke when driving your child to the baseball game, then obviously you are too irresponsible to care for this child.
Forget the fine, take the child away and then get in line for sterilization, after all pregnancy is a disease otherwise how is it a woman’s health issue under Obamacare?
Big Brother is here, you may like it when it’s in your favor. Well it will not always be that way.

[macsmom]

Think of it this way--it's child abuse. Putting a stop to child abuse is not Big Brother interfering with the adult's life. Forcing a child to breathe tobacco smoke is making a choice which is injurious to the child's health. Whose side do we want to be on?

[marylander]

I understand the argument and rationalization, but the issue is where does it end? At what point does Government regulation and oversight end? You cannot legislate or regulate responsibility nor can you legislate or regulate common sense. I do not want to linve in a Nanny State such as Maryland is evolving into. That is truly the focus of the Democrats and Liberals. To look to Government to protect us from all potential dangers. Come on, do you really support this over regulation?