Morning Brew: May 1st, 2008

I'm pretty sure that Rich Hall had a "Sniglet" for the urge to make a silly face when someone points a camera at you. For some reason, the only one I can remember is "aquadextrious: the ability to turn off the bathtub faucet with your feet"

It's hard to believe that anyone in their right mind would smoke in a car, or any confined space for that matter, with a child present.

I'm a smoker and I really don't understand it.

Keven, you 'd be surprised at what some people will do. LOL. I remember, working security at a nightclub a couple of weeks ago, there was a woman who was pregnant hanging out with smokers and even smoking herself. Unfortunately there are asshats out there who will do some stupid stuff.

@ keven

Check out some of the argumemts that appear in the comments of the linked blogTO article. Some smokers are quick to call the health threat minimal and continue to smoke with kids present.

RE: smokin' while drivin' with the chillun'.

What if you're in a convertible with the top down? Will that be exempt? What if you put the baby seat in your motorbike's sidecar?

Re: Patrick - You'd still be a douche.

Jerrold, those weren't your average smokers. Those were tabacco lobby trolls. Kinda like the gun nuts that invaded Spacing a while back.

Funny about the ATM safety.

I actually left my card in the machine, someone found it while my account was still active, and they only took $20.

I don't plan on doing that again, but considering they could have stolen my rent money it seems like there are some decent people out there, even ones who are thieves.

@David

Don't machines eject your card before they eject your money and receipt?

I am a smoker and I don't smoke in my car when the kids are in it. Having said that, I think making laws to prevent people from doing so crosses into dangerous territory. Why don't we just ban cars? They are far more harmful than the smoke that comes off a players light.

While we're at it, why don't we introduce legislation that makes it illegal for a pregnant woman to drink alcohol. How about legislation that prevents a pregnant woman from having a smoke? How about legislation that prevents any person from having a smoke within ten feet of a woman that is with-child?

Here's one - let's introduce legislation that says you can't ride a bicycle wearing bell-bottomed jeans.

I, and many people my age - grew up riding around in cars with parents who smoked. Unforunately, I survived long enough to see the world we now live in.

Good post Jerrold!
Toronto FC ONWARD!

BTW.
Why dont we have laws against ... Drugs... OR minors smoking or drinking..

Laws like this in car smoking ban are good for society.

I don't agree -- I think laws like this are bad for society. We depend too much on our government to protect us and our children from everything and everything.

What every happened to personal responsibility?

Obviously, it didn't exist if your parents were busy smoking with you in the car. Laws like this wouldn't be needed if people did the right thing all the time.

Well, people don't do the right thing all of the time and who are we to decide what's right and wrong anyway?

When I was a kid, you could ride a bike without a helmet - but now it's illegal. While I agree that it's safer to ride a bike with a lid on, it sort of takes some of the fun and spontaneity out of being a kid, doesn't it?

The point is that there is way too much government interference these days. You have to let people make their own mistakes and deal with the consequences of those mistakes.

Certainly, there are far better was for lawmakers to spend their time.

There's a lot of fraud science surrounding second-hand smoke, but regardless of how much harm it actually does, it only takes a smidgen of common sense to recognize that it at least isn't healthy.

I don't understand why we still have seatbelt blitzes/checks, since if you're still so stupid that you don't wear a seatbelt you deserve to die. Natural selection. But in that line of the police having to cover for our lack of intelligence, this car-smoking ban doesn't surprise me. If grown adults are going to act like children, they'll get treated like children.

There sure is a lot of ignorance out there.

Why don't we make it illegal to take our kids to the beach as well? While there, they may step on some broken glass or breathe in some of the polluted air of the Toronto waterfront.

Governments like to go around telling people they know what is safe and what isn't. They don't want people talking on the phone in the car, but they have no problem with people viewing the countless billboard advertisements while they drive 120km/h along the Gardiner Expressway.

Laws are there to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Personal responsibility? Tell that to the child that is going to end up with Asthma because their parents smoke in the car while they are straped into their carseat.

Laws are also in place to ensure our society is healthy. I'm fully supportive of being allowed to do whatever you want, as long as 1) It has zero effect on the lives or wellbeing of others and 2) You forfeit your health care rights and entitlements to other tax funded services.

@ Jay: but the kids stuck in the car with the smoke can't help themselves. My parents did it and I absolutely hated it. Come to find out years later that all my bitching was for a reason because I am allergic to it, they just thought my constant coughing was me being a pain in the ass because I didn't like the smoke. When you're stuck in the backseat of a car with smoke blowing in your face, strapped in by the seatbelt there is nowhere to go - you can't just get up and leave. The kids don't choose to smoke so do it when they're not held hostage 2 feet away.

The things you talk about aren't the issue. Just because something one bad thing is legal doesn't give you the right to engage in every bad thing under the sun. That logic is asinine. Why don't we just make rape legal or ban the use of water because it can cause drowning?

Trying to compare an issue to unrelated one is just avoiding the actual issue.

Like I said, I don't advocate smoking in a car that has kids in it - but, I also don't advocate excessive lawmaking.

We are a bunch of pussies and we are teaching our kids to be the same way. We're telling future generations that no matter what - the government will find some way to make sure nothing bad ever happens to you.

I have two boys aged 13 and 11, neither of which has ever broken an arm. By the time I was 13, I had broken mine three times. My point? Kids are too sheltered and it just keeps getting worse.

Making things like this illegal are sending the wrong message.

@Jay

The problem is that parents who smoke around their children don't take responsibility for their actions - their children do, in the form of diseases and death.

You'd have a case if you supported a law forcing parents who smoked around their children to sign a contract allowing themselves to be infected with asthma or lung cancer when their child develops the problems, and to be financially responsible for their child's healthcare for the rest of their lives (since these problems don't stop when they move out). That is taking personal responsibility. Until people like you get the balls to make such private contracts, it's the children who have to take responsibility for the acts of the parents. Of course, that's how they roll in the conservative and so-called "libertarian" camps: personal responsibility = let someone else suffer for my fuckups.

@Jay

Maybe you should go break one of your son's arms. This will be good for all involved: it will help you because you can feel as though you made your son a man; it will help him because social services will take him away from a pussy like you.

Speaking of pussies - I love people who post under fake names.

My point is that we are so quick to gasp in horror if one of kids scrapes a knee. This is why the government feels like it has to stick its nose in everywhere, because people need to feel that security.

At my kids school, they aren't allowed to have snowball fights or even make a snowman because it might lead to a snowball fight and some kid might get hit in the eye and his blonde SUV driving mother will call the school and scream at whoever answers the phone (as soon as she gets home from pilates, that is) because her baby got hit in the face and she feels so guilty because he spends most of his time with a nanny anyway --- that she feels she must do something!!

While we're at it, maybe we shouldn't talk about politics around our kids either ... or utter a curse word ... or watch a tv show that may be offensive to anyone at all ... or allow our kids to go outside of the house because they might get hit by a car and boy oh boy that will mean health-care which will cost all the taxpayers money and we wouldn't want that.

If you have kids, you know what i'm talking about. If you don't - you should probably shut the fuck up.

Maybe it's just me, but when did breaking your arm become a badge of courage? As Ryan L, pointed out there are many purposes of laws. The law in this case is to ensure that children, who can't defend themselves, are not exposed to their parents secondhand smoke.

Nobody said it was a badge of courage -- and I simply use it as an example to illustrate how sheltered we all are ... not just our kids.

There are useful laws, and there are laws that will never be enforced and are simply a waste of everyone's time.

I'm not sure I want my cops spending their time writing tickets to a guys smoking in cars while there are people out there trying to steal kids from playgrounds.

Again, just because bad things happen, doesn't give everyone the right to do bad things.

Just because murder exists doesn't give everyone the right to steal cars.

@Jay

It is perfectly reasonable to outlaw something that negatively impacts society. It isn't just the child that's being killed (though that seems reason enough to ban it to me), it's the taxpayers being dinged because that kid is going to need more health care from all of the side effects that are associated with inhaling second hand smoke.

So in short, not only are parents who smoke with their kids in the car abusing their children, they're also being an unfair burden to the tax base.

I hope the ban goes through. I grew up in a non-smoking house, but my grandfather smoked in the car all the time when I was with him, and I distinctly remember trying to get any sort of fresh air I could. I'd immediately get a headache when I got in the car (and still do get immediate headaches around smokers)...not fun for a kid.

Carrie, you don't understand. Your grandfather had every right to subject you to that because of the existance of other dangers to children (whether they are enforced or not).

"It is perfectly reasonable to outlaw something that negatively impacts society. It isn't just the child that's being killed (though that seems reason enough to ban it to me), it's the taxpayers being dinged because that kid is going to need more health care from all of the side effects that are associated with inhaling second hand smoke.

So in short, not only are parents who smoke with their kids in the car abusing their children, they're also being an unfair burden to the tax base."

Typical cop-out comments ...

What about the parent who allows their kid to eat junk food and develop poor eating habits? Chances are, the kid will grow into an obese adult or have heart or other health problems. Taxpayers will have to pay for that person's care too. Maybe we should charge those parents with abuse, too?

Why doesn't are society just make smoking out and out illegal? I would support this, even though I am a smoker. Why don't we just make junk food illegal while we're at it? What about alcohol? How many families have been torn apart by booze? How many people have been abused because of it?

We could go on and on and on here.

And Ryan, your sarcasm is very amusing but really - aren't we all just voicing our opinions here? You're all entitled to yours and i'm entitled to mine. I'm not saying that i'm right and the rest of you are wrong - i'm simply expressing how I feel about the subject.

Oh, how I wish that debate could develop here without people resorting to calling each other pussies and telling each other to fuck off. The internet has weakneses.

Jay, your arguments are flawed and reek of no logcial cohesion. You don't seem to understand the possible ulterior motives to why some of these rules or laws are created. You simply have to look at this past winter, to see why you probably wouldn't want kids having a snowball fight. I don't know maybe it's just me but I don't want to get pelted with a combo of snow and ice. And trust me if my kid gets hit in the eye you better be sure someone is going to be held responsible. From the little pissant who hit my kid to the school and even the parent.

The fact of the matter is that if the kid scrapes their knee or whatnot that's a part of life. Smoking with your kid in the car and they have no way of telling you to piss off and smoke elsewhere isn't a part of life. It's basically the parent being a major douchebag.

I agree. The parent is a douchebag. I don't think anyone is disputing that.

Were you never hit with a snowball as a child? Did you never take pleasure in nailing someone with a nice wet one?

We wonder why it is, when our kids our old enough that they are expected to go out into the world on their own - they have no idea what the fuck to do with themselves. Am I the only one who has noticed the increase in crimes being committed by teenagers?

I have taken plenty of slushy snowballs to the head and been on the receiving end of many a snow-job. It's all part of growing up. When it's over, we move on.

I'm not sure we need laws protecting us from snowballs.

@Jay

You said: "What about the parent who allows their kid to eat junk food and develop poor eating habits? Chances are, the kid will grow into an obese adult or have heart or other health problems. Taxpayers will have to pay for that person's care too. Maybe we should charge those parents with abuse, too?"

Here's the difference: You can enjoy the odd chocolate bar or bag of chips without being obese or unhealthy. But there is absolutely no way you can have a cigarette without contributing to an early death.

And word to the wise, all that misogynistic language makes you sound like a dumb jock in the 80s.

Are you calling me wise?

Growing up in Hawaii and California, I had the luxury of not being involved in snowball fights. Living in those areas we never even had a sand fight. The increase in crimes committed by teens might be due to a lack of facilities or even activities for teens to take part in. From the time I first arrived here in Toronto that was the first thing I noticed. Back where I lived in Atlanta we had tons of free open gyms for teens. Here there isn't jack squat.

@ Jay

Outside of colloquialisms aimed at making fun of you, I don't think anyone would intentionally call you wise...

Agreed. I was at the park with my kids last night and they take the rims of the basketball nets at night. They also take them down over the summer.

You know a lot of big words, colon ... congratulations.

Before you came to this thread, none of my comments were directed at any one individual.

The thing I like about blogTO is that it gives me a place to express my opinions and engage in lively debates with others of differing opinions. This is by far the most juvenile discussion I have ever been involved with and frankly, I would like it to be over.

I'm in the habit of expressing myself and I am receptive to others doing the same and I respect opinions that are different from my own.

I won't change my opinion - no matter how much of your vocabulary you throw at me.

When this topic was hot last year, Jim Watson said "the government doesn't legislate common sense" - I think he summed it up perfectly.

On the table at the same time was a proposal to introduce legislation that would require kids to wear helmets when tobogganing. I laughed when I heard that one too, and I have personally known people who have had siblings die in tobogganing accidents. (key word = accident)

The core issue here, to me anyway, is responsibility. Before we go out and start legislating everything - maybe we should try educating people about the consequences of their actions.

Driving drunk is illegal - but there are still organizations like Madd out there throwing statistics around, because the fact of the matter is people ignore laws.

Second-hand smoke is 23 times more toxic in a car than in a house. That fact alone, makes me not want to even think about smoking in my car when my kids are in there with their little undeveloped lungs. So, I don't.

More people need to know about these statistics. The government should spend its time educating people about the realities and the dangers of there actions. Believe it or not, there are people out there who will change there habits based on this - without having to be subjected to legislation.

note to BLOG TO ... you should be able to edit your post to correct spelling mistakes after you've posted.

"More people need to know about these statistics. The government should spend its time educating people about the realities and the dangers of there actions. Believe it or not, there are people out there who will change there habits based on this - without having to be subjected to legislation."

The province ran ads discussing the dangers of second hand smoke to children. Obviously the the government thought that wasn't effective enough and decided to give offenders a wake up call.

Your comments might not have been directed at one person but you called us all "pussies." That is what put this thread into a tailspin. So if you're all about people taking responsibiity for their actions, why don't you take responsibility for that?

Now if I understand your line of reasoning, outlawing murder is stupid because there are still people who commit murder. Are there any laws you think are appropriate?

I said that our society was full of pussies. I didn't direct it at anyone in specific.

And I don't think you understand my line of reasoning at all.

I give up. Go ahead and make the law. People will ignore it anyway - including police. The only time it will be enforced is when they have a "blitz" so they can prove to the public that they are actually doing something.

@Jay

I agree with you.

I've considered your arguments and I hope you'll join me in calling for a repeal of the age of consent law. Not just the new one, but the old one too.

Adults need to be educated about the consequences of their actions. There are consequences that we must face when fucking cihldren. I was first fucked when I was 8 and I learned a thing or two about sex. It pisses me off that my children can't have the same experiences - parents, teachers, friends, everyone is so paranoid because as soon as they fuck my child they're scared that I'll start ranting and raving like a crazy person.

If fucking children is bad then we should educate adults and children about the consequences of it. But ultimately it is an issue of responsibility. If you're going to get a 12 year old girl pregnant, you need to stand up and be a father. If you're going to fuck an 8 year old boy, you need to understand that he might feel needy and awkward for a period of time. But he will learn about responsibility, and that's something sorely lacking in this day and age. Ultimately, the government has no right to interfere in these issues. They are best resolved between an adult and the child he fucks, as they can each best learn about responsibility without the government condemning their actions and treating someone as a "victim" in our pussy society.

This has gone way too far and the original argument has been lost.

I'm not sure why it is so important to you that I change my opinion, nor do I care.

It's not personal, you know ... it's just a friendly debate ... so get over yourself.

In other words: I'm too stupid to respond to your argument, so I'll just change the subject.

If you were right you could respond; you couldn't respond, so you're not right.

It's not about being right and wrong ... it's about having an opinion - and I stand by mine. If that makes me "not right" in your eyes - that's fine with me.

If there was something in that last diatribe of yours worthy of a response, believe me - I would be all over it.

But it seems like some kind of pity-fishing to me and it's way off topic, so i'll pass.

By the way, abusing a child is quite different than letting him throw a snowball and frankly, it makes me sick that you would even spew on as you did in this forum.

Smoking in a car for 18 years or so can give a child asthma and lung cancer and so on. I don't know what the % is, but suffice to say there are enough cases where there is a direct causal link.

Surely that is a form of abuse. Moreover, I think most people would rather be sexually abused once as a child than spend a lifetime sucking air from an inhaler or die young.

Abuse takes many forms. Snowball throwing is not one of them, but smoking in cars with children is. If you believe the government is supposed to protect against abuse, then you support the smoking ban. Glad to have you on our team.

Believe me, i'm not on your team.

Why do stupid people think opinions are neither right nor wrong?

You can stand by your opinion all you want, as the ignorant typically do, and it won't make it any more appealing. Reason helps us discover truth, and reason shows that your opinion is a piece of shit.