Ban smoking in cars,says British Medical Association.

i do agree, u bought it n its ur space to do it if u wish. but on the flip side n this isnt an arguement, but if someone can smoke a fag while drivin, why cant i use my phone???

But not if it makes you less safe. If anything you do whilst driving has a negative effect on general safety, you have to question whether you should be doing it or not. We ALL do things we shouldn't when driving and I'm sure we could all improve in one way or another.

You wont be allowed to change the radio station next, then it will be illegal to move the gearstick.

The original thread was a health issue topic, seems we have swerved off the road a little, must have lit a fag :lol:

I think youll find it will be illegal to sh!t in your own home by 2013!!!! :oh yer:

I always save that for a mates house or work, saves on toilet roll and my water bill, so bring it on :thumbup:

were a country being ruled when they get us smokers to stop they will then put fuel prices up to claim the tax back they lost on tobbaco

i bet they dont ban it for ministers an there mates

its the same as you can't smoke in public buildings except a few place's like prisons an royal palace's

funny how parliment an the house of lords come under royal palaces
so they can smoke in there while they drink there plonk that the taxpayers paid for by the public

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13386948

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10357852

in my opinion we are being controlled by dictatorship.. I do agree with parts of the smoking ban but not all but i deffo do agree with driving coz i smoke and about ten yrs ago the lit end of my ciggy fell out in my lap causing me to swerve...so yes its a practical idea for saftey also.

Ok, I apologise, I didnt mean to say its NOT a distraction....because yes it is. What I meant to say is its not a big distraction. As Ratty said, all be it in a sarky fashion, is that its no more of a distraction than using the controls for the car...Changing gear requires a bowl load more thinking power (thus more of a distraction) than smoking...yet they arnt going to ban manual cars are they? Looking at the N/S wing mirror has to be the worst offence possible because not only do you take your eyes off the road ahead (you also have to turn your head sideways so its even more harder to use your peripheral vision), but you also have to then focus on the objects in the mirror, work out how far away they are, what speed they are going ect ect ect.

What Im saying is that drivers legally have to do far more distracting things than smoking will ever be. So why dont we ban driving all together, would save millions of lives evey day! Why dont we all dress up in bubble wrap...

The simple fact is (and yes its very brutal and harsh) people need to die....the world is over populated atm. The goverment are complaining about pentions costing too much because people are living too long....well I ever wonder why....because they are making it illegal to shorten our lives. As I said, brutal and harsh...but true... No Im not saying for 1 second I want people to die....its a horible thing!! I prity much watched my dad die when I was 16....I know death is horrible, but it needs to happen for the survival of the human race.

Its like parents that safe guard there kids from all things dangerous....they then grow up not know the real dangers of life, and are then at much more risk of danger. And thats what the goverment are trying to do to us. Give us the choice to be unhealthy, give us the choice to bugger up our own lives, punish us if that means we hurt others by all means, but dont take away the choice.

Rant #2 over

- Also I dont mean to offend anyone, nor am I dismissing others views, simply expressing my own views!!

There are clearly two safety elements involved in smoking within cars. There is the distraction aspect and also the wellbeing/health aspect.

The distraction aspect involves only the driver engaging in smoking while driving;
the health aspect would involve all the vehicle occupants and no doubt (no pun intended) maw & paw in the front seats smoking while the juniors are sat in the back of the vehicle inhaling the products of the adults - this is most likely uppermost in the BMA argument.

If folks are becoming concerned legislation in this aspect could be introduced, then worry more as some extreme thinkers have already deemed speeding whilst conveying children, to be exposing the kids to danger and liable to scrutinity by social services.

Yeah Im all for banning smoking if under 16's are in the car. That makes perfect sence, but thats not what they are saying, they want to out right ban smoking in the car...hence why I think there is such a upraw about it.

Non - smokers will like this to become illegal and us smokers will like this to become legal,so basicly this will be a "catch 22" for everyone.

Me and my brother dont smoke in our parents car as they are non - smokers and also because its an 09 minted Honda CRV and we respect their wishes though.

You are all missing the point i am afraid. Every time the government want to pass a bill or act, or another stealth tax that they know will upset and arouse the populace, they come out with the old acorn,,,"Ban Smoking" they know this issue, along with the fuel issue will create the best smoke screen for them ( no pun intended

).
It has nothing to do with health or safety. They are paving the way to another "act" that will allow them to generate more funds by fining drivers who smoke behind the wheel, they tried it a while ago, and it was bombed out.
Strange how this whole debate has reared its head again so soon after the immigration fiasco of 2 weeks ago

Banning smoking and relying on the revenues of fines is plain stupidity. All you have to look at is the annual return of the duty they put on tobacco and compare it to the ptiful amount of fines they will garner from proving someone smoked in their cars.

Its a push by the BMA to stop smokers from smoking to reduce the costs imposed by bad health from smoking. If you were looking at a pure financial point of view the accountant's would have to compare the amount of duty lost with banning smoking compared to the amount of money saved from not treating smoking related ilnesses. The biggest issue the government will have with this is the amount of money they would instantaneously lose from the loss of duty on tobacco will never regained untill all those who suffer from smoking related illnesses have either been cured or pass away. I doubt the Govenerment could cope with that void of money, especially as we are under threat of yet another recession. What they seem to be doing is slowly but surely limiting the times and places you can smoke to gently reduce the smokers and therefore reduce the ilnesses involved to such an extent that the drop in revenue will be steadily countered by the drop in NHS costs to treat people.

The issue the govenrment has is the instant angry response of the people who see it as yet another limit on their freedom. They therefore get a seperate body (the BMA in this case) to bear the brunt of the anger deflecting the attention away from themselves to carry on doing what they believe they should do.

The fact of the matter is that smoking is unhealthy and also intrusive with its smell etc. I would also like to state that a great deal of people enjoy smoking (myself for one) however people should also respect others wishes and not inflict it deliberatly on those around them that do not want to be subject to others smoke. If I have children around I move away. I don't smoke in my truck with children inside or people who don't want to be passivly smoking. I always drive with my windows open when smoking and have had comments before now that my cars don't smell of smoke even though its obvious I smoke in them. Blanket bans like this is the only way that the government can keep the irresponsible and idiots who have no respect for othrs under control. Unfortunatly this has the knock on affect that those few bad apples shaft the rest us.