Quantcast

Comments about ‘Gov. Herbert supportive of bill banning smoking in cars with children’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 5 2013 3:40 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
CPA Howard
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA

It's a wonder those of us over age 40 managed to make it through our childhood. We rode in cars with adults smoking, rode in the back of our station wagons cross country, rode our bikes without helments. Everytime we pass laws like this we lose a small piece of our freedom. When ever they want to regulate away our free agency, its always for the children. Stop using our children as an excuse for the progressive agenda that the Government knows what's best for us. If you want to know where you're heading look to the west at California.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

I am a Democrat, but if I have to live in a state governed by Republicans, this Utah is a pretty good one. Best managed in the nation and willing to use the power of government to protect the children. In these crazy tea party times, this isn't something to be taken for granted.

stevo123
slc, ut

CPA Howard, Yup we made it through childhood, now even more of the kids will make it, and make it with out asthma, and other health complications due to smoke in cars. If Mr. Herbert really cares there will a move to help clean up the air along the Wasatch front. Millions of us are sitting in that "smokey car".

xscribe
Colorado Springs, CO

Right, it's for the children! Because they can't make their parents stop! If adults want to smoke in a vehicle with the windows rolled up, it's their choice. No freedom lost there!

jonik
Philadelphia, PA

It is dangerous to force drivers, especially with kids aboard, to go Cold Turkey. Withdrawal causes distraction, decreased alertness, irritation (road rage?) and sleepiness. Look it up.
Civil rights are endangered by this added excuse for police to use "probable cause" to stop and search drivers with, say, lollypops, toothpicks, or unlit cigarettes in their mouths.
Kids will have to carry ID proving they are old enough to survive "Environmental Tobacco Smoke". If the law is based on "tobacco" language, note that many brands may contain zero tobacco, and that plain tobacco itself does not seem to have been studied yet to justify tobacco bans. "Studies" routinely fail to qualify “tobacco”. Could be fake tobacco or pesticide-contaminated tobacco for all we know.
Has even one child been diagnosed as harmed by "ETS" to justify the law? If there was, we’d surely have a "Billy's (or Becky’s…) ...Law"
“Kid-protecting” legislators permit child-damaging industrial chemicals (pesticides, dioxins, etc.) in cigarettes, with no specific warning.
Officials blame and prosecute victims but ignore perpetrators of multi-decade crimes of mass poisoning, and mass experimentation without informed consent.
Search up "Fauxbacco" for references.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments