Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 05:15pm

CBC wrote:TORONTO - Drivers should not be allowed to smoke in their vehicles if they have children as passengers, says the Ontario Medical Association in a new report on the dangers of second-hand smoke.

The report, Exposure to Second-hand Smoke: Are We Protecting Our Kids?, looks at how second-hand smoke in vehicles and the home continues to harm children's health despite moves to reduce smoking in public spaces.

OMA RECOMMENDATIONS
Ban the use of tobacco inside vehicles used to transport children.

Amend the Day Nurseries Act to ban smoking in homes and facilities that provide daycare.

Provide more information for caregivers who smoke.

"This report will lead the way in taking action against [second-hand smoke] in spaces that children should feel safe and protected," said Dr. John Rapin, president of the association, which represents the province's physicians. "Physicians see the harmful effects of second-hand smoke on children every day.

"It is even harder knowing that the illnesses they suffer can be prevented."

The OMA says a number of studies have shown that second-hand smoke affects a child's health, increasing the risks of respiratory illnesses including asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia. It also increases the risks of sudden infant death syndrome, and of cancer and heart disease in adulthood.

"Children are especially at risk to the effects of [second-hand smoke] because they are still physically developing and have higher breathing rates than adults," said Dr. Ted Boadway, an OMA director. "Further, children have little control over their indoor environments."

The association says governments such as the province of Ontario should be applauded for banning smoking in public places, but it should do more.

The report cites bills that have been introduced in the states of Georgia and New Hampshire that would allow police to pull over and fine a driver for smoking while a child is in the car.

Excellent. I hope that the Ontario government takes it too heart and passes it into law. Might be hard to enforce though.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-14 05:18pm

I can already smell libertarians getting their panties ruffled.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-14 05:19pm

Oops, premature submittion.

Add to that: Though I can see that this could be called totalitarian. It's not the government's place to say who can or can't force their children to ingest carcinogens.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 05:22pm

SyntaxVorlon wrote:I can already smell libertarians getting their panties ruffled.

What's a libertarian? Do we have them in Canada?

Add to that: Though I can see that this could be called totalitarian. It's not the government's place to say who can or can't force their children to ingest carcinogens.

I can see it too. But really, kids have no choice in the matter. And if adults can't be responsible enough not to smoke in front of their children than they should have that right removed.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-14 05:39pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
SyntaxVorlon wrote:I can already smell libertarians getting their panties ruffled.
What's a libertarian? Do we have them in Canada?

Add to that: Though I can see that this could be called totalitarian. It's not the government's place to say who can or can't force their children to ingest carcinogens.
I can see it too. But really, kids have no choice in the matter. And if adults can't be responsible enough not to smoke in front of their children than they should have that right removed.

Libertarians are Alyrium Denryle.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 05:47pm

SyntaxVorlon wrote: Libertarians are Alyrium Denryle.

That doesn't really help at all. Are they anti-government or something?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-10-14 05:52pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
SyntaxVorlon wrote: Libertarians are Alyrium Denryle.
That doesn't really help at all. Are they anti-government or something?

They subscribe to the 19th century ideas of absolutely no regulations on businesses and private enterprises, and not providing any services they are not absolutely required to by the Constitution. No protections for the lower classes, nothing. The Scrooge party.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 06:06pm

SirNitram wrote: They subscribe to the 19th century ideas of absolutely no regulations on businesses and private enterprises, and not providing any services they are not absolutely required to by the Constitution. No protections for the lower classes, nothing. The Scrooge party.

Jesus Christ. If they were in power I'd be getting fucked six ways from sunday. Thankfully we have no such party up here in the Great White North.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-10-14 06:11pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
SirNitram wrote: They subscribe to the 19th century ideas of absolutely no regulations on businesses and private enterprises, and not providing any services they are not absolutely required to by the Constitution. No protections for the lower classes, nothing. The Scrooge party.
Jesus Christ. If they were in power I'd be getting fucked six ways from sunday. Thankfully we have no such party up here in the Great White North.

We only have them every four years, when they decide that, instead of building a power base by gaining local seats and proving they can reliably govern, they make lots of fuss and fits when the two main party's ignore them. See earlier threads in this forum with the Lib candidate beign arrested, and the Libs suing ASU.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-10-14 06:14pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:Excellent. I hope that the Ontario government takes it too heart and passes it into law. Might be hard to enforce though.

This is the McGuinty Liberals we're talking about, they are the living definition of "incompetant government". I wouldn't get my hopes up on having them pass it, but on the other hand this sounds like one of those pet issues which they seem to like. They'll probably bring it up to distract the media when they get caught breaking yet another of their election promises.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 06:20pm

aerius wrote:
This is the McGuinty Liberals we're talking about, they are the living definition of "incompetant government". I wouldn't get my hopes up on having them pass it, but on the other hand this sounds like one of those pet issues which they seem to like. They'll probably bring it up to distract the media when they get caught breaking yet another of their election promises.

Well I can't comment on Ontario Provincial Politics, I live here but I ignore it. Are they anything like the Federal Liberals? If so then they would definatly take this up.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2004-10-14 06:32pm

This is the McGuinty Liberals we're talking about, they are the living definition of "incompetant government".

Somebody beat out the NDP for the title? Well that sucks.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-10-14 06:38pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:Well I can't comment on Ontario Provincial Politics, I live here but I ignore it. Are they anything like the Federal Liberals? If so then they would definatly take this up.

I wish. They're more like the NDP than anything else, except worse since they no ideas, plans, or understanding of the province & what its needs are. Let's put it this way, they want to shut down all of our coal-fired power plants (roughly 1/3 of our total generating capacity) by 2007 and believe that we can do so by enviro energy conserving crap. And we're going to keep the lights on how?

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 06:45pm

aerius wrote: I wish. They're more like the NDP than anything else, except worse since they no ideas, plans, or understanding of the province & what its needs are. Let's put it this way, they want to shut down all of our coal-fired power plants (roughly 1/3 of our total generating capacity) by 2007 and believe that we can do so by enviro energy conserving crap. And we're going to keep the lights on how?

Indeed, thankfully Renfrew has it's own hydro plant (that's where I live). Maybe they want to build new nuke plants?

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-10-14 06:55pm

tharkûn wrote:Somebody beat out the NDP for the title? Well that sucks.

Right now I think they're in a tie with the NDP, it's really hard to decide which is worse.

Cpl Kendall wrote:Indeed, thankfully Renfrew has it's own hydro plant (that's where I live). Maybe they want to build new nuke plants?

I wish, they blabbed some stuff energy conservation and renewable energy initiatives. Yeah, that's going to work, maybe for rural areas but the entire Golden Horseshoe area would be fucked.

Anyways, back on topic, I think it's definitely a good idea. I've been in a smoker's car and it's goddamn horrible, putting children through that is truly criminal.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 07:01pm

aerius wrote:

I wish, they blabbed some stuff energy conservation and renewable energy initiatives. Yeah, that's going to work, maybe for rural areas but the entire Golden Horseshoe area would be fucked.

What's the Gloden Horseshoe?

Anyways, back on topic, I think it's definitely a good idea. I've been in a smoker's car and it's goddamn horrible, putting children through that is truly criminal.

Exactly. I have two kids and can't pathom why you would smoke in the car with kids there.

Korvan · Post by **Korvan** » 2004-10-14 07:06pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:
SirNitram wrote: They subscribe to the 19th century ideas of absolutely no regulations on businesses and private enterprises, and not providing any services they are not absolutely required to by the Constitution. No protections for the lower classes, nothing. The Scrooge party.
Jesus Christ. If they were in power I'd be getting fucked six ways from sunday. Thankfully we have no such party up here in the Great White North.

Oh we have them all right, we just call them by another name... Albertans.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-10-14 07:29pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:What's the Gloden Horseshoe?

The metropolitan area surrounding the western end of Lake Ontario, including the cities of Toronto and Hamilton. It's generally accepted as starting at the small industrial city of Oshawa (about 30-40km east of Toronto), and ending at Niagara Falls...

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-10-14 07:31pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:What's the Gloden Horseshoe?

The Golden Horseshoe is the highly developed & industrialized area around the western end of Lake Ontario. It starts at Niagara Falls on one end and goes to the Oshawa area about half an hour east of Toronto. Basically, everything you see on this map.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-10-14 07:36pm

It's also worth pointing out that more than half of Ontario's population lives in the Golden Horseshoe...

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 07:36pm

Thanks Ma Duece and aerius. My Ontario geography is bad. I'm from BC and never thought I'd spend any time in Ontario. Plus I live in the Ottawa Valley and don't really pay attention to the rest of the province.

LordShaithis · Post by **LordShaithis** » 2004-10-14 09:07pm

I love this. This is a great idea. I think it needs to go even further. I think Ontario needs state employees in every home, monitoring what people and their children are doing. We can have folks locked up for feeding their kids too much fast food and letting them see boobies on TV. It'll be lovely.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2004-10-14 09:14pm

GrandAdmiralPrawn wrote:I love this. This is a great idea. I think it needs to go even further. I think Ontario needs state employees in every home, monitoring what people and their children are doing. We can have folks locked up for feeding their kids too much fast food and letting them see boobies on TV. It'll be lovely.

What you propose is right-wing America's dream come true.

White Cat · Post by **White Cat** » 2004-10-15 07:29pm

Yes, Albertans are well known for being the Canadian province most likely to want the government to regulate fast food intake...

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-10-15 07:43pm

SirNitram wrote:
Cpl Kendall wrote:
SirNitram wrote: They subscribe to the 19th century ideas of absolutely no regulations on businesses and private enterprises, and not providing any services they are not absolutely required to by the Constitution. No protections for the lower classes, nothing. The Scrooge party.
Jesus Christ. If they were in power I'd be getting fucked six ways from sunday. Thankfully we have no such party up here in the Great White North.
We only have them every four years, when they decide that, instead of building a power base by gaining local seats and proving they can reliably govern, they make lots of fuss and fits when the two main party's ignore them. See earlier threads in this forum with the Lib candidate beign arrested, and the Libs suing ASU.

*ahem* we do win local offices, thank you very much.

ANd I am not AS bad anymore with the lack of government programs.

However, banning smoking in cars is no business of a government. It is unenforcable as well, and will end up being a waste of money.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Re: Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Re: Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Re: Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Re: Doc's in Ontario Recommend Banning Smoking In Cars

Thanks