Jersey banning smoking in cars?

[VABills]

I heard this on the radio. That New Jersey is now going to ban smoking in cars? You know as much as I hate smoking, and I do agree with the ban on smoking in public establishments, yes including bars and restaurants. How does Jersey honestly think that they can ban smoking in cars? Under what premise? Over legislating here. A few of these idiots need to be show the chemical dump.

[Alaska Darin]

The slippery slope continues unabated.

[Bill from NYC]

I heard this on the radio.  That New Jersey is now going to ban smoking in cars?  You know as much as I hate smoking, and I do agree with the ban on smoking in public establishments, yes including bars and restaurants.  How does Jersey honestly think that they can ban smoking in cars?  Under what premise?  Over legislating here.  A few of these idiots need to be show the chemical dump.

389684[/snapback]

 

This has been my point all along VA. Rights are not swept away all at once. It is a gradual process. Did you support the proposed smoking ban in NYS Housing Projects? It was equally stupid and oppressive, perhaps much worse.

My views on this issue are clear. When eating, drinking and smoking are banned in the parking lot of RWS (a matter of time), I suspect that you will be as unhappy as I am about the erosion of individual rights in our great country.

[Bill from NYC]

The slippery slope continues unabated.

389689[/snapback]

 

Yes it does AD, and thanks for being on the sane side.

[Reuben Gant]

What on God's Green planet would motivate a state legislator to vote for something like this?

 

Is it smoking in cars full stop? Or smoking while operating a car/truck?

 

I have known truckers with scarred knuckles that swear cigarettes have

saved their lives on long hauls.

[VABills]

This has been my point all along VA. Rights are not swept away all at once. It is a gradual process. Did you support the proposed smoking ban in NYS Housing Projects? It was equally stupid and oppressive, perhaps much worse.

My views on this issue are clear. When eating, drinking and smoking are banned in the parking lot of RWS (a matter of time), I suspect that you will be as unhappy as I am about the erosion of individual rights in our great country.

389690[/snapback]

I disagree with you on the public housing, for two reasons. One that was rental property subsidized by the federal/state government. Therefore, smoking should be banned there as it is offically public property. Second with the cost of cigarettes, I have a strong objection to my tax dollars supporting the apartments of these people knowing that they are spending several hundreds per year in these activities, that I am supporting. In additiona, a large portion of the people on rent control are also on medicade and medicare, hence we are also having to pay for the added medical problems that they are their familiy incures due to smoking problems.

 

The problem I have with this proposed law is that legislatures do not know when to stop.

[Bill from NYC]

What on God's Green planet would motivate a state legislator to vote for something like this?

 

Is it smoking in cars full stop? Or smoking while operating a car/truck?

 

I have known truckers with scarred knuckles that swear cigarettes have

saved their lives on long hauls.

389698[/snapback]

 

Libby Pataki, a supposed anti-smoking activist, was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to speak about "health issues" and "women's issues," this with no medical background.

Do you think this had anything to do with why he changed his decade long stance and all of a sudden, supported the smoking ban in bars?

[Alaska Darin]

The problem I have with this proposed law is that legislatures do not know when to stop.

389703[/snapback]

Which is why they should rarely be allowed to start. What other legal activities engaged in by adults would you like to legislate to the point of having police/court involvement? Soda drinking? Barbequeing?

[PTS]

I heard this on the radio.  That New Jersey is now going to ban smoking in cars?  You know as much as I hate smoking, and I do agree with the ban on smoking in public establishments, yes including bars and restaurants.  How does Jersey honestly think that they can ban smoking in cars?  Under what premise?  Over legislating here.  A few of these idiots need to be show the chemical dump.

389684[/snapback]

I hate the cell phone law while driving. I, unlike most people I guess, seem to have no problem doing two things at once while driving. I always maintained that if you can't drive and talk then you shouldn't be able to drive and smoke.

 

I'd love to see smoking banned every where, I don't want to breathe that crap, but this is definitely over legislation when it comes to what you do in your own property/car.

[VABills]

Which is why they should rarely be allowed to start.  What other legal activities engaged in by adults would you like to legislate to the point of having police/court involvement?  Soda drinking?  Barbequeing?

389712[/snapback]

 

I think some "motherment" is needed on occassion, yes.

[stuckincincy]

I heard this on the radio.  That New Jersey is now going to ban smoking in cars?  You know as much as I hate smoking, and I do agree with the ban on smoking in public establishments, yes including bars and restaurants.  How does Jersey honestly think that they can ban smoking in cars?  Under what premise?  Over legislating here.  A few of these idiots need to be show the chemical dump.

389684[/snapback]

 

Endeavor to make smoking illegal in the United States. Forget about crime, but appreciate the fact that for example, in my state, Ohio, cigarette taxes are their THIRD-largest source of revenue.

 

When you succeed in banishing them, and knowing that the States and other taxing entities aren't about to lose that jack, you will no longer be subsidized by smokers. Just doing a little bit of figuring here in my State, my tax will drop from about $1,500 per year to about 600 hundred - with the non-smokers now having to pony up 600 bucks apiece. Sweet!

 

Oh, I forgot - in the long term, it's cheaper for all. Crying shame if I live to collect my social security dough, eh?

 

 

I won't, but that's another matter...

[Bill from NYC]

I disagree with you on the public housing, for two reasons.  One that was rental property subsidized by the federal/state government. Therefore, smoking should be banned there as it is offically public property.  Second with the cost of cigarettes, I have a strong objection to my tax dollars supporting the apartments of these people knowing that they are spending several hundreds per year in these activities, that I am supporting.  In additiona, a large portion of the people on rent control are also on medicade and medicare, hence we are also having to pay for the added medical problems that they are their familiy incures due to smoking problems. 

 

The problem I have with this proposed law is that legislatures do not know when to stop.

389703[/snapback]

 

Believe it or not, I can see your point, although I do not agree.

 

My wife grew up in a Housing Project across the street from Bellvue Hospital, on 1st Ave. Her father (may God rest his soul) smoked (my wife does not).

Even though their apartment was subsidized, it was their home. My father in-law was the "man of the house" in an old school Puerto-Rican family.

My wife is an officer of a major bank. His other children consist of a police officer, cpa, a Psychologist with a PHD, and a RN. Do you seriously think that it would have been OK for the government to burst into their home to punish/arrest this wonderful man for cigarette smoking? Would it be OK for his wife and daughters to be traumatized as such?

 

Please, give me an honest answer.

[VABills]

Believe it or not, I can see your point, although I do not agree.

 

My wife grew up in a Housing Project across the street from Bellvue Hospital, on 1st Ave. Her father (may God rest his soul) smoked (my wife does not).

Even though their apartment was subsidized, it was their home. My father in-law was the "man of the house" in an old school Puerto-Rican family.

My wife is an officer of a major bank. His other children consist of a police officer, cpa, a Psychologist with a PHD, and a RN. Do you seriously think that it would have been OK for the government to burst into their home to punish/arrest this wonderful man for cigarette smoking? Would it be OK for his wife and daughters to be traumatized as such?

 

Please, give me an honest answer. 

389729[/snapback]

Yes, but that is not the way it works. It would be handled by the "unannounced" HUD inspectors who are inspecting it to ensure the building complies with certain standards, lead based paint issues, etc... If they detect smoking in the apartment they resident can be given a warning letter, and after 3 strikes or whatever, subsidies could be revoked.

[Alaska Darin]

Believe it or not, I can see your point, although I do not agree.

 

My wife grew up in a Housing Project across the street from Bellvue Hospital, on 1st Ave. Her father (may God rest his soul) smoked (my wife does not).

Even though their apartment was subsidized, it was their home. My father in-law was the "man of the house" in an old school Puerto-Rican family.

My wife is an officer of a major bank. His other children consist of a police officer, cpa, a Psychologist with a PHD, and a RN. Do you seriously think that it would have been OK for the government to burst into their home to punish/arrest this wonderful man for cigarette smoking? Would it be OK for his wife and daughters to be traumatized as such?

 

Please, give me an honest answer. 

389729[/snapback]

Yep, after cigarettes they're going after alcohol. Think I'm kidding?

 

All of you who don't like it, eventually they're going to get to something you do like. Freedom often means not liking everything that goes on around you and the idea that bars are "public" places and you have a right to go there is so wrong that the word doesn't do it justice.

[Reuben Gant]

All this coming from the country that so successfully banned alcohol.

 

Those people saying freedom isn't free are actually right, it is taxed, regulated,

and fined.

[stuckincincy]

Yep, after cigarettes they're going after alcohol.  Think I'm kidding?

 

All of you who don't like it, eventually they're going to get to something you do like.  Freedom often means not liking everything that goes on around you and the idea that bars are "public" places and you have a right to go there is so wrong that the word doesn't do it justice.

389736[/snapback]

 

Well put, but likely falling on deaf ears. Mark these words down with your purple pen.

[blzrul]

This has been my point all along VA. Rights are not swept away all at once. It is a gradual process.

389690[/snapback]

Which is why I don't like the Patriot Act.

[todd]

Which is why I don't like the Patriot Act.

389773[/snapback]

 

Excellent point.

[GG]

Which is why I don't like the Patriot Act.

389773[/snapback]

 

Really? Is that why there was no outcry from commuters in NYC over people's bags being searched on mass transit?

 

Nothing like equating a law meant to streamline law enforcement across various jurisdictional and structural authorities to fight a real external enemy, with takings of personal liberties to "protect people from themselves."

 

I'm sure that since you're in an overly ironic mood lately, you haven't missed the gem that the more PATRIOT is whittled down, the more opportunities for terrorists' success, ensuring that this country will become a police state after weekly bombings.

[/dev/null]

All this coming from the country that so successfully banned alcohol.

389740[/snapback]

 

and that same country is currently doing one helluva fine job maintaining the ban on marijuana, cocaine, heroin, etc...

 

how long before somebody proposes banning smoking in private residences? my guess is that it will be done under the guise of protecting the health of children

 

motherment = rj

[blzrul]

Really?  Is that why there was no outcry from commuters in NYC over people's bags being searched on mass transit?

 

Nothing like equating a law meant to streamline law enforcement across various jurisdictional and structural authorities to fight a real external enemy, with takings of personal liberties to "protect people from themselves."

 

I'm sure that since you're in an overly ironic mood lately, you haven't missed the gem that the more PATRIOT is whittled down, the more opportunities for terrorists' success, ensuring that this country will become a police state after weekly bombings.

389793[/snapback]

I work in an office park/mall. I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside. The Patriot Act could not stop me. I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button. And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed. The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again. It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist. Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties. Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands. And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it. Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

[Alaska Darin]

I work in an office park/mall.  I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside.  The Patriot Act could not stop me.  I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button.  And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed.  The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again.  It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist.  Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties.  Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands.  And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it.  Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

389854[/snapback]

Stop that.

[Chilly]

Retarded.

[erynthered]

I work in an office park/mall.  I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside.  The Patriot Act could not stop me.  I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button.  And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed.  The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again.  It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist.  Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties.  Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands.  And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it.  Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

389854[/snapback]

 

 

Lets not interupt you then. You think its bad now? Wait till about four or five more attacks on our soil. Then, after that, they'll start profiling, OH, MY GOD, PROFILING!!!! NO, NO

 

Nothing you say will surprise me anymore. The distance between ignorance and knowledge is only the distance between your fingers and the key board. You really are an idiot. Big Picture Deb.

 

You must have the I’m an idiot stilettos’ on tonight.

 

Try the fish, just look out for the bones, they’ll kill Ya……….

[GG]

I work in an office park/mall.  I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside.  The Patriot Act could not stop me.  I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button.  And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed.  The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again.  It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist.  Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties.  Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands.  And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it.  Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

389854[/snapback]

 

 

Nice to read the Paul Krugman Talking Points 101 by completely obfuscating the main issues. Should we fire up Kate Smith on the 78RPM for full effect?

 

PATRIOT isn't meant to stop a middle aged white woman from blowing herself up, because there's a miniscule chance that a middle aged white woman is going to fill up an REI backpack with TATP.

 

What PATRIOT does is allow the opportunity to spot suspicious behavior like a brand new travel agency that suddenly does $1.5MM in cash billings. It allows monitoring of strange internet chatter to Pakistan. It makes law enforcement notice people taking pictures of subway entrances, bridge footings and other unordinary structures.

 

Nice of you to be so certain that the terrorists succeeded once, and that methodology won't be seen again. But, we can speculate with greater certainty that PATRIOT is helping with uncovering ongoing terrorist activities.

 

But hey, that's a direct comparison to not allowing people to smoke in their cars.

[Reuben Gant]

 

But hey, that's a direct comparison to not allowing people to smoke in their cars.

389916[/snapback]

I would have said it differently, but I do think there is a pattern to this all. The more comfortable we become with legislative encroachments upon civil liberties, the more....aw screw it....go ahead and search my car, library records, and medical info. I don't care anymore.

[stuckincincy]

I work in an office park/mall.  I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside.  The Patriot Act could not stop me.  I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button.  And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed.  The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again.  It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist.  Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties.  Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands.  And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it.  Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

389854[/snapback]

 

 

Blz, we are not eroding away anything by our own hands. The hand is forced. Nobody likes what's going on, but unfortunately even more has to be done. We face an enemy that finds you and I repugnant, and they are not interested in re-educating us along their views - in slavery and torture and death they find vindication.

 

The days of thousands and thousands of Americans keeping their mouth shut about something like the Manhattan Project and Los Alamos and Oakridge activities are long gone. Betrayal is everywhere. I guess that's progress, enlightenment, diversity, eh?

 

Prepare to be harsh or prepare to die. None of us want this, 'tis abhorrant, but it exists.

[GG]

I would have said it differently, but I do think there is a pattern to this all. The more comfortable we become with legislative encroachments upon civil liberties, the more....aw screw it....go ahead and search my car, library records, and medical info. I don't care anymore. 

389933[/snapback]

 

There is a big difference in the foundation of the laws. One is the encroachment on civil liberties to protect us from ourselves, the other is the encroachment to protect us from others.

 

The dividing factor is whether you accept the premise that we are in a real war right now. I would guess that if the US was attacked by a sovereign nation on 9/11, there would not be as much outcry at PATRIOT, if that law was targeted at combating that nation. The 200+yr history of this nation is certainly replete with war-time acts of curtailed civil liberties. We seem to have recovered quite fine in eah aftermath.

 

Many people believe that there is a war going on that's warmer than the Cold War we recently finished. All iterations of PATRIOT were overwhelmingly passed by Congress, because a substantial majority feels the need for its protections.

 

My question is how many people have to die in the US for people to recognize that this is a real war?

[Alaska Darin]

My question is how many people have to die in the US for people to recognize that this is a real war?

389945[/snapback]

Regardless, it's a VERY fine line to toe. I'd prefer profiling to the Nth degree, myself, as well as actually doing something about the GD border.

[JimBob2232]

Someday we will take back our country..

[Reuben Gant]

 

My question is how many people have to die in the US for people to recognize that this is a real war?

389945[/snapback]

I don't dispute that this is a "real war" however vaguely defined.

When government becomes less transparent, that is worrysome, and

like a mule, I want it explained to me. I am willing to sacrifice some things,

lines in airports don't bother me that much to ensure safety of planes and some

public goods, but I am troubled if the 4th amendment is weakened:

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

If this isn't preserved, the Union aint worth saving.

[GG]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

If this isn't preserved, the Union aint worth saving.

389962[/snapback]

 

My memory serves that PATRIOT provisions pale in comparison of past government actions in time of war.

 

(Maybe ot would be helpful to me if people pointed out the specific provisions in PATRIOT that will destroy the 4th Amendment)

[Reuben Gant]

My memory serves that PATRIOT provisions pale in comparison of past government actions in time of war.

 

(Maybe ot would be helpful to me if people pointed out the specific provisions in PATRIOT that will destroy the 4th Amendment)

389971[/snapback]

sect. 215 for starters. - I find troublesome. I don't know precisely what it means.

When government appropriates powers to itself, these are usually abused before long.

[GG]

sect. 215 for starters. - I find troublesome. I don't know precisely what it means.

When government appropriates powers to itself, these are usually abused before long.

389974[/snapback]

 

You mean the one that gives the FBI the investigative powers that are already available to other branches of law enforcement? (Along with the requirement to get a judicial order for an officially sanctioned investigation)

[ExiledInIllinois]

You know... Most accidents are caused by somebody not paying attention to the road while changing a cd or using the radio.

 

Ban them.

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Blz, we are not eroding away anything by our own hands. The hand is forced. Nobody likes what's going on, but unfortunately even more has to be done. We face an enemy that finds you and I repugnant, and they are not interested in re-educating us along their views - in slavery and torture and death they find vindication.

 

The days of thousands and thousands of Americans keeping their mouth shut about something like the Manhattan Project and Los Alamos and Oakridge activities are long gone. Betrayal is everywhere. I guess that's progress, enlightenment, diversity, eh?

 

Prepare to be harsh or prepare to die. None of us want this, 'tis abhorrant, but it exists.

389937[/snapback]

 

That is the price for thinking about me. Everything is cut to the minute and second. The game is bigger, not really better.

[IBTG81]

I work in an office park/mall.  I could walk into Macy's tomorrow with a backpack on my back and immolate Macy's and probably most of REI along with hundreds of people inside.  The Patriot Act could not stop me.  I could load my car with plastique the next time I go to a Mariner's game, stop in the middle of an intersection where hundreds of people are waiting to cross, and push a button.  And the Patriot Act couldn't stop me.

 

The terrorist counts on narrow-minded stupidity and inability to think out of the box in order to succeed.  The Patriot Act was a knee-jerk reaction to a terror methodology that succeeded in its goal and probably won't ever be seen again.  It may have stopped 9/11, it didn't exist.  Like a shifting virus, terror groups will change their tactics and we'll always be one step behind.

 

With fewer civil liberties.  Pretty soon "our way of life" will be no more, because our liberties will have been eroded away, by our own hands.  And when "our way of life" is no more, the terrorists have won.

 

If "our way of life" is so precious, then each and every American citizen should be willing to life that life and, if necessary, die doing it.  Hiding behind laws, plastic and duct tape is un-American.

389854[/snapback]

 

 

That's why we need to destroy the whole mideast with everyone in it.

Living in the US and here legally? Too bad. Buh-bye.

 

It's our way of life vs. theirs.

[taterhill]

That's why we need to destroy the whole mideast with everyone in it.

Living in the US and here legally? Too bad. Buh-bye.

 

It's our way of life vs. theirs.

390088[/snapback]

[Reuben Gant]

You mean the one that gives the FBI the investigative powers that are already available to other branches of law enforcement?  (Along with the requirement to get a judicial order for an officially sanctioned investigation)

389985[/snapback]

my understanding is this greatly expands the ability of government to collect private information. (computer records, business records, purchase records, library records, all with a gag order). This needs to be obtained with a court order, but without probable cause. Also it isn't discriminate information, it is everybody's information.

 

I was once mistakenly arrested and interrogated overnight for something I wasn't involved in. It turned out there wasn't a crime commited at all (so how could there be probable cause to search my person, effects, and documents.) The 4th Amendment is very important to me.

[Bill from NYC]

my understanding is this greatly expands the ability of government to collect private information. (computer records, business records, purchase records, library records, all with a gag order). This needs to be obtained with a court order, but without probable cause. Also it isn't discriminate information, it is everybody's information.

 

I was once mistakenly arrested and interrogated overnight for something I wasn't involved in. It turned out there wasn't a crime commited at all (so how could there be probable cause to search my person, effects, and documents.) The 4th Amendment is very important to me.

390184[/snapback]

 

The above does sound like a very interesting story.

Btw, wrt arrests, probable cause is needed for the ARREST, not the search. Search incident to a lawful arrest is perfectly legal.

I am NOT judging what happened to you; whereas I do not know any of the facts, just trying to offer a possible explanation.