Smoking ban in cars with anyone under the age of 18

boyfalldown said:
I thought keeping an extra bottle of scotch under your pillow worked. Always woke up next to someone who looked just as good in the morning that way ;)
Click to expand...
Or,
I've never been to bed with a right dog, but I've sure as hell woken up with a few :D
 
Cobra said:
Or,
I've never been to bed with a right dog, but I've sure as hell woken up with a few :D
Click to expand...

The trick is to get away before they wake up - much harder to "do" when sober...
 
Never been to bed with an ugly girl but woke up with plenty is the saying up North.
 
Cobra said:
Or,
I've never been to bed with a right dog, but I've sure as hell woken up with a few :D
Click to expand...
n0chex said:
Never been to bed with an ugly girl but woke up with plenty is the saying up North.
Click to expand...

Us ladies don't have that problem, blokes snore so loudly we never get to sleep
 
Sadly there are enough thickos around who smoke in the car with kids. Hopefully they will get the message eventually.

I see no problem with this law, as it's not going to affect considerate smokers or non smokers. It'll give the police a legal chance to prevent such child abuse and improve the health of many unlucky kids.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
Sadly there are enough thickos around who smoke in the car with kids. Hopefully they will get the message eventually.
I see no problem with this law, as it's not going to affect sensible smokers or non smokers.
Click to expand...
And the police have already admitted that they don't have the resources to enforce this.
"Any one caught, is likely to get a lecture rather than a fine" according the lunch time radio.
Seems they CBA with the paper work..
 
Today the morons think if it's legal it must be OK.

It's important to get the message across to those who are so stupid as to do such a ridiculous thing.

Sure, the malicious, "I don't give a f##k" brigade might carry on. But their children are doomed anyway.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
It's still important to get the message across. .
Click to expand...
I'm not disputing that and they ( a legal eagle) were also saying that by making something illegal even if its pretty much unenforceable, does reduce the instances.
 
Because the police have enough proper crimes to deal with it's dwindling workforce and forced redundancies across the whole country.
 
n0chex said:
Because the police have enough proper crimes to deal with it's dwindling workforce and forced redundancies across the whole country.
Click to expand...
Over the last 5 ( I think it was) years they have lost the total man power equivalent to 9 forces, that's a disgrace!
 
ianp5a said:
Child abuse is a "proper" crime.
Click to expand...

So make feeding them constant crap illegal too.
Or not making them go to school.
Or giving them ridiculous names.

Or letting them play video games like COD at the age of 6

Or plonking them in front of the TV because it keeps them quiet.
 
Last edited:
They do quite a lot to prevent that. The take malnourished children away from their parents. Social services take it seriously and there are various laws to help them.

It's sad these laws are needed. But good that they are doing something to protect children from dopey parents. Or don't you think they should bovver?
 
Last edited:
I think it sad that they focus on the visually obvious things like this which the police have already admitted they have no intention of enforcing when there are far more insidious cruelties.

6 kids with 6 fathers.
Malnourished that are not picked up by the authorities (far outnumbering those "on the books" I fear)
Those left alone at home for hours on end for whatever reason.
Those abused by their own parents physically and mentally.
AS mentioned before, those plopped in front of a computer / tv because it is easier for the parents.
Those not restrained in cars (I see it every day)
Those who aren't taught by their own parent to read and write before they go to school simply because their parents see it as "the education system's responsibility", when it really isn't.
Those who are pregnant in their early teens because of a combination of the above.

I could go on.
 
There are already laws against most of that.

But sure, maybe some other things should also be made illegal.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
There are already laws against most of that.

But sure, maybe some other things should also be made illegal.
Click to expand...

Laws, yes.
Enforced, not even close.
 
viv1969 said:
Or giving them ridiculous names.
Click to expand...
Now that should be illegal!
Can you imagine how traumatised little Fifi trixibelle must have felt at school?
But I suppose having rich and shameless famous parents has its compensations ;)
 
Cobra said:
Now that should be illegal!
Can you imagine how traumatised little Fifi trixibelle must have felt at school?
But I suppose having rich and shameless famous parents has its compensations ;)
Click to expand...

Not for Peaches.
 
There are strong naming laws in Germany, yet they are still allowed names like Gerda, Gitti and Edeltraut. Yet not allow reasonable sounding names. And a petty official says "it's not in our big book".
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
There are strong naming laws in Germany, yet they are still allowed names like Gerda, Gitti and Edeltraut. Yet not allow reasonable sounding names that are not in their big book.
Click to expand...

Gerda is a very traditional name in Germany.
Where's the problem?
 
I know. What sounds stupid to one person might not to another. And can only be legislated badly. And it's going to be nearly impossible to keep a list of banned names up to date.

In Germany it still affects people who "don't" choose ridiculous names. The smoking in cars with kids doesn't affect any sensible people at all.
 
Last edited:
I do think some need to be protected against themselves as it really highlight the inability to spell names by some parents.
 
dejongj said:
as it really highlight the inability to spell names by some parents.
Click to expand...
I suggest that they miss-spell these things "just to be different" ;)
 
Cobra said:
I suggest that they miss-spell these things "just to be different" ;)
Click to expand...
I used to think that also, however having children of that age and meeting a fair number of parents I had to change my views on that.

And don't get me started on numeracy. This morning there was a carer (mum?) with a boy on the tube who had absolutely no clue to do year 4 (I guess) maths. I felt really sorry for the boy as she made it unnecessarily complex, and couldn't explain the method and resorted to stuff like "you just see it..."

No, there will be cases where this is on purpose, but I don't give the majority that dubious benefit of doubt.
 
Surely when a law becomes law it is there to be enforced , it has already been said that the police won't enforce it.
So what a total waste again of the tax payers money, but on the other hand it's paid for the Mp's time and wages over the months bringing this to parliament.
 
This country if fecked lets face it..........I feel sorry for the younger generation as in my teenage son who is 19 and already owe's 30k in University education fee's and he still has a further 2 years left.
 
Julie1979 said:
Where do we end with these laws? I've seen people with kids in the car and really loud music on. Is there going to be a law for that too?
Click to expand...

There will never be an end.
What is normal & acceptable now, will be seen as unacceptable in 50 yrs.

I fear that we are all becoming homogenised & individuality will eventually be outlawed.
We are sleepwalking into a life of complete boredom & big brother.
The really sad thing is, we are allowing it to happen. Divide, then conquer.
 
OldCarlos said:
There will never be an end.
What is normal & acceptable now, will be seen as unacceptable in 50 yrs.

I fear that we are all becoming homogenised & individuality will eventually be outlawed.
We are sleepwalking into a life of complete boredom & big brother.
The really sad thing is, we are allowing it to happen. Divide, then conquer.
Click to expand...
Yup a lefties wet dream, full state control and dumb it all down to the lowest common denominator. Yuk.
 
I saw a thoughtful young mother in a supermarket car park this morning, she'd got out of the car for a fag while her 5 year old son sat inside.

Luckily she was quite warm in her dressing gown and slipper socks
 
Julie1979 said:
Where do we end with these laws? I've seen people with kids in the car and really loud music on. Is there going to be a law for that too?
Click to expand...

Probably, and there are a few other things that will require attention at some point. Surely the state will have to regulate consumption of alcohol in the presence of children, or if you're in charge of children...including your own?

dejongj said:
Yup a lefties wet dream, full state control and dumb it all down to the lowest common denominator. Yuk.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with 'lefties' really. Most governments/states incline towards authoritarianism, and complete control of the sheeple is part of their agendas. Nothing to worry about, of course. It's for your own safety and security, and you've nothing to worry about if you haven't done anything wrong...
 
@MartynK just checking that that was sarcasm :thumbs:
 
viv1969 said:
Those who aren't taught by their own parent to read and write before they go to school simply because their parents see it as "the education system's responsibility", when it really isn't.
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with the sentiment, I'd think my child was abnormally advanced if she could read and write *before* she started school. She can write a couple of words, sometimes the letters are backwards, and recognise her name etc, but she certainly can't "read". Pretty sure I haven't failed as a parent though.
 
viv1969 said:
Those who aren't taught by their own parent to read and write before they go to school simply because their parents see it as "the education system's responsibility", when it really isn't.
Click to expand...
They don't like it if you do though ;)
My daughter now late 20's was taking books into junior school at about 7/8 years old, to read, far in advance of her years,
we were actually sent a letter by the head, saying the the reading material was unsuitable for a child of that age.
There was absolutely nothing remotely raunchy or violent contained in the books she liked to read.

I'm guessing Janet and John, were more suitable :rolleyes:


dejongj said:
I used to think that also, however having children of that age and meeting a fair number of parents I had to change my views on that.
Click to expand...
Not having young children to compare with, these day's I'll take your word for it, and add that actually it doesn't surprise me, its been getting worse through the years ;)
 
I tell you what buddy, the "celebrity" culture is well and truly established. It's all about looking "good" and appearances. Not just the parents but also the children. It's rare to find friends for my children who aren't into all that kind of stuff and actually want to learn.

But hey, it earning a good crust for a lot of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top