A proposal to ban smoking in cars with children inside is scheduled to be heard
Wednesday, in the California state Senate's health committee. California is one of 16 states considering such a ban. The proposed ban has its supporters and its critics, as they all do. Those who are in favor, like the American Lung Association, say babies' and
children's exposure to secondhand smoke contributes to asthma, lower
respiratory tract, ear infections and sudden infant death syndrome, and that it is the government's job to step in when parents knowingly, and willingly, expose their children to cigarette smoke's powerful toxins and carcinogens. Those who are against the ban, call it an example of "nanny government," and an invasion of personal rights.
Sen. Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, wrote bill SB7, which would would make it an infraction punishable by a fine of
$100 to smoke a cigarette, cigar or pipe in a car containing anyone under 18.
The driver would not have to commit another traffic offense to be pulled over.
While I agree that legislature based on what the government, as an
institution, thinks is "right" can be a slippery slope, I think that
when medical and scientific evidence prove that something is so toxic
that prolonged exposure to it can be deadly, it irresponsible not to protect children whose parents simply don't give a crap. Smoking is everyone's personal right, sure. But smoking in a car with a child present is tantamount to child abuse. That's just sick. Even smokers know that.
What do you think about the proposal? Do you think it's within the state's rights to protect children from harmful chemicals this way, or do you think it's an invasion of personal rights?
