Anyone Want To Have A Go At The Economist Magazine?

[Plectrum Infusion]

I'd suggest more accidents are caused by husbands and wives arguing in cars - so should we should ban marriage? Or just married people driving together? How about whining kids in the back seat - ban reproduction amongst drivers?

 

I usually wait untl I get home to start reproducing, there's nothing worse than getting a gear lever up your arse.

[thesultanofsheight]

there's nothing worse than getting a gear lever up your arse.

 

In some circles its a national pastime here fella.

[Saltire]

Slightyly off the topic, but I was listening to LBC radio yesterday and it seems that ministers in the UK are now thinking about banning people from smoking in their cars, this they say, is due to the high number of accidents caused by drivers distracted by lighting up and that to smoke you need to take your hand off the wheel!

 

What do you all think about that? Agree or disagree?

 

I don't think anyone should be permitted to smoke in a moving car. On a similar thread recently I had posted that I was a rear seat passenger in a car where the front seat passenger dropped their cigarette which rolled still lit under the front seat. Not a good thing to happen in the outside lane of a dual carriageway. We managed to retrieve it after alot of smoke and panic. And it did distract the driver!

 

All other anti smoking laws have been made, with passive smoking in mind.

 

Surely banning smoking in cars should be with potential fire risk in mind?

[triskelion]

Maybe just ban smoking in moving cars?

 

You can always make the (rather poor) argument that there are other things that are equally or more distracting in cars (as Stu Peters did). This is probably the case, but it is not an argument against restricting what people can do whilst in control of a vehicle. It is a matter of what you can take effective steps against. You cannot blanket ban people from having their spouse or small children in the car with them when they are driving, as it places unrealistic expectations on people.

 

There are other things though, that do not fall into this category. It is difficult to make a case for needing to drive home after drinking, or to smoke while driving, or use a mobile phone whilst driving. These things are also fairly simple to legislate against.

 

However, there is a third category, which is basically category two, but harder to legislate against. For example, if someone is too sick or too sleepy to safely be in control of a vehicle, then there is a clear risk there, but what can you do about it? How do you measure the extent of a cold? What units is sleepiness measured in?

 

This stuff reeks of nanny-state, and even thinking about it sends a shiver down my spine, but at the same time I'm not sure I can trust enough drivers to be sufficiently responsible.

[Gladys]

FFS, picking your nose while driving is possibly dangerous and that happens frequently!

 

Why are we allowing regulation to deal with possibles rather than probables? When we are regulated out of a normal existence, I do hope someone mounts a legal challenge against 'them' for not thinking of every injurious eventuality and not being able to deliver the guaranteed immortality that we are being led to believe will result.

[Stu Peters]

Complete nanny-state nonsense. Where are the stats to prove that this is such a threat to life and limb? I've probably done half a million smoking miles behind the wheel (and dropped a couple in my lap during 35 years driving) but NEVER had anything close to accident because of it.

 

Don't fall for it peeps - next thing it'll be booze and your freedom to have a drink (not whilst driving, obviously), you Mark Miwurdz.

[Lost Login]

Complete nanny-state nonsense. Where are the stats to prove that this is such a threat to life and limb? I've probably done half a million smoking miles behind the wheel (and dropped a couple in my lap during 35 years driving) but NEVER had anything close to accident because of it.

 

Don't fall for it peeps - next thing it'll be booze and your freedom to have a drink (not whilst driving, obviously), you Mark Miwurdz.

 

I know plenty of people who will smoke while driving. Like many non smokers many have not had an accident while driving. Some though like like non smokers have. I am aware though that a couple of these were the direct consequence of smoking. One mate was lucky to escape with his life about 20 years ago while driving his mothers car. He dropped a match while lighting a fag and the next think he knows he has totalled the card narrowily missing a lorry head on in the process.

 

I do not use that as vindication for a smoking ban whilst driving as I think such legislation is probably unneccesary, just as it is in respect of mobile phones as if the police actually see anybody distracted by either they can presumably do them for driving without due care and attention. I do recognise though it is meant to be a preventative measure in that it is to stop you being distracted in the forst place and I presume the police are really the only ones who can advise if this is a problem.

 

What I do find odd though is that I was always told it was an offense to eat or drink whilst driving. I have no idea whether this is actually true or just something my parents told me. If it is true though then I do not see why smoking should be any different.

[Saltire]

What I do find odd though is that I was always told it was an offense to eat or drink whilst driving. I have no idea whether this is actually true or just something my parents told me. If it is true though then I do not see why smoking should be any different.

 

There have been a couple of cases of people being done by the police for eating behind the wheel. Don't know whether they have to see your driving suffering as a result of eating to be able to stop you though.

 

Or you might just get stopped for it if the police are in a bad mood!

[triskelion]

Somehow I forgot about the driving without due care and attention laws.

 

So, yeah, any specific 'smoking whilst driving' ban is needless nanny-statery.

[Saltire]

Complete nanny-state nonsense. Where are the stats to prove that this is such a threat to life and limb? I've probably done half a million smoking miles behind the wheel (and dropped a couple in my lap during 35 years driving) but NEVER had anything close to accident because of it.

 

Don't fall for it peeps - next thing it'll be booze and your freedom to have a drink (not whilst driving, obviously), you Mark Miwurdz.

 

If someone isn't paying attention to their driving regardless of the reason, whether it be eating, using a mobile etc then of course they should be stopped if causing a danger to other road users.

 

The possible added danger of smoking behind the wheel is the fact the cigarette is lit. Drop a mars bar in the car, that in itself isn't dangerous. Drop a lit fag and it could be a whole different outcome. If you have ever seen a car interior go up, you will know how fast a fire can take hold, couple that with the fact you are sitting in a machine fuelled by petrol....

[Albert Tatlock]

Complete nanny-state nonsense. Where are the stats to prove that this is such a threat to life and limb? I've probably done half a million smoking miles behind the wheel (and dropped a couple in my lap during 35 years driving) but NEVER had anything close to accident because of it.

 

Don't fall for it peeps - next thing it'll be booze and your freedom to have a drink (not whilst driving, obviously), you Mark Miwurdz.

 

If someone isn't paying attention to their driving regardless of the reason, whether it be eating, using a mobile etc then of course they should be stopped if causing a danger to other road users.

 

The possible added danger of smoking behind the wheel is the fact the cigarette is lit. Drop a mars bar in the car, that in itself isn't dangerous. Drop a lit fag and it could be a whole different outcome. If you have ever seen a car interior go up, you will know how fast a fire can take hold, couple that with the fact you are sitting in a machine fuelled by petrol....

More Nu-Shite nanny-state clap trap, with no statistical basis. The bulk of accidents are caused by people talking and arguing and generally getting distracted, and by adjusting audio equipment - ask any insurance company. If anything should go first it should be audio and sat nav equipment, with compulsory divorce and separation for couples who don't get on.

 

This is just another thoughtless attack on smokers, when there are far greater risks to consider if people want to go down the 'distraction' route, and there's already numerous laws covering distraction whilst driving.

 

That's the trouble these days, too many laws rushed together by socio-facist-nanny-state-lobbyists like you - who haven't got a clue what the f**k they are talking about with regard to risk and probability, never mind taking into account the civil liberty consequences - and Scotland seems to be the world leader in producing them and exporting the f**k-wits that come up with them.

[Saltire]

My last post is purely my opinion. And I'm sticking to it!

[Stu Peters]

What I do find odd though is that I was always told it was an offense to eat or drink whilst driving. I have no idea whether this is actually true or just something my parents told me. If it is true though then I do not see why smoking should be any different.

 

It's a Manx thing. Chicken Nuggets are no problem, but chips, cheese 'n gravy takes both hands...

[Albert Tatlock]

What I do find odd though is that I was always told it was an offense to eat or drink whilst driving. I have no idea whether this is actually true or just something my parents told me. If it is true though then I do not see why smoking should be any different.

 

It's a Manx thing. Chicken Nuggets are no problem, but chips, cheese 'n gravy takes both hands...

Smoking whilst driving is completely different than eating or drinking, and changing tapes or CDs whilst driving.You generally take your eye of the road when eating and drinking and occupy one hand fully doing so, as you do with stereos and sat nav, whereas a cigarette is held between 2 fingers which allows the hand to still be used for steering and changing gear - and the hand to mouth movement is automatic, and does not require taking your eye off the road. People tend to light up when it is safe to do so, i.e.not whilst overtaking, and not when accelerating and going through the gears. People also keep their cigarettes generally in an easy to find/feel location, so much is actually done by feel, including operating the car lighter or even your own lighter (which I for one raise to eye level when lighting up, which keeps my eyes on the road) - if you do something repetively, you become adept at it without it requiring much additional concentration.

[Lost Login]

Smoking whilst driving is completely different than eating or drinking, and changing tapes or CDs whilst driving.You generally take your eye of the road when eating and drinking and occupy one hand fully doing so, as you do with stereos and sat nav, whereas a cigarette is held between 2 fingers which allows the hand to still be used for steering and changing gear - and the hand to mouth movement is automatic, and does not require taking your eye off the road. People tend to light up when it is safe to do so, i.e.not whilst overtaking, and not when accelerating and going through the gears. People also keep their cigarettes generally in an easy to find/feel location, so much is actually done by feel, including operating the car lighter or even your own lighter (which I for one raise to eye level when lighting up, which keeps my eyes on the road) - if you do something repetively, you become adept at it without it requiring much additional concentration.

 

Is there a prize for the most one eyed ost of the year?

 

Everything you argue about smoking above you could argue about eating and drinking. Equally about music and Cds especilaly these days with the controls on the steering wheel becoming a standard feature on new cars.

 

I appreciate that you are almost a religeous zealot where smoking is concernced, nearly as much as some of the anti lobby but it does lead at times to your postings being very myopic. I especially like the argument that "if you do something repetively, you become adept at it without it requiring much additional concentration" Does this mean that you believe that thee may be some merit in inexperienced smokers not being allowed to smoke at the wheel until they become adept at it. I have visions of responsible motorists sitting in stationery cars in their drives endlesslesssly practicing, Maybe there could be courses and exams to judge when you are adept but obvioulsy they would have to be dummy cigaretes as obvioulsy you are not allowed to smoke in the workplace.

 

On a personal basis I have no real opinion on wether smoking whilst driving should be banned. I have never done it so have no experience of wether it is a major distraction and neither have I seen any figures on it. I do understand that whether it is smoking, music, putting your make up on, telephones etc etc the least there is to distract you whilst driving the better, but also I realise that it is impossible to drive in a sealed unit, but whether it equires specific legislation rather than just driving without due care and attention I am not sure.