I am open about it and don't shy away from admitting it.
I also became a smoker when I was of legal age.
As crazy as it may seem, I figured that like driving, drinking, and consensual sex, the government made smoking legal for those 18 and over because it is a behaviour that people at that age are generally considered to be smart enough to weigh up the risks against the privilege.
I'm actually in favour of the NSW government's ban on smoking in cars with children in it.
He says that it's "Nanny state" legislation and that he is a product of parents smoking in cars.
I find this quote rather telling: "You be the judge... maybe I would have been six foot six and I would have had much greater intelligence, who knows?"
What Tony forgets to mention is that he is a product of a time when we did not know as much about the effects of smoking.
I personally believe that the effects of secondhand smoke are blown out of proportion in respect to adults.
Children on the other hand have developing bodies and shouldn't be exposed to smoke in an enclosed space with only open windows as the sole ventilation. How asinine would it be for the legislation to be filled with exceptions? "You can't smoke in a car with children unless you're in a convertible or have all the windows open, rain or shine." If you're a responsible smoker, then you should be able to hold the craving via Nicorette or the patch. Most smokers are able to handle the urge while flying or while working in most workplaces.
To put it bluntly, revenue grab or not: Shut Up, Abbott.
1 comment:
i think tony abbott makes some valid points.
but the thing that seems weird to me is that the legislation would ban smoking in cars with children, but would do nothing about smoking in *homes* with children. now, a child at home can go to a room where there are no smokers (or, better yet, go outside). but there are times (for example, during dinner or while watching tv) when a child will be unwilling or unable to move away from a smoker.
so, why doesn't the nsw government try to do something about those situations? why is the proposed legislation fixated on smoking in cars when there are plenty of opportunities for smokers to endanger the health of innocent children in the home?
i believe the nsw government wouldn't dare to legislate what people can or cannot do in their own homes for the exact reasons offered by tony abbott -- the nanny state etc.
for these reasons, tony abbott's argument is persuasive in certain circumstances. the only question is how far you wish to stretch that argument. people who think that their cars are extensions of their homes (i.e., private personal space) should be inclined to support tony abbott's position. but those who believe a car is not at all like one's home should be disposed to opposing tony abbott's position.
Post a Comment