I think the law would be BS too, but it's probably not because of smoke but more because of idiots who try to smoke, drive, talk on cellphone, read magazine, eat ice cream and screw while driving.

If this goes thru, then banning cell phone use will be very easy.

I wonder what would happen if we propsed to ban children from cars because they are a distraction, then offered to compromise by making it law that they go in the trunk?

Don't they have more important things to legislate, such as castration or execution of rapists and child molesters?

I've seen a number of instances of bad driving only to spot the driver of the car balancing an inch of ash on their fag. People who are smoking or using a mobile phone aren't in full control of their vehicle. I wouldn't stop anyone smoking. We need the tax income and to save money on pensions. Just don't do it in a moving car.

for every violation of other groups of citizens you allow, be prepared that the gov't is socializing you to a violation prepared for your group. example: drugs is the witch burned of today so, you can violate drug users without limit. once the general public accepts those standards,those standards eventually get applied to everyone.confiscation of dope smoker's property= confiscation approved by supreme court of your property for private developer. banned dope smoking=no cigarette smoking. drug testing druggies=drug testing everyone. drug searches=road checks,beating black people in civil rights marches=beating hippies=beating protestors of any nature. these may not be clear explanations but, sit back and meditate on the idea i'm trying to convey and a light may come on for you. simply put...accept no constitutional violation of any group thus protecting the right and your group.

and concluded that you are an idiot.

The supreme court decided that it was up to the states to decide this type of case, as in what constitutes public property. They recommended that the states pass laws barring the practice of taking property, and many are not working on it. I think they made an error too, but their reasoning was sound. You think the court wants to take away everybodys property. You are a fool.

I want meth dealers and producers burned at the stake.

"banned dope smoking=no cigarette smoking." Your logic is flawed.

Some people in certain jobs should be drug tested. Do you want airline pilots flying our planes while loaded?

The guy's a pot-smoking loser. you think he flies? He sits at home smokes a fatty and eats Chee-tos all day.

you are a master debater [no pun intended]. start out calling someone you disagree with a name. you have a great future as a diplomat for a fascists power. they like to fight.

take everyone's property? sorry, don't think i said that.

meth dealers... they probably should be burned at the stake but, in case the accuser is of questionable character, don't you think due process would be nice. i'm sure more than one negro was hung by your ancestors.

my logic is backed by the history of controlling authorities.

drug testing violates the fourth amendment. what part about "persons" do you not understand?

and to your buddy.....i don't smoke or do drugs or drink. i just simply understand that there are some things you have to accept in a free society. if the government can't control what comes out of your mouth,they surely shouldn't be allowed to control what goes in.

You lack a real understanding of the 4th amendment and the law. You dont see the difference between an involuntary search, such as the police coming into your home, and a voluntary drug screening? If a pilot wants to drop acid while flying a passenger jet, then he should not apply for jobs which require a drug test. Drug testing and the 4th amendment have nothing in common.

Is that a postage scale in your pocket or are you happy to see me?

all the smoking laws are stupid and there shouldn't be a smoking ban in public places. Its there own choice to go to a smoking or nonsmoking resturant.

who are they to tell you where to smoke and where not to smoke!! Its all stupid