A law I actually agree with!

[Anonymous]

Here in Connecticut they are trying to pass a law that makes it illegal to smoke cigarettes in a car with children in car seats. Sorry I don't have a link though. I really hope it goes through. It's about time!

[Anonymous]

Some more info on UNCRC, if you are interested...

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:

• It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law.  It is no mere statement of altruism.^1.


• Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.^2.


• Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification.^3.


• The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI.^4.


• The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation.  Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.^5.


• The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.^6.


• Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty.  This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.^7.


• A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures.  This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.^8.


• Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.^9.


• Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.^10.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:

• Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.^13.


• The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.^14.


• A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.^15.


• According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.^16.


• Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.^17.


• Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.^18.


• Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.^19.


• Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions,  without parental knowledge or consent.^20. 


• Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.^11.


• A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.^12.

[NiCo86]

 I sure hope so! I think it should be extended to ANY child, not just children in car seats.

[kailu1835]

Good.  Someone needs to look out for the innocent children being forced to inhale toxins.

[Aireeahnah]

It infringes our right to ''choose'' however doesn't smoking in a car with children infringe on their right to choose whether not they are exposed to secondhand smoke?

So honestly I think people should ask themselves...is it more important to have that right in your car instead of just smoking before or after you are in your vehicle and giving a right to your kids to be free of that garbage?

Quoting Anonymous:

While I agree it is bad to smoke in the car with children; I have to disagree with this law.  It is once again infringing on our rights to "choose".  Here in Oklahoma they are trying to take our choice away for smoking in public places, such as bars, parks, ect.  I do not smoke, however when I take my children to the park they do not just randomly go up to people who are smoking and stay near them..............

[kailu1835]

So far, this keeps getting rejected in our country, and for good reason.  Children should not have more rights than their parents.  Ever.  With, of course, the exception of the right to not be abused or neglected.

Quoting Anonymous:

Some more info on UNCRC, if you are interested...

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:

• It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law.  It is no mere statement of altruism.^1.


• Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.^2.


• Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification.^3.


• The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI.^4.


• The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation.  Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.^5.


• The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.^6.


• Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty.  This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.^7.


• A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures.  This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.^8.


• Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.^9.


• Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.^10.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:

• Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.^13.


• The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.^14.


• A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.^15.


• According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.^16.


• Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.^17.


• Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.^18.


• Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.^19.


• Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions,  without parental knowledge or consent.^20. 


• Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.^11.


• A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.^12.

[Anonymous]

Yet you can legally fuck a 16 year old.

Quoting CamsMommy0731:

Here in Ontario, Canada, you can't smoke it a car with someone under 18 or around any public building within 10 yards of any entrance

[Anonymous]

It is more important to have the right to choose, every time, hands down. I don't even smoke. But ask yourself, what is next? Yes, it is bad to smoke around your kids. But it is worse to allow the government to dictate your life and personal property. Why would you just hand over your rights to the government. It isn't about the smoking at all. It's the bigger picture.

Quoting Aireeahnah:

It infringes our right to ''choose'' however doesn't smoking in a car with children infringe on their right to choose whether not they are exposed to secondhand smoke?

So honestly I think people should ask themselves...is it more important to have that right in your car instead of just smoking before or after you are in your vehicle and giving a right to your kids to be free of that garbage?

Quoting Anonymous:

While I agree it is bad to smoke in the car with children; I have to disagree with this law.  It is once again infringing on our rights to "choose".  Here in Oklahoma they are trying to take our choice away for smoking in public places, such as bars, parks, ect.  I do not smoke, however when I take my children to the park they do not just randomly go up to people who are smoking and stay near them..............

[Anonymous]

I agree. I was debating with another lady who is for this treaty, but I don't think she fully understands the ramifications of it. Yes kids should be protected, and they should have rights to be free from abuse, but this is SCARY!

Quoting kailu1835:

So far, this keeps getting rejected in our country, and for good reason.  Children should not have more rights than their parents.  Ever.  With, of course, the exception of the right to not be abused or neglected.

Quoting Anonymous:

Some more info on UNCRC, if you are interested...

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:

• It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law.  It is no mere statement of altruism.^1.


• Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.^2.


• Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification.^3.


• The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI.^4.


• The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation.  Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.^5.


• The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.^6.


• Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty.  This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.^7.


• A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures.  This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.^8.


• Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.^9.


• Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.^10.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:

• Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.^13.


• The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.^14.


• A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.^15.


• According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.^16.


• Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.^17.


• Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.^18.


• Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.^19.


• Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions,  without parental knowledge or consent.^20. 


• Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.^11.


• A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.^12.

[Lilcountrygrl86]

Well in California its already illegal to smoke with kids in the car, period.

[kailu1835]

Just jumping in here, I've seen firsthand the effects of smoking around children.  I used to work in family care, and there were a few kids with extreme asthma, and the parents were avid smokers.  When asked, they would all insist that they never smoked around their kids, only outside, etc.  Then I'd watch them light up outside, and climb into the car with the kids.  I felt so bad for their kids.  I know that smoking around kids is extremely dangerous, and feel that if you do it, you are abusing your children.  There is no reason why children should have to live their lives with breathing problems because of your selfish desire to light up.

Quoting Aireeahnah:

It infringes our right to ''choose'' however doesn't smoking in a car with children infringe on their right to choose whether not they are exposed to secondhand smoke?

So honestly I think people should ask themselves...is it more important to have that right in your car instead of just smoking before or after you are in your vehicle and giving a right to your kids to be free of that garbage?

Quoting Anonymous:

While I agree it is bad to smoke in the car with children; I have to disagree with this law.  It is once again infringing on our rights to "choose".  Here in Oklahoma they are trying to take our choice away for smoking in public places, such as bars, parks, ect.  I do not smoke, however when I take my children to the park they do not just randomly go up to people who are smoking and stay near them..............