Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

So if I'm driving my 17 year old

126 replies

IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 01/10/2015 09:01

and we're both smoking, I can be prosecuted?

Seems strange to me given that a 16 year old can legally smoke.

AIBU to think they should have thought it through a bit more with regards to age?

Not discussing the health implications, more interested in the potential for time-wasting for both smokers & Plod...

OP posts:
Icanseeclearly · 02/10/2015 07:30

They have stated that a 17yo driving alone would not be committing an offence.

A 17yo smoking with others in the car would be and, as it is the drivers responsibility, the driver could be prosecuted.

I don't really get the angst, just don't smoke in cars, it's disgusting (said as a smoker and a driver)

BrendaandEddie · 02/10/2015 07:32

i dont know why smoking while driving is allowed anyway

Original poster
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 02/10/2015 08:08

i dont know why smoking while driving is allowed anyway

Because most people would rather Plod was doing something useful, not ticking boxes....

OP posts:
BrandNewAndImproved · 02/10/2015 09:02

I think it's actually classed as dangerous driving to smoke like it is to eat!

Another law that doesn't carry any weight.

HaydeeofMonteCristo · 02/10/2015 09:08

I did wondwr whether an 18 year old who'd passed his test would really be prosecuted for smoking with his mate aged 17 1/2 in the car. We would have been in trouble in sixth form if so! All we did aged 17 was smoke in cars!

But I think the law is a good thing. Presumably police will concentrate on cases where the child is young.

A 17 year old driving and smoking (say cigarettes that he had been given) would presumably not fall foul?

Mind you, smoking while driving is a bad idea anyway.

tobysmum77 · 02/10/2015 09:13

I think the law only looks silly if you look at the extremes. how can you not think that it's good to try and protect children from being stuck in an enclosed environment with smoke?

Do people really smoke with children in a car? Obviously I'm a snooty cow who lives in a naice area but how many people would do this? Confused

OurBlanche · 02/10/2015 09:17

It isn't the common sense of not smoking in a car full of kids, nor the ethics, morals, health etc. That will remain u to the smoker.

This is yet another unenforceable law that will sit on the statute books, occasionally causing a DM/MN headline but not actually making a difference.

It is just Soundbite Politics, a phenomenon which should automatically prompt a vote of no confidence in the pillock that proposes it!

Original poster
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 02/10/2015 09:45

It is just Soundbite Politics, a phenomenon which should automatically prompt a vote of no confidence in the pillock that proposes it!

Well Said!

OP posts:
BondGate · 02/10/2015 09:47

Yes, tobysmum, some parents really do smoke with their children in the car. I've seen people do this. Some people just don't accept that it might be harmful to health.
I even heard a smoking rights activist on the radio yesterday claiming that there was no evidence that smoking when pregnant could harm a baby, and that smoking when pregnant lowered your risk of certain pregnancy health problems. (They had a doctor on too who strongly disagreed with this)

tobysmum77 · 02/10/2015 09:57

So effectively it is a law against stupidity. Presumably the same people smoke in their house also around the kids and will just wait till they are through the door instead..... And the point in this is??? Confused

I also don't know anyone who smokes in their house around their kids either...... but I obviously live a sheltered life. The only people I know who smoke always go outside.

InimitableJeeves · 02/10/2015 10:04

I thought the police were saying that for the first six months or so they would go easy on people and issue warnings, but that the law would be enforced after that?

Birdsgottafly · 02/10/2015 10:12

""Do people really smoke with children in a car? Obviously I'm a snooty cow who lives in a naice area but how many people would do this?""

I see loads of people smoking with kids in the car.

""Presumably the same people smoke in their house ""

We can't legislate against what people do in their own homes, unless it becomes abusive.

We can dictate the standards of the behaviour "we" want displayed in public.

A lot of the arguments against, or questioning this, were being bandied about when seat belts became a legal need (yes, I'm that old).

Same with car seats.

It's something that we will just go along with/get used to and it will improve health.

Children of smokers, will at least get some respite.

tobysmum77 · 02/10/2015 10:18

We can't legislate against what people do in their own homes, unless it becomes abusive.

Well that isn't really true is it.... it is illegal to be in possession of drugs, and therefore take them in your house not that this is actually enforced.

the children of smokers will get some respite
Only if the parents smoke less as a result of this which is highly unlikely. They'll just light up as soon as they get in instead

JawannaDrink · 02/10/2015 10:19

Does nobody think before they post? It's not really about being "done by the plod" for smoking in your car. Wittering on about driving 17 year olds and dolls in car seats is not funny.

Laws like this are intended to de-normalise behaviours that have been deemed inappropriate/offensive/harmful. The idea is to make the notion of smoking in a tin box with kids, which is all of the above, less and less socially acceptable, with the intent that people self-police.

And if you do happen to pull over some bellend for speeding or talking on a mobile etc, you can slap them with an extra fine if they are smoking with children in the car. Win win.

ShowOfHands · 02/10/2015 10:22

I think most laws when described in extreme and remarkable scenarios, have the potential to sound ludicrous.

I do regularly see two cars on the school run which contain KS1 aged children and both parents are surrounded by a fog of smoke. I think it's worth remembering that all bureaucracy and petty sniping aside, it's that scenario which they're trying to prevent. I doubt very much it will make a great deal of difference and it's probably not the way to go about tackling the problem. People who smoke around children in that way are not doing so because they haven't been threatened with tiny possibility of a £50 fine. They do so for far more complex reasons.

I don't blame the police for the introduction of the law and I suspect the vast majority of traffic officers won't be behaving in the petty ways people are claiming (not on here necessarily, just in general atm).

LurkingHusband · 02/10/2015 10:26

We can't legislate against what people do in their own homes, unless it becomes abusive.

Want a bet ?

LurkingHusband · 02/10/2015 10:27

Slightly OT, but didn't a politician or party suggest no new law should be passed, without one being repealed ?

Original poster
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 02/10/2015 10:38

Wittering on about driving 17 year olds and dolls in car seats is not funny.

Charming!! Grin

But I do think it's important that police time is used effectively and gives the best return. This law is not about safety on the roads, it is about a health risk being minimised. As pointed out above, it's likely those same kids will go home & sit next to a smoker there anyway....

I don't believe the role of the police is to police health issues - my remark about arresting parents of overweight kids who have chips in the trolley is only partly joking - the principle is no different.

Pulling over vapers or people with empty car seats etc just because they're smoking is not a valuable use of time or resources...

If the government were serious about removing the risk of smoking they'd make it illegal full stop - want to hazard a guess on why they don't??

And if you do happen to pull over some bellend for speeding or talking on a mobile etc, you can slap them with an extra fine if they are smoking with children in the car. Win win.

Yeah. No one cares about the fine, it's the points people care about...

OP posts:
Original poster
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 02/10/2015 10:43

It's something that we will just go along with/get used to and it will improve health.

Actually, I'd prefer that the government focused on the motor industry and got them to clean up their act - their emissions affect everybody, whereas smokers only affect those in close proximity.

I can guarantee that some of the smug bastards who bang on about smoking all the time on MN are driving the very cars that are pumping shit into all our lungs on their 10 minute drive to school in the morning whilst pretending to meet emissions levels.

If you want to "think of the children" maybe ask your local MP to lobby for action in that respect...

OP posts:
ShowOfHands · 02/10/2015 10:48

I doubt we're suddenly going to see vast numbers of officers out there looking for empty car seats and vapers to harrass.

You aren't allowed to use a mobile whilst driving. I see people using mobiles whilst driving every single day. Police aren't sitting around waiting to pull them over. You can't actually legislate against stupidity and expect it to eradicate the problem. The smoking thing will probably work in exactly the same way. People will see it and tut. Ignorant people will continue to put others at risk. Thus has it ever been.

I do think a PP's point about it making the practice additionally stigmatised is a bonus.

And the doll in a carseat thing IS juvenile and unhelpful. Grin

LurkingHusband · 02/10/2015 10:51

If the government were serious about removing the risk of smoking they'd make it illegal full stop

Bingo.

I'm at an age now where I feel justified in basing my decisions and opinions on what is happening. As opposed to what people say they are doing. So I now approach life with the first 5 words quoted above. Quite illuminating. People would be in uproar if they knew how many deaths and injuries are considered acceptable ...

ShowOfHands · 02/10/2015 10:53

Iknow, it doesn't have to be either/or though does it.

People can still lobby for action in other areas.

I do despair of the argument that is always dragged out on here when we talk about smoking around children and somebody always says 'well I bet you drive a car and they're far more dangerous'. Well, the argument falls down on several levels. The one has nothing to do with the other. You can talk about the danger of emissions if you want but it doesn't stop smoking being unhealthy and a real problem. It's possible for two things to be dangerous and both of them to be recognised at the same time. It also completely ignores the fact that it's an unfair and ridiculous comparison. Driving has SO many positives attached. It offers educational and extra curricular opportunities, freedom for the isolated, employment and on and on and on. Smoking is not remotely comparable to this as an activity.

Original poster
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou · 02/10/2015 11:29

Iknow, it doesn't have to be either/or though does it.

Apparently it does though doesn't it. Easier to criminalise an activity than put pressure on big business......

On a lighter note, I got my car seat today! (cheers Ebay) Down the charity shop for a suitable doll & then the OH can puff away all she likes and go piggy-fishing, we'll see if we catch any...... Wink

OP posts:
OurBlanche · 02/10/2015 11:34

Passing laws is about criminalising behaviour, not de normalising it, Jawanna.

To use them to do otherwise is abusive in and of itself, nanny state-ism at its, erm, finest!

If you want to de-normalise a behaviour run a Public Information Campaign, ask a TV production company if they'd mind running a storyline on it.

But don't pass a law criminalising it. What you end up with is this, a law that makes it illegal to something that is legal - again.

It is all a big political lie, a sop to those who shout loudest. Time and money could be better spent elsewhere.

LurkingHusband · 02/10/2015 11:46

What you end up with is this, a law that makes it illegal to something that is legal - again.

Do you think that's an accident ? Ever since ASBOs, the powers that be have been itching to find ways to use power in an arbitrary way to create and enforce social divisions. Upthread, I suggested that this law may be used to harass BME people. Meanwhile, the personalised number-plated low-mileage school-run SUV will just cruise past the poor driver being ticketed. No one is going to stop them.