Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Driving Under the Influence of Tobacco
Those unhappy DCists who are battling a proposed prohibition on cigarettes in restaurants and taverns better not hit the high road for New Jersey unless they plan to pack picket signs. The "Liberty and Prosperity" state is considering a ban on smoking while driving.
As New Jersey resident John Cito put it:
The day a politician wants to tell me I can't smoke in my car, that's the day he takes over my lease payments.
Even police chiefs in New Jersey are questioning the efficacy of such a law in preventing vehicular smoking, as the one-year-old ban against handheld cell phones hasn't deterred many drivers. Not to fear, New Jerseyites already seem at least as prepared as D.C. denizens to blow smoke back at the banners.
|7.25.05 @ 2:49PM|#
What in the fucking fuck is the rationale for this? Even the
article acknowledges that only 1% of distraction-related accidents
involve smoking.
You know what distracts me even more than smoking? EVERY OTHER
GODDAMN THING IN MY CAR. I am distracted by hot chicks in nearby
cars. Ban 'driving while hot'! I am distracted by the sun in my
eyes as I drive west in the evenings. Ban 'driving while sunny'! I
am distracted when I have no smokes left, and have to drive without
'em.
Hell with it, just ban driving.
Or admit this is bullshit anti-smoking nannyism, that lacks even
the fig leaf of 'secondhand smoke', and that the real goal is to
outlaw smoking altogether.
For fuck's sake, does anyone really want to *live* in the world the
command-and-control types imagine? Does anyone really want to live
in a world where everything any pressure group disapproves of is a
criminal act?
|7.25.05 @ 2:53PM|#
Fascism is proceeding quickly these days. First more and more
searches in NY and NJ transit, then this. As well as tourists being
searched and made to kneel at gun poin tin midtown manhattan.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/331264p-283131c.html
Bin ladin and al queda must be celebrating. They have won. The
ineptness and panic on the part of western governments and media
they have caused must exceed their expectations.
|7.25.05 @ 2:57PM|#
New Jersey also bans self service gas stations.
WTF?
As a resident of the only other state in the union to do likewise,
I'll second that 'WTF.'
|7.25.05 @ 3:00PM|#
Brain Courts,
When I lived in Oregon I got used to no self-service after a while.
I sure do like pumping my own gas though.
|7.25.05 @ 3:03PM|#
In the interest of appealling to their consitiuent's desire for safety and prosperity, I would think the New Jersey legisilators would focus their attention toward a ban on shark attacts at their beach resorts.
|7.25.05 @ 3:04PM|#
"His latest measure, co-sponsored by Assemblywoman Loretta
Weinberg, D-Teaneck, comes on the heels of a proposal to ban
smoking in bars, restaurants and the state's casinos.
The smoking while driving ban shifts the smoking debate to private
property."
So this "shifts" the debate? I guess I didn't realize how many
restaurants and bars the government actually owned that the other
bans had been directed at?
|7.25.05 @ 3:06PM|#
Joe and brian-
In all seriousness, I think the purpose is to provide jobs for
people for whom gas-pumping is their only skill.
As for this no-smoking-in-cars business, along with
let-us-check-your-bags-in-the-subway and
let's-do-seatbelt-checks-on-the-road and
let's-have-drunk-driving-checkpoints, the purpose is simple--fix
things so that Americans no longer have any sort of right to be
left alone by the authorities.
If this passes, then the next time I drive through New Jersey I
will keep an UNLIT cigarette in my mouth the whole time, just to
waste the cops' time.
Which reminds me--is this proposed ban for drivers only, or
passengers as well?
|7.25.05 @ 3:07PM|#
I wouldn't reject this regulation out of hand. I think it is
reasonable (1) if there is some empirical basis showing that
smoking while driving is a safety hazard AND (2) whether such a
regulation could be effectively and fairly enforced.
Based on the experience so for the ban on using cell phones while
driving I suspect that the anwer to both questions is no. However,
ensuring safe roads - to the extent practicable - is one of those
areas where state power is necessary. So I'm less skeptical about
this, than I am with most other regulations.
|7.25.05 @ 3:15PM|#
jennifer, i hear they're going to ban smoking for everyone in the car, due to the fact that secondhand smoke negatively affects the health of all of the occupants of the car, who naturally are incapable of finding forms of transportation that do not involve sitting in a car with smokers.
|7.25.05 @ 3:18PM|#
The problem isn't that smoking is distracting drivers.
The problem is that ANYONE can drive a car. A lot of people lack
the focus/concentration to drive a car safely. If it's not
cigarettes, the stero, a cellphone, a 52 ounce ice coffee or eating
a 5-piece dinner from KFC, those same idiots are going be
distracted by the lines in the road or the clouds above.
|7.25.05 @ 3:18PM|#
I'm afraid I'm gonna have to call bullshit Daniel. Bars that are in states that don't ban smoking and choose not to allow smoking on their own don't need cops patroling them to enforce their own rules. If a toll road owner saw smoking in cars as a big enough liability to offset the cost of private security they would. But I don't think it really is a problem, and this is just poking and proding at your private life for the sake of fucking with you.
|7.25.05 @ 3:23PM|#
this is just poking and proding at your private life for the
sake of fucking with you.
Speaking of which, New York isn't just searching the bags of subway
riders anymore, but also bus passengers, ferry passengers, and the
riders of the New Jersey commuter trains. Because, you know, if
we're allowed to go through our daily routines without being
hassled by the cops then THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON!
|7.25.05 @ 3:23PM|#
Hold it, hold it, hold it!!!
This is important.
Shawn, WHERE can you get a 52 ounce iced coffee?
|7.25.05 @ 3:24PM|#
If the cops tell me I need to drop my 52 ounce iced coffee, I don't care what they're pointing at my head, I'm jumping the turnstiles.
|7.25.05 @ 3:26PM|#
If they do shoot you, Joe, you have my solemn word that I'll go on Hit and Run and post that this incident, while regrettable, is nonetheless necessary to keep us safe.
|7.25.05 @ 3:27PM|#
As a smoker and native of South Jersey ...
I prefer not to pump gas myself in February but the law was put in
as a way to keep up prices. New Jersey, because of our many
refineries and small size, has very inexpensive gas, no self-serve
helps to bump the price a little higher. (And your surprised that
service station owners can influence state law?)
The only time I'm distracted while smoking is when I drop the damn
thing in the car. That's annoying and sometimes painful.
Anti-smoking, fat epidemics and Kelo are all of the same piece.
Many people just can't stand it when their neighbors make the
"wrong" decisions and are not shy about compelling them to make the
"right" decisions. With us right now it's a tiresome, therapeutic
compulsion. In other places and times the compulsion has been fatal
to many.
And people mock slippery slope arguments. If it works in the car,
why not in a house?
KipEsquire|7.25.05 @ 3:28PM|#
Note that the sponsoring politician, despite being a vocal
anti-smoking crusader, insists
that the measure is based on "traffic safety" rather than "health
concerns."
Which makes you wonder he doesn't propose banning motorcycles,
which have a far higher accident rate than "smokers in cars."
|7.25.05 @ 3:33PM|#
everyone please stop proclaiming that "the terrorists have won".
last time i checked, the world wasn't under the control of a
massive islamic theocracy, israel still existed and there was still
a U.S. military presence in the mideast.
they don't give a shit about what freedoms we do or don't have, we
do. err, should.
|7.25.05 @ 3:34PM|#
How about if we just give the police, as well as private citizens, the authority to beat the living crap out of people who empty their ashtrays out the window?
|7.25.05 @ 3:37PM|#
Zach--
I am merely quoting our wise President, who said that the
terrorists hate us for our freedom, and that the loss of our
freedom is the terrorists' victory. And since we're losing freedom
at a dizzying pace, then either the terrorists are winning or the
President was full of shit. Which is clearly an impossibility.
|7.25.05 @ 3:44PM|#
And since we're losing freedom at a dizzying pace, then
either the terrorists are winning or the President was full of
shit.
The president is being successful at stopping terrorism. We have
gone to war with Iraq in order to ensure our freedoms from
terrorists. We are freer now than ever. Let freedom ring.
|7.25.05 @ 3:48PM|#
"Of all the tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the
good of its victims may be the most oppressive.
It may be better to live under robber barons than
under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber
baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who
torment us for our own good will torment us
without end, for they do so with the approval of
their consciences."
Thus spake C.S. Lewis.
|7.25.05 @ 3:48PM|#
I've read about the cops on the subways too, but there weren't
any at my station this morning or on Friday. There was one cop
there Thursday afternoon but not checking bags, just standing
around. I understand that it's a small station, but you could bring
in a bazooka and no one would look twice at you. And after you're
on the subway no one (besides other passengers) looks at you. btw,
there's a precinct house right downstairs.
I think they're only at the big stations, such as Penn Station and
Times Square and Bowling Green for the tourists. It's all about the
photo ops and overtime.
Adam|7.25.05 @ 3:57PM|#
Daniel: you underestimate how easy it is to "empirically" "find"
a link between a behavior and an outcome (as opposed to empirically
manufacturing the link).
It's a matter of defining dependent and independent variables to
suit your purpose, and then watching those important details
disappear when the story hits the 6 o'clock news, never to return
in the course of the ensuing political debate.
|7.25.05 @ 4:00PM|#
Jane,
I have enjoyed many laughs reading your posts. Witty, biting
sarcasm.
But wait, the thought haunts me that you might actually be sincere
in your comments. Which is it? Could you set me straight?
Timothy|7.25.05 @ 4:04PM|#
I lived in Oregon for years, grew up there, didn't have to pump
my own gas until I moved to Texas. I love, absolutely love, pumping
my own gas.
Jennifer mentioned upthread that the intent of the law is
employing the useless...erm...unskilled; but as far as I know the
intent of the Oregon law was protecting Ma&Pa full-service
stations from the larger chains back in the day as well as
purported "environmental" concerns. Right, because the drop-out
filling my tank is SO much less likely to spill any gas.
In any case, I doubt it really has much of an effect on employment:
most gas stations still hire the same 2-3 minimum wagers that gas
stations elsewhere do, but gas is 20-30 cents more expensive per
gallon, and you wait 15 minutes to get your tank filled.
Nine times out of ten the little jerks don't even have the decency
to wash your windshield for you, so you've got to climb out of the
car to do that. That's a damn pain in the ass.
Oregon: The only state where you may be prescribed heavy doses of
barbituates to kill yourself, but you can't pump your own gas
because that would be way too dangerous.
Adam|7.25.05 @ 4:05PM|#
I think they're only at the big stations, such as Penn
Station and Times Square and Bowling Green for the tourists. It's
all about the photo ops and overtime.
Wait, are you saying that this is a waste of time and money, and
that any terrorist with the mental capacity of Terri Schiavo circa
February can figure out a way around it? Oh my!
Seems to me that most of the terror-bombings this year (which tend
to take place in Iraq) have involved vehicle-borne explosives. Same
with Egypt (and that is a repressive police state) last
week.
Any bets on how long it will be before random searches of
automobiles are OK'd?
"Is that smoke I smell in here? Were you smoking while you
were driving, son?"
|7.25.05 @ 4:06PM|#
I guess the smoking ban will help to identify the pot smokers that drive while inhaling. Its not like we are fully law abiding citizens to begin with. No amount of government terrorists will keep us from our personal freedoms.
|7.25.05 @ 4:18PM|#
No random searches. I go to the museum of natural history a
couple of times a year, and it must must be on the top of every
terrorist's list of targets because every car is searched, every
trunk is opened, or else no admittance. Then to get in you have to
empty your bags and go through a metal detector. This with three
kids under 8, all Irish with freckles and one with red hair.
I can't imagine what they make middle eastern visitors go
through!!!
|7.25.05 @ 4:24PM|#
His latest measure, co-sponsored by Assemblywoman Loretta
Weinberg, D-Teaneck, comes on the heels of a proposal to ban
smoking in bars, restaurants and the state's casinos.
The smoking while driving ban shifts the smoking debate to
private property.
Funny; I didn't know that the bar in Morristown I've been
frequenting for seven years was state-owned...
|7.25.05 @ 4:27PM|#
How about if we just give the police, as well as private
citizens, the authority to beat the living crap out of people who
empty their ashtrays out the window?
Sure, but if someone says I can't smoke while driving, they're
going down!
On a separate note, I think it's hilarious when my passengers
complain about how my smoking while driving affect their health,
but don't say anything when I pop the top down and they're
bombarded with the healthy emissions of the surrounding
vehicles.
|7.25.05 @ 4:28PM|#
For what it's worth, I remember seeing a letter in the Galesburg
(IL) newspaper from a local sheriff. He accused Illinois State
Police District 14 of harassing the people of Warren County (based
on his observations and complaints to his office).
District 14's response was predictable: "Click it or ticket is a
valuable tool in blah blah thank the Warren County Sheriff's Office
for discussing this matter publiclly blah blah safe
highways."
I'm waiting to see how much hell Warren County's sheriff, his
deputies, and the county's people will catch.
|7.25.05 @ 4:35PM|#
Although Fabius Maximus goes all around robin's red barn trying
to avoid it, the fact is gas is cheaper in Jersey.
Who the hell needs self service gas stations?
|7.25.05 @ 4:39PM|#
Oregon: The only state where you may be prescribed heavy
doses of barbituates to kill yourself, but you can't pump your own
gas because that would be way too dangerous.
Let's not forget - and now the only state where you need a
prescription to get a box of Sudafed.
|7.25.05 @ 4:54PM|#
The only problem I've ever had with smoking in the car was this one time when a seed exploded and showered my lap with burning embers. I now clean my stuff much more carefully.
|7.25.05 @ 5:04PM|#
At least it's not Utah - the only state where you need an invitation to go out for a beer.
|7.25.05 @ 5:07PM|#
One thing about jersey, you can still smoke in the
bars!
I can't believe they haven't "taken care of that" yet.
|7.25.05 @ 5:09PM|#
Who the hell needs self service gas stations?
Um, I do. Besides, who are you to decide whether other people can
pump their own gas? But seriously, I've waited in many a line here
in Oregon and one bad one in New Jersey (made the mistake of
running low on the turnpike heading back to DC after a holiday
weekend in NY... the line at the pumps was at least 5 cars by about
8 lines with what looked like only two employees fueling). When I
lived in the DC area I never had a problem with waiting for more
than a single car. Self serve is faster, more convenient and should
be nobody's but the station owner's and car owner's business.
|7.25.05 @ 5:24PM|#
But yes, growing up here I've heard the debate over legalizing
self-serve gas many times. The ironic thing, I suppose, is that the
people of Oregon keep voting down every attempt to allow it - so
it's not the idiots in Salem (though plenty of those there are -
see Sudafed issue) who are solely responsible for this. The
arguments raised by the opponents run the gamut from silly to
irrelevant.
Safety. Never mind that the vast majority of Americans pump their
own gas without self-immolation. Oregonians are too inept it
appears to handle this complicated task safely.
Senior-citizens. They claim that it wouldn't be fair to make some
little old lady get out to pump her own gas in the middle of winter
with rain pouring and wind blowing. Of course when they added a
provision that would require an attendant to pump your gas if you
requested it, that was denounced because stations would clearly
charge more for this service which wouldn't be fair to said little
old lady.
Environmental. As Timothy pointed out above, this is silly. I fully
expect people to be more careful fueling their own car.
Employment. Yes, Jennifer is right in that this argument is always
raised as well. We need to prevent people from fueling their own
vehicles as some sort of make-work program for the
skill-challenged.
Competition. Timothy is also right in the Mom and Pop versus Big
Oil argument being raised against self-serve. Again, whether or not
this is true, we don't need a make-business program for Mom's and
Pop's funded by higher fuel prices anymore than we need a make-work
program for dropouts.
At any rate, if any of these social policy reasons were truly
valid, they could always just tax us and hand these deserving
individuals the money. Then they could get the hell out of the way
and let us pump our own goddamned gas.
Ok, end of rant / thread jack... (for now) :)
|7.25.05 @ 5:31PM|#
Brian-
You have a good point. There are few roadside gas stations in
Oregon along I-5 I absolutely refuse to stop at. The lines and wait
times are downright ridiculous. Some of these poor gas pump jockeys
even go as far as pulling power trips on you. If you look in anyway
inconvienenced or aggitated, they'll slow down, allow other people
to pay first and pump yours last.
|7.25.05 @ 6:23PM|#
now the only state where you need a prescription to get a
box of Sudafed
Wow. And I thought Michigan was bad.
|7.25.05 @ 7:09PM|#
Native NYer,
I guess you've forgotten about the Irish Republican Army. As
someone who has more Irish ancestry than any other, with blonde
hair and green eyes, I get a little nervous when I hear talk about,
"locking up the terrorists."
Thankfully we haven't heard about them recently, at least about any
violent acts.
|7.25.05 @ 7:50PM|#
Something Calling itself "Timothy" emitted:
is employing the useless...erm...unskilled;
I used to pump gas for $5/hr or thereabouts in Portland, Oregon.
Fuck you--you've obviously never worked a day in your life. Maybe
Howard Dean wasn't so far off the mark, eh?
|7.25.05 @ 7:57PM|#
While I'm totally against outlawing self-serve, I must admit
that people in general are careless as hell when pumping gas.
Part of the complex I manage is a very busy gas station, and I can
attest that we have to clean up gas spills (though usually small
ones) many times each day. Even more infuriating is that the same
people turn around and try to blame us for having pumps that "don't
stop". At which point I'd love to inform them that, 99% of the
time, they don't stop because:
-- You pulled the handle out while still squeezing the handle
-- You (illegally) put a gas cap in the handle so you could sit in
your car for 90 seconds
-- When the auto shutoff kicked in to stop the pump, you pulled it
out just a little before squeezing the handle so you could pump
that crucial extra 0.1 gallon into your tank.
-- The side of your vehicle with the gas tank was not facing the
pump, so you stretched the hose across your vehicle and held the
handle upside down, thus defeating the auto shut-off
mechanism.
Unfortunately, our "customer is boss" philosophy prevents me from
doing this unless they make unreasonable demands. I've also seen
people attempt to:
-- Fill glass jugs with gasoline
-- Fill kerosene cans with gasoline (?!)
-- and yes, smoke while pumping gasoline (!!!)
So, there is something to the customer incompetence (and more
importantly, customer unaccountability) argument.
|7.25.05 @ 8:02PM|#
Though it is quite fun filing our mandatory reports to DHS on transactions of over 100 gallons of gasoline (usually landscapers with trailers full of lawn equipment). To avoid the hassle, I usually advise them to pump at several different pumps to avoid going over that limit. Which is, I'm sure, very illegal.
|7.25.05 @ 8:13PM|#
I will confess to occasional incompentence in pumping. I once drove off with the hose still inserted in my gas tank. And I once doused my sneaker with gasoline when overfilling a can. I'm highly distractible. I'd make a horrible gas station attendent.
|7.25.05 @ 8:46PM|#
Serafina,
That's actually not so bad, however embarrassing it may be, since
gas hoses are typically held together by "breakaways" which shut
off the flow of gas when they break, so no gas is spilt.
|7.25.05 @ 8:50PM|#
So, there is something to the customer incompetence (and
more importantly, customer unaccountability) argument.
Ok, come to think of it that doesn't surprise me at all. I mean
I've seen people backing up on a freeway because they missed an
exit, so stupidity pumping gas is to be expected (and no, I don't
mean your incident of forgetfulness, Serafina - we all have those
:) ).
So I retract what I said about customers being careful and instead
I will say it is an issue between the station and the customer. If
a station decides it's not a good idea to allow self-serve that's
one thing, but it is no business of the state.
|7.25.05 @ 9:00PM|#
there is no more telling example of our civilization's rush
towards gesellshaft attitudes than the dominance of pay at
the pump, self serve gas stations. a medieval traveler typically
exchanged greetings with those he passed on the road, and shared
stories and company with those in the common room of the inn at
which he slept. nowadays, we cannot even be bothered to interact
with a service station attendant who pumps our gas, or even accepts
our payment.
indeed, it is possible to drive from coast to coast without
exchanging a single word with another human being. as you here
would argue, the market has spoken, and what it is saying is that
we prefer to be a nation of isolated individuals. what this
ignores, however, is the deep desire of all people to be needed. no
doubt such highly intelligent and skilled folks as those who
frequent these fora feel needed, but what about the gas station
attendant whose help you so blithely refuse? what about his
feelings? must everything revolve around your own convenience?
|7.25.05 @ 9:05PM|#
snicker snicker said:
...but what about the gas station attendant whose help you so
blithely refuse? what about his feelings?
He hates his job. And he thinks his customers are morons. But he
likes washing windshields of cars with busty drivers. Can't go
wrong there.
|7.25.05 @ 9:11PM|#
biggus - yeah, well, back in medieval times, you had to interact
with people because you were frickin' walking, so you could.
When I buy something at the gas station, I'm usually quite amicable
and will even make a few quips to the attendant. Share stories?
No.
Anyway, I know this is a humourous shot at gaius, but I'd thought
I'd share my thoughts, just so I don't come across as an isolated
individual who's only concerned for his own convenience.
|7.25.05 @ 9:18PM|#
Mr. dickus,
LMAO. One of the funniest damn things I've read on here in a while.
The best part is that the parody is so close to reality that if you
had signed a certain frequent commenter's name I'm not sure I would
have known it was a joke. Do I detect a thoreauian sense of humor
here? I hate to not give credit where credit is due so will the
real biggus dickus please stand up, so to speak. ;)
|7.25.05 @ 9:21PM|#
To jack the thread back to the original subject =)
I drove a taxi in a midwestern college town for two years. You can
still smoke in a taxi here. Cab drivers around here typically are
managing a soda or coffee, a cigarette, the music radio, and the
business radio (CB type radio) while driving. The business radio is
way more distracting than a cigarette. The dispatchers can get
mighty testy if they don't get an IMMEDIATE response from a driver.
And way more distracting than that: The screaming drunks we hauled
home every night after the bars closed.
So by all means, ban smoking while driving for safety reasons,
right after you ban radio dispatching, cell phone dispatching,
transportation of children, and transportation of drunks.
|7.25.05 @ 9:22PM|#
this is a humourous shot at gaius
or perhaps, mr lowdog, another fellow who has become fed up with
our me first culture. the lack of capitalization is no meaningless
quirk, but rather a means to avoid having "i" stand out, as we
english speakers, alone in the west, are fond of doing. for after
all, "i" am no more important than "you", so why should the name
"i" be taller than that of "you" and even "we"?
|7.25.05 @ 9:25PM|#
I hate to not give credit where credit is due so will the
real biggus dickus please stand up, so to speak. ;)
But, I apparently do hate to not split infinitives
:)~
|7.25.05 @ 9:26PM|#
I live in a state that recently banned OTC sales of Sudafed. You
don't need a prescription (yet) but you can only buy it from a
pharmacy. So if you need a decongestant in the middle of the night,
you're screwed if there's no 24 hour pharmacy close by.
Not only that, but you have to show ID (you have to be 18 to buy it
now) and sign for it, and there's a limit of 7500 mg a month. So if
your whole family takes pseudoephedrine to help with allergy
problems, you have to go to 3 different pharmacies to get enough
for everybody (which, btw, is illegal, but I've heard of more than
one pharmacist telling people to go to another pharmacy).
The recommended dosage is 30mg every 4 to 6 hours, no more than
120mg in 24 hours. If you have 3 people in the house taking 3 doses
(90mg) a day for a month, you will easily exceed 7500mg, however it
is illegal for one person to purchase that quantity.
hey, but at least i get to interact with my local pharmacist.
|7.25.05 @ 9:31PM|#
Actually, I think biggus brings up an interesting topic here. How much of a part did the English capitalization of the first person singular pronoun play in the much more rapid acceptance of individualism amongst English-speaking peoples?
|7.25.05 @ 9:36PM|#
modernity has mixed a potion consisting of subjective measures,
physical comfort, materialistic philosophy, humanistic morality,
and relativistic religion. the cauldron wherein the concoction
bubbles and boils is the modern nation-state on the way to joining
a global pan-sovereignty. fueling the fire that keeps the broth
simmering is an all-pervasive, ever faster, inescapable
encroachment of technology.
what hath man wrought?
|7.25.05 @ 10:05PM|#
Just a query for the group:
Has anybody here ever ridden with someone that really wanted a
smoke and there wasn't one to be had? That would seem to me to be a
bit more dangerous..
|7.25.05 @ 10:27PM|#
Has anybody here ever ridden with someone that really wanted
a smoke and there wasn't one to be had? That would seem to me to be
a bit more dangerous..
I have because I don't let anyone smoke in my car. I would agree
abut the distraction too; they were quite aggitated and unhappy
with my 'smoking ban.' :)
|7.25.05 @ 11:32PM|#
I've gone camping with people who apparently thought ranger Rick was going to come around and sell them a pack. Annoying - we had to go for a drive in the middle of "roughing it". (these same friends also thought they were going to stay three days in a managed state park, for free. Lol, good thing someone brought more than cigarette money!)
|7.26.05 @ 1:15AM|#
As a typical Jersey moron, I'll confess to a guilty affection for the full-serve fascism of my fair state. Chalk it up to brainwashing, technical incompetence, or sheer abject laziness, but every time I cross the border it's something of a rude awakening: what, they expect me to pump MY OWN gas?
|7.26.05 @ 1:16AM|#
I was not try to avoid that fact. It is cheaper. I was just
saying why we had the law and that I actually prefer not to pump my
own gas when it's flippin' cold.
Of course I'll never forgive Florio for the seatbelt law.
|7.26.05 @ 1:53AM|#
I go to Oregon for 5 weeks every summer on business, and to make
an intellectual argument of it, that no-self-serve thing is
unadulterated bullshit, on every level.
Fortunately, since I'm always there with out of state plates, if
service is excruciatingly slow, I just feign ignorance and get out
of my car and start doing it myself. That gets an attendant over to
my car REAL fast.
As Reason says, it's all about Choice. Put a regular station on one
corner, and self-serve on another, and let them charge what they
will. And see who wins.
|7.26.05 @ 2:10AM|#
I should have said, see if they don't both thrive, since some will prefer one and some will prefer the other, in all likelihood.
Ron Hardin|7.26.05 @ 5:51AM|#
The AP story has an important detail :
"The day a politician wants to tell me I can't smoke in my car,
that's the day he takes over my lease payments," said John Cito, a
financial planner from Hackensack with a taste for $20
cigars.
That is financial-planner rebellion : some change in lease
payments.
|7.26.05 @ 6:10AM|#
How much of a part did the English capitalization of the
first person singular pronoun play in the much more rapid
acceptance of individualism amongst English-speaking
peoples?
Objection! Assumes facts not yet in evidence.
|7.26.05 @ 9:52AM|#
>Put a regular station on one corner, and self-serve on
another, and let them charge what they will. And see who
wins.
They both do in my neighborhood, as you suspected. We quaintly have
both, and their gas prices are roughly similar.
|7.26.05 @ 10:23AM|#
About a year ago I spent almost a half hour at a Southern Mississippi self-service station shooting the shit with the old coot owner. We talked about Nascar, bootlegging in North Georgia, the gas business, the weather,I thought I'd never get out of there. So, big D is wrong about his civilation is doomed by self-service crap.
|7.26.05 @ 1:07PM|#
"for after all, "i" am no more important than "you", so why
should the name "i" be taller than that of "you" and even
"we"?"
Do you intend to place your personal opinions above the accepted
grammar of the English language? Just who do you think you are,
buddy? What kind of humility is that? Accept the status quo, and
don't let us hear you making any more of those reformist
noises.
;)
|7.27.05 @ 11:21AM|#
I think the only purpose for this law is to increase the state's revenue. Unfortunately smoking has become such a taboo in this country that politicians have public support for any anti-smoking law regardless of its rationale. I also heard that you have to be pulled over for something else in order to get the fine, however, when you get pulled can't just put the cigarette out and just deny that you were smoking to begin with? This law is ridiculous.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245