Page 7 of 12

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:46 am
by AR15L
WaJim wrote:
mislabeled wrote:Way ahead of you. Not me -- there's an anti-straw group that's trying to make sure you do NOT have straws in your possession.

Boulder - http://kdvr.com/2017/07/05/group-pushes-to-ban-plastic-straws-in-boulder/
Berkeley - http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/31/could-this-be-the-last-straw-for-plastic-straws-in-berkeley/
The guy who claims to have started the anti-straw movement - https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-campaign-to-eliminate-plastic-straws-is-sucking-in-thousands-of-converts/2017/06/24/d53f70cc-4c5a-11e7-9669-250d0b15f83b_story.html?utm_term=.5eb930c2ee9c

If banning straws saves just one life...




To be fair that drink could easily be an electric ice tea.


Smokin pot should be restricted as well but there rarely goes a day when I don't smell the burning stink weed at an intersection. Just the other day coming home from the Gym at 630 am the car in front of me at the light was stinking to high heaven.

This phone thing is just the beginning of Restricted Driving Laws.

Increased state revenue through fines....nuthin else.

This state is The democrats are hurting for funds.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:48 am
by leadcounsel
TechnoWeenie wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:What is your SOLUTION to distracted drivers?


Bats. Airhorns. Paintball guns. nails/screws. Schrader valve removal tool aka valve stem tool.Etc

I think people wouldn't do half the shit they do if they realized someone might beat the shit out of them for doing it...

There are a lot of people that deserve it too...

There is a difference between moral right and legal right. Not legal to put a gun to the back of the head and pull the trigger of some guy trying to steal your car, morally OK in my book. Likewise it's legal to murder an unborn child aka abortion, not OK morally..

Similarly, not legal to flatten the tires of a car tailgating you, but morally? Give the guy a couple warnings and then go to town...If the guy wasn't following so close he'd be able to avoid the road hazard. The problem, IMO, comes into play when there are vehicles other than your intended target on the roadway.

This reminds me.. The back of my truck gets dirty, I need to put in a pressurized water dispenser in the rear.....maybe some small nozzles on the bumper or something facing the tail lights to keep them clean..


So, let me get this clear.

You are routinely anti-cop and post frequently on police over-reach and brutality by an organization that spends billions collectively and takes training and responsibilities to the community and law enforcement seriously.

You want to replace that with every moron with an average IQ of 90 going out and doing vigilante justice as judge, jury, and executioner. These mouth breathers we see in society have no training and are often totally unreasonable in life, and would be unreasonable in the application of any street conviction and punishment.

Talking on your phone while driving? Sure, then a car full of tough guys follow you to your house and want a confrontation over it, or they do $10,000 worth of damage to your car while you're in home depot shopping...

Yeah, I can't possibly see any problems going forward. thumbsup :facepalm2:

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:54 am
by leadcounsel
skey wrote:So what about all the Uber drivers. Many are not from the area and they spend quite a bit of time poking and selecting stuff. One finger yes, but almost non-stop.


I have not bothered yet to read the law. However as I briefly read a news article summarizing it, it's apparently not illegal, as I read the law, to have a mounted phone or GPS device to select a location or item.

I really don't get the pushback. I think we can all agree that phones are a significant distraction and we've all seen it, or even done it, and certainly experienced it in some fashion. Last summer in front of me on a 2 lane hwy a pickup truck went right off the road and hit an embankment and rolled over. I can't prove it but suspect it was a distracted phone user not watching the road. Scary that people frequently walk on that shoulder of the road, so it could have been a vehicular homicide but he got lucky.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 9:59 am
by Old Growth
edogg wrote:Because voice commands suck.


Anytime I say "In a few" mine sends, "Im a Jew".

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:02 am
by AR15L
As this thread gets longer and longer and is still staying on focus, which is remarkably good, I just made the purchase of two G1W-C 1080P Full HD Dash Cams.
His and hers.
Funny thing is after this weekend of noticing no less than four assholeidiotstupidmofos drivers, per day, even the wife suggested we get the dash cams.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 10:06 am
by Selador
WaJim wrote:
mislabeled wrote:Way ahead of you. Not me -- there's an anti-straw group that's trying to make sure you do NOT have straws in your possession.

Boulder - http://kdvr.com/2017/07/05/group-pushes-to-ban-plastic-straws-in-boulder/
Berkeley - http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/31/could-this-be-the-last-straw-for-plastic-straws-in-berkeley/
The guy who claims to have started the anti-straw movement - https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-campaign-to-eliminate-plastic-straws-is-sucking-in-thousands-of-converts/2017/06/24/d53f70cc-4c5a-11e7-9669-250d0b15f83b_story.html?utm_term=.5eb930c2ee9c

If banning straws saves just one life...




To be fair that drink could easily be an electric ice tea.


Smokin pot should be restricted as well but there rarely goes a day when I don't smell the burning stink weed at an intersection. Just the other day coming home from the Gym at 630 am the car in front of me at the light was stinking to high heaven.

This phone thing is just the beginning of Restricted Driving Laws.

Increased state revenue through fines....nuthin else.

This state is hurting for funds.

Image Bottom line! Image

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:20 am
by TechnoWeenie
scorpion rider wrote:The problem I have with this law is they are trying to push it to be as bad as a DUI for insurance.


I wonder who got donations from insurance industry reps...

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:29 am
by leadcounsel
So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:53 am
by TechnoWeenie
leadcounsel wrote:
TechnoWeenie wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:What is your SOLUTION to distracted drivers?


Bats. Airhorns. Paintball guns. nails/screws. Schrader valve removal tool aka valve stem tool.Etc

I think people wouldn't do half the shit they do if they realized someone might beat the shit out of them for doing it...

There are a lot of people that deserve it too...

There is a difference between moral right and legal right. Not legal to put a gun to the back of the head and pull the trigger of some guy trying to steal your car, morally OK in my book. Likewise it's legal to murder an unborn child aka abortion, not OK morally..

Similarly, not legal to flatten the tires of a car tailgating you, but morally? Give the guy a couple warnings and then go to town...If the guy wasn't following so close he'd be able to avoid the road hazard. The problem, IMO, comes into play when there are vehicles other than your intended target on the roadway.

This reminds me.. The back of my truck gets dirty, I need to put in a pressurized water dispenser in the rear.....maybe some small nozzles on the bumper or something facing the tail lights to keep them clean..


So, let me get this clear.

You are routinely anti-cop


Nope. Anti-corruption, anti-abuse, pro-accountability, pro-citizen, pro-rights

and post frequently on police over-reach and brutality by an organization that spends billions collectively and takes training and responsibilities to the community and law enforcement seriously.


Training cops to shoot everyone so they go home at night isn't training, it's brainwashing, conditioning a response. But that's another thread altogether.

You want to replace that with every moron with an average IQ of 90 going out and doing vigilante justice as judge, jury, and executioner. These mouth breathers we see in society have no training and are often totally unreasonable in life, and would be unreasonable in the application of any street conviction and punishment.


Everyone? No, just me.. Haahahah.... There are lots of things that sound great that we all know won't work in reality. I mentioned the nails vs tailgater, that impacts other drivers that have nothing to do with this asshole tailgating. So while it'd be nice to get the guy off my ass and park him for an hour or 2, it's not practical. Now if it's removing the valve stem from a guy driving like a dick that you find in the Safeway parking lot that you both happen to be going to.. Well... Have at it....

Talking on your phone while driving? Sure, then a car full of tough guys follow you to your house and want a confrontation over it, or they do $10,000 worth of damage to your car while you're in home depot shopping...

Yeah, I can't possibly see any problems going forward. thumbsup :facepalm2:


The problem is, is that everyone thinks that they are the top 5% drivers of the world. Everyone thinks they can sip on their latte while cutting their fingernails while having a phone conversation and checking their text messages while they're driving.. I've seen safe use of mobile phones and other devices. I've also people drift across Lanes and almost hit me.

Of course, we're never going to be able to beat the shit out of someone's car because they forced you off the road onto the shoulder because they're too busy texting, or because they don't know how to check their mirrors before they change lanes, that doesn't mean they don't deserve it. And to be completely honest with you, if I was on a jury, and some guy was accused of breaking the taillight of some guy that force them onto the shoulder because he was too busy sending a text, my vote would be not guilty in a heartbeat. Again, moral versus legal.

You can't really cure stupidity, but you can make people pause before they act stupidly. Kind of like people trying to force their way into traffic, call their Bluff. Let them hit you. Maybe they'll think about it next time and realize that they're the one that's going to be ruled at fault. Or, when the six foot two 400 lb guy gets out of his vehicle that the fight that they wanted to get in, was probably not a good idea.

The problem is, just like HOV, just like reckless driving, people racing on the streets, Etc law enforcement can't be everywhere at all times. I can't count how many times I've contacted County or State Police, advise them of the bullshit that I've seen, advise them that I have it on camera and then I would like to speak to a trooper, provide descriptions of the vehicle, license plate number, description of the driver,etc. and not hear shit back.... I just stopped calling. No one gives a fuck. I mean, I have a video of the guy doing stupid shit, obviously five or six tickets worth, obviously unsafe shit, which is proof of what happened. Which would be a guaranteed conviction, and they don't fucking care.

Which brings up the whole immoral versus illegal thing. Just because your speeding doesn't mean you're driving unsafely. Just because you California stop a stop sign, does not mean you were driving unsafely. There are plenty of violations that I've seen, that don't even register on my radar, because they're not unsafe. You see a guy swerving? Pull them over. Tailgating? Drifting in the lane? Erratic speed? Then yes, pull them over. But seriously, how many of you need to look at your cup holder, in order to pull your cup out of its cup holder and take a sip? How many of you take your eyes off the road to be able to grab Fry's out of your bag when you stop at McDonald's? Pretty much no one. If there's someone that is taking their eyes off the road to grab a fry, or take a sip of their drink, they're fucking retarded and shouldn't be on the road anyway.

And yes, I have zero sympathy for the idiot putting on mascara or eyeliner, or whatever the fuck it is, while they're driving, and then stabs themself in the eye when they get honked at when they can't maintain their Lane... in fact, I do believe pain compliance, is a tactic used by the police. Funny that.

Bottom line. No we can't beat the shit out of people's cars, as much as we want to or as much as they deserve to. We need to focus on the people that are driving unsafely, and not lump everybody under one umbrella. When's the last time someone got a criminal reckless driving charge when they rear-ended somebody because they were sending a text message? Why didn't they get charged with reckless driving? Or at least negligent driving? They always get charged with following too closely or something like that. But they never add on to it. Why is that? Law enforcement has tools at its disposal that it's not using. All you have to do is think outside the box. Instead, another law is passed, a law that is ripe for abuse.

Now, in order to pull someone over, all a cop has to say is, I thought he was looking at a phone.

Can you name one law that has not been taken out of context and used for purposes other than what the law was originally intended for? Law enforcement has already had the capabilities to download contacts and text messages and all that fun stuff from phones for quite a while, and a lot of agencies are now equipping vehicles with this technology. You honestly don't think that they're going to con someone into forking over their phone, under the guise of needing it for evidence, or trying to get a warrant for that phone, and then finding out that that person was engaged in some other illegal activity?

And you think that's funny? Let me ask you this, when politicians were rallying for laws that required business licenses to protect the public, do you think police would be arresting eight-year-old girls for selling lemonade on the side of the road to fund their Girl Scout trip? Do you think when the FDA claimed that it needed to regulate food products in the United States for Public Safety, that they would be raiding a small farm with SWAT teams because they gave their neighbors unpasteurized milk?

If ever there is an entrance for tyranny, it will be under the guise of Public Safety.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:54 am
by skey
leadcounsel wrote:So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???

Not really, but if I am not mistaken now smoking is secondary offense worth $99 as part of the same bill. They can KMFA on that one.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:12 pm
by leadcounsel
TechnoWeenie wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:
TechnoWeenie wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:What is your SOLUTION to distracted drivers?


Bats. Airhorns. Paintball guns. nails/screws. Schrader valve removal tool aka valve stem tool.Etc

I think people wouldn't do half the shit they do if they realized someone might beat the shit out of them for doing it...

There are a lot of people that deserve it too...

There is a difference between moral right and legal right. Not legal to put a gun to the back of the head and pull the trigger of some guy trying to steal your car, morally OK in my book. Likewise it's legal to murder an unborn child aka abortion, not OK morally..

Similarly, not legal to flatten the tires of a car tailgating you, but morally? Give the guy a couple warnings and then go to town...If the guy wasn't following so close he'd be able to avoid the road hazard. The problem, IMO, comes into play when there are vehicles other than your intended target on the roadway.

This reminds me.. The back of my truck gets dirty, I need to put in a pressurized water dispenser in the rear.....maybe some small nozzles on the bumper or something facing the tail lights to keep them clean..


So, let me get this clear.

You are routinely anti-cop


Nope. Anti-corruption, anti-abuse, pro-accountability, pro-citizen, pro-rights

and post frequently on police over-reach and brutality by an organization that spends billions collectively and takes training and responsibilities to the community and law enforcement seriously.


Training cops to shoot everyone so they go home at night isn't training, it's brainwashing, conditioning a response. But that's another thread altogether.

You want to replace that with every moron with an average IQ of 90 going out and doing vigilante justice as judge, jury, and executioner. These mouth breathers we see in society have no training and are often totally unreasonable in life, and would be unreasonable in the application of any street conviction and punishment.


Everyone? No, just me.. Haahahah.... There are lots of things that sound great that we all know won't work in reality. I mentioned the nails vs tailgater, that impacts other drivers that have nothing to do with this asshole tailgating. So while it'd be nice to get the guy off my ass and park him for an hour or 2, it's not practical. Now if it's removing the valve stem from a guy driving like a dick that you find in the Safeway parking lot that you both happen to be going to.. Well... Have at it....

Talking on your phone while driving? Sure, then a car full of tough guys follow you to your house and want a confrontation over it, or they do $10,000 worth of damage to your car while you're in home depot shopping...

Yeah, I can't possibly see any problems going forward. thumbsup :facepalm2:


The problem is, is that everyone thinks that they are the top 5% drivers of the world. Everyone thinks they can sip on their latte while cutting their fingernails while having a phone conversation and checking their text messages while they're driving.. I've seen safe use of mobile phones and other devices. I've also people drift across Lanes and almost hit me.

Of course, we're never going to be able to beat the shit out of someone's car because they forced you off the road onto the shoulder because they're too busy texting, or because they don't know how to check their mirrors before they change lanes, that doesn't mean they don't deserve it. And to be completely honest with you, if I was on a jury, and some guy was accused of breaking the taillight of some guy that force them onto the shoulder because he was too busy sending a text, my vote would be not guilty in a heartbeat. Again, moral versus legal.

You can't really cure stupidity, but you can make people pause before they act stupidly. Kind of like people trying to force their way into traffic, call their Bluff. Let them hit you. Maybe they'll think about it next time and realize that they're the one that's going to be ruled at fault. Or, when the six foot two 400 lb guy gets out of his vehicle that the fight that they wanted to get in, was probably not a good idea.

The problem is, just like HOV, just like reckless driving, people racing on the streets, Etc law enforcement can't be everywhere at all times. I can't count how many times I've contacted County or State Police, advise them of the bullshit that I've seen, advise them that I have it on camera and then I would like to speak to a trooper, provide descriptions of the vehicle, license plate number, description of the driver,etc. and not hear shit back.... I just stopped calling. No one gives a fuck. I mean, I have a video of the guy doing stupid shit, obviously five or six tickets worth, obviously unsafe shit, which is proof of what happened. Which would be a guaranteed conviction, and they don't fucking care.

Which brings up the whole immoral versus illegal thing. Just because your speeding doesn't mean you're driving unsafely. Just because you California stop a stop sign, does not mean you were driving unsafely. There are plenty of violations that I've seen, that don't even register on my radar, because they're not unsafe. You see a guy swerving? Pull them over. Tailgating? Drifting in the lane? Erratic speed? Then yes, pull them over. But seriously, how many of you need to look at your cup holder, in order to pull your cup out of its cup holder and take a sip? How many of you take your eyes off the road to be able to grab Fry's out of your bag when you stop at McDonald's? Pretty much no one. If there's someone that is taking their eyes off the road to grab a fry, or take a sip of their drink, they're fucking retarded and shouldn't be on the road anyway.

And yes, I have zero sympathy for the idiot putting on mascara or eyeliner, or whatever the fuck it is, while they're driving, and then stabs themself in the eye when they get honked at when they can't maintain their Lane... in fact, I do believe pain compliance, is a tactic used by the police. Funny that.

Bottom line. No we can't beat the shit out of people's cars, as much as we want to or as much as they deserve to. We need to focus on the people that are driving unsafely, and not lump everybody under one umbrella. When's the last time someone got a criminal reckless driving charge when they rear-ended somebody because they were sending a text message? Why didn't they get charged with reckless driving? Or at least negligent driving? They always get charged with following too closely or something like that. But they never add on to it. Why is that? Law enforcement has tools at its disposal that it's not using. All you have to do is think outside the box. Instead, another law is passed, a law that is ripe for abuse.

Now, in order to pull someone over, all a cop has to say is, I thought he was looking at a phone.

Can you name one law that has not been taken out of context and used for purposes other than what the law was originally intended for? Law enforcement has already had the capabilities to download contacts and text messages and all that fun stuff from phones for quite a while, and a lot of agencies are now equipping vehicles with this technology. You honestly don't think that they're going to con someone into forking over their phone, under the guise of needing it for evidence, or trying to get a warrant for that phone, and then finding out that that person was engaged in some other illegal activity?

And you think that's funny? Let me ask you this, when politicians were rallying for laws that required business licenses to protect the public, do you think police would be arresting eight-year-old girls for selling lemonade on the side of the road to fund their Girl Scout trip? Do you think when the FDA claimed that it needed to regulate food products in the United States for Public Safety, that they would be raiding a small farm with SWAT teams because they gave their neighbors unpasteurized milk?

If ever there is an entrance for tyranny, it will be under the guise of Public Safety.


I just don't see the potential for abuse here. You're either using your phone or not. It's hard for someone to mistake it. Is your phone in your hand or up to your ear while driving. Pretty easy.

As to the vigilante justice nonsense, no thanks. I far prefer to live in a world with highly trained reasonable cops who are held accountable if they make mistakes, versus the average unreasonable moron I see in daily life. The average person on the street is not a good driver and lacks driving training and many have pretty bad decision making. I'll use voting as an example. 25% don't bother, and 50% that did, voted for a candidate opposite of your views (not wanting to get political, but 1/2 the voters disagreed with your vote). Hence why we actually need a bunch of laws, and warnings on products, and other such things. Because people are self centered and stupid. I don't agree with everything cops or politicians do, and they make mistakes and surely there is over-reach from time to time. This isn't one of them.

Eh, your call against "tyranny" is ill applied here. Society needs some laws and order, or you just end up with total chaos and anarchy. We get glimpses of anarchy when the anarchists burn down and loot. Is that what you want? What is the vigilantist penalty for cutting you off in traffic? Murder? Nope. I don't see any problems with this. I actually want traffic laws against drug/drunk driving, and phone use while driving. Equating a $150 ticket for texting while driving (which puts everyone around that person at risk of death) to tyranny totally undermines your claims and understanding of what tyranny actually is. It's not a $150 ticket. It's instead an government sanctioned kidnapping at night with no warrant, and an ex-parte trial wherein you see no evidence, are convicted, and sent away never to be seen from again. Or you are taxed without any voting rights. Etc. That's tyranny.

I'm sick and tired of bad, dangerous drivers on the roads. And the bulk of them are due to being on their phones. I'm a damn good driver. Have driven some 300,000 miles in my life. I think I have 3 speeding tickets, and my last/only at-fault accident was probably 25 years ago when I was a teenager and did a bad lane change (blind spot).

When you recognize that it's a privilege, and that you're behind the wheel of a weapon just as deadly as your handgun, maybe more deadly, you prioritize. Your phone call, text, makeup, and Big Mac can really wait until you stop safely in a lot... It's not worth MURDERING a person on a bike or walking her dog across the street, or on a motorcycle, or whatnot.

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:01 pm
by edogg
leadcounsel wrote:So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???


No. I think what people here (including myself) are opposed to is making more laws when there are already laws covering this stuff. Plus the aspect of "precrime".

Just because I glance down at my phone when I get a text to see if it's something important that i should pull over for immediately doesn't mean I am automatically going to wind up crashing into someone.

If I cause an accident because I'm texting, I get the book thrown at me. And rightfully so.

Likewise how is diddling the 8" touchscreen on my car any less distracting? With my Apple CarPlay, I can search through my Amazon Music list by swiping incessantly to find the song I want. Or I can much more quickly and safely find the music I want by grabbing my phone and tapping the letter and swiping once or twice to find the playlist.

Just a few minutes ago, my kids were screaming at me in the car at a stop light. While I was reaching for the toy my daughter dropped, the light turned green and cars started going. Is that illegal too? Doesn't seem any less distracting than if I was replying to a text.

Stupid laws are stupid...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:18 pm
by AR15L
skey wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???

Not really, but if I am not mistaken now smoking is secondary offense worth $99 as part of the same bill. They can KMFA on that one.

I don't know if this is real or not but I do remember telling all my friends and anyone that would listen that when they came up with the no smoking in bars, etc. bill for people to vote on, I went off like Cujo foaming at the mouth screaming how it wasn't the .gov right to tell businesses people couldn't smoke in their own place of business, blah, blah, blah...
It was done "for people who had to work in second hand smoke".
At that time I said the next thing they will go after is adults, a.k.a. parents, smoking in cars with kids. You know, kids breathing second hand smoke.
Looks like we're there.
:timeout:

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:34 pm
by edogg
AR15L wrote:
skey wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???

Not really, but if I am not mistaken now smoking is secondary offense worth $99 as part of the same bill. They can KMFA on that one.

I don't know if this is real or not but I do remember telling all my friends and anyone that would listen that when they came up with the no smoking in bars, etc. bill for people to vote on, I went off like Cujo foaming at the mouth screaming how it wasn't the .gov right to tell businesses people couldn't smoke in their own place of business, blah, blah, blah...
It was done "for people who had to work in second hand smoke".
At that time I said the next thing they will go after is adults, a.k.a. parents, smoking in cars with kids. You know, kids breathing second hand smoke.
Looks like we're there.
:timeout:


Smoking with kids in the car is already illegal in CA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: New Distracted Driving Law

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:44 pm
by skey
edogg wrote:
AR15L wrote:
skey wrote:
leadcounsel wrote:So, to be clear, some here think that distracted driving, holding your phone to your ear, or texting while driving is a good thing???

Not really, but if I am not mistaken now smoking is secondary offense worth $99 as part of the same bill. They can KMFA on that one.

I don't know if this is real or not but I do remember telling all my friends and anyone that would listen that when they came up with the no smoking in bars, etc. bill for people to vote on, I went off like Cujo foaming at the mouth screaming how it wasn't the .gov right to tell businesses people couldn't smoke in their own place of business, blah, blah, blah...
It was done "for people who had to work in second hand smoke".
At that time I said the next thing they will go after is adults, a.k.a. parents, smoking in cars with kids. You know, kids breathing second hand smoke.
Looks like we're there.
:timeout:


Smoking with kids in the car is already illegal in CA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have never smoked in a car with kids in it. Even in the 70's. It is me, myself, and I.