Police To Ignore UK Car Smoking Ban?

H/T Smokingscot for this story:

Smoking ban farce: Police vow to IGNORE new law coming into force tomorrow that makes it illegal to light up in cars with children

A new law against smoking in cars carrying children will not be enforced, police chiefs have admitted.

From Thursday, officers will have the power to dish out £50 on-the-spot fines.

But police bosses say they will turn a blind eye to those caught flouting the law. Drivers will instead get away with a warning – ‘education not prosecution’.

The approach is a blow to ministers who pushed through the legislation on the advice of health experts. At least three million children are thought to be exposed to dangerous fumes in their family car.

The Mail understands that private guidance to chief constables urges them to give motorists at least three months to adjust to the new law. A similar approach was taken with the workplace smoking ban in 2007.

Does that mean that after 3 months they’ll start enforcing this stupid law?

And what’s the Pope up to?

In recent years, the theory that Christianity and Islam are just two distinct paths to God among many others has rapidly gained traction all over the planet. Some religious leaders have even gone so far as to try to merge Islamic and Christian practices, and the term “Chrislam” is now often used to describe this ecumenical movement.

The Pope seems to have taken to referring to God as “the all-merciful”, just like Muslims.

I think I get the idea. Just like all the countries in Europe are to be merged into a single state, so all the religions are going to be merged into one, and part of that will probably mean getting Sharia Law and women having to wear veils and alcohol being banned. In practice it will mean everyone having to become Muslims, and Christianity being sidelined. That’s going to be great success, isn’t it? Just like the EU.

In other news:

David Cameron’s visit to Jamaica threatens to become overshadowed by calls for Britain to issue a full apology for the slave trade and to pay billions of pounds in reparations.

I guess then we can demand that the Italians issue a full apology for the Roman invasion of Britain in 43 A.D., and demand they pay hundreds of billions of pounds in reparations for staying for another 300 or 400 years, and leaving the country littered with roads, towns, and villas.

And last but not least:



About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Police To Ignore UK Car Smoking Ban?

  1. The Blocked Dwarf says:

    As soon as I saw that headline on The Bestes Frau In The World’s Daily Capnophobe this morning I knew it was a ‘plant’. FIrstly no Police Officer would ever ‘vow’ to disregard a law and secondly it is a pretty standard tactic of The Tobacco Control Industry to goad the police into TAKING ACTION TO SAVE THE LITTLE CHILDREN. Now everyone (ie Politicians and The ‘Concerned’ will be all ‘for the sake of the children there can not be a ‘period of Grace’.)

    I bet some Mouthpiece for Big Pharma was ready to be interviewed by the Daily Fumophobe’s BRAVE journalist: “By not enforcing this law straightaway, the police are condemning thousands of sweet innocent clean lunged kiddywinkies to DIE a horrible death.”

    I didn’t even bother to read the article.

    So, as of 30 minutes ago, is it ok to vape in a car with kids? And are there any points or is just a fine ? If it’s just a fine then I guess I’ll just chalk it up under ‘Licence to smoke’, judging by the number of people I see on their cell phones whilst driving, the chances of having to pay the £50 licence fee more than once a year or so seem really slim.

    At the moment of typing this on my smart phone ,as it happens,driving *reaches behind him to pass Granddaughter2 (3 months) a homemade Gauloises Mais (she’s not so keen on Capstan)*

  2. chris says:

    Would it be preferable for religions to emphasize their differences and act, they so often have and do, as ways to divide people and make them hate each other? I’m sure ISIS doesn’t want all religions merging into one, etc.

    • Frank Davis says:

      Well, no, it wouldn’t be. But equally bad, and quite possibly much worse, is to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach, which will ensure that almost everybody is uncomfortable.

      People are actually all different. They have different sized feet, if nothing else. And a one-size-fits-all religion is like having a standard ‘normal’ shoe size which is either far too big for most people or far too small for the rest. In such a circumstance it becomes important to re-emphasise the fact that people are different, and stop pretending that they’re “all the same”, when they’re not. And the same applies to nationalities and religions as applies to feet.

      • roobeedoo2 says:

        And some people don’t want anything to do with religion at all. Would it be forced on them regardless?

        My personal belief is that we’re the Cos to God’s Play…

        God wants to experience everything, good and bad… and why not? Otherwise what’s the point of being God ;)

    • beobrigitte says:

      I’m sure ISIS doesn’t want all religions merging into one, etc.

      It doesn’t. However, ISIS’ stance on smokers appeases tobacco control. So, it’s a case of fuck women, fuck everything else. As long as smokers are being beheaded…..

  3. jaxthefirst says:

    I heard (last night, I think) a lawyer explaining why the population of the West Indies cannot legally claim reparations. He explained it thus: “In the UK, ‘reparations’ fall under system known as Damages. Under this system, if I do something to you which results in you sustaining a loss, you can sue me in court, and the court (if it is proved that I did that thing, and you did sustain that loss), will order me to pay you whatever amount of money is required to make up for the loss which you have suffered. Now, when you look at the population of the West Indies today, living in an advanced, reasonably wealthy, clean, healthy, well-fed place, and you then compare that to the lives of those people living in West Africa, from whence most of the West Indians originated – you see that the West Indian population are living a much better standard of life than are the populations who avoided slavery and whose children and grandchildren stayed in West Africa. So, in effect, those people in the West Indies have, ultimately, gained from their ancestors having been stolen away from their homes. And when someone has ultimately gained from something someone else has done, then there can be no claim for damages from the person who enabled you to make that gain.”

    Maybe we in the UK should put in a claim for a percentage commission for having, effectively, enabled people in the West Indies to live a much better life than they would have done had they stayed back in Mother Africa. Maybe, say, 10% of the difference in income of the average West Indian when compared to that of the average West African from each member of the West Indian population …

    Seems fair to me.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    UN Program To Indoctrinate Every Child In The World Into Marxism Under The Guise Of Equal Rights…

    What better way to take over the planet than to indoctrinate all of the children of the world to your way of thinking and shared beliefs? That appears to be what is…


    • harleyrider1978 says:

      What better way to take over the planet than to indoctrinate all of the children of the world to your way of thinking and shared beliefs? That appears to be what is underway as Hussein Obama and his global government comrades move to provide an “education” to every child on the Earth, one that will undoubtedly include their Marxist agenda at its core.

      Former Australian Prime Minister and left wing agitator Julia Gillard is leading the effort on behalf of the globalists, in conjunction with their just announced UN Agenda 2030 blueprint for global government and global austerity. She’s an advocate of carbon trading profiteering in the name of a non-existent problem, global climate warming change, so she’s already proven herself to be a natural for the global disinformation program.

      While the report claims that there will be local input into the educational content, it is a fair assumption to make that these same fraudulent alarmists who find it impossible to make a speech on anything without somehow weaving a threat from the air and climate into it are going to forego an opportunity to mold young minds into their shared compulsion. It’s much more likely that the mathematics and science are merely a cover for the important topics consistent with the global Marxist thinking, man is killing the planet, success is bad, collectivism is good, obedience is freedom, everyone must be equal, religion is for fools and private property ownership is a sin. It’s basic Marxism and if they are successful, within a generation the entire planet will be poisoned and ready to accept their domination.

      more on the link

  5. In case anyone is in a discussion about the “dangerous fume levels” inside cars… here’s an excerpt from the “Karz With Kidz” chapter of TobakkoNacht that might help you out:

    WARNING: This excerpt is roughly 1,500 words long! Antismokers may have a hard time reading it…. even if their heads DON’T explode!
    It looked like this was one holy sanctum where smokers were safe. But no, “Never Say Die!” shouted those seeking to extinguish the burning butts. “What about the CHILLLLDRENNNN?” Sound bites and heart-wrenching Photo-Shopped pictures were created around the concept of helpless, gasping, choking tykes trapped in rolling gas chambers. Babies were presented as being smothered in clouds of smoke not just twice as dense as at home, but in clouds that were 10, 23, or even 72 times as dense and deadly! Studies competed with each other in producing ever more sensationalist statements about little Morky or Mindy being forced to breathe in atmospheres deadlier than the EPA’s “Dangerous Level,” as murderous parents toked on their death sticks.

    Just as with all the other studies we’ve dissected so far, these claims weren’t worth the paper they were printed on. …

    Most reasonable people hearing the phrase “a parent smoking in a car with a child” would picture someone driving along a street or highway with the windows at least moderately opened to allow the smoke to blow out of the car. Smokers tend to open their windows while smoking, even when driving alone. The number of parents who would sit in a parked car with the windows rolled up tight and the air vents sealed while continuously smoking up a fog next to their baby blue eyes is probably smaller than the number of card-carrying Ku Klux Klan members who voted for President Obama.

    And yet, imaginary parents puffing away in such sealed-up gas chambers provide precisely the kind of scenarios for some of the scary figures quoted in news stories about smoking in cars. Figures such as the 23x one noted a few paragraphs ago have been presented by government bodies and used in official testimonies, only to later be tracked down and found to be simply misapplied numbers plucked out of the air by advocacy groups.

    Another trick favored and featured by antismoking researchers in this area is similar to the one used in the outdoor smoke studies: focusing on the momentary conditions of what they call “peak concentrations” (i.e., the “microplumes” mentioned a little earlier), while deliberately confusing those exposures with ones that last continuously over 24-hour or 365-day EPA guideline periods.
    Think back to the last time you were in a car or a social situation with a smoker sitting right next to you. Occasionally, the air will waft the wrong way and, for a moment, a concentrated plume of smoke will blow right into your face (or into a researcher’s “sniffer monitor”) from the burning tip of the cigarette. It doesn’t happen often in a moving car with the windows cracked even moderately open, but even then, such moments occasionally exist.

    That is what is meant when researchers cite figures for peak concentrations. Such figures are completely meaningless when com-pared with the EPA outdoor air standards for contaminants inhaled and exhaled with every breath, for 24 hours a day / 365 days a year, but that is exactly the comparison Antismokers make when presenting these “smoking in cars pollution studies” to the public. For individual tiny discrete moments, the air quality in a particular few cubic centimeters of space in these cars could indeed be far worse than the EPA’s level for 24-hour constant and inescapable exposure. Actually, if that were all the air one had to breathe, it’s unlikely even the hardiest adult would survive for a single hour. But in terms of a moment of exposure, it’s kind of like having a cup of coffee at 160 degrees and taking a tiny little sip from it – you’ll enjoy it and your health won’t be damaged at all. But if I immersed you in a cannibal’s kettle at 160 degrees for 24 hours, you’d be soup. Heck, you’d be deader than a hard-boiled egg in 24 minutes!! That’s why you should ignore the “peak readings” in stories about studies like these: they’re nothing but a propaganda tool used to frighten innocent people.

    The EPA itself – even though it doesn’t issue press releases warning about it – is actually quite aware of the danger of this sort of misuse of their data and cautions against it in their official documents. In their guidelines for the proper scientific interpretation and public use of their data, they explicitly warn against taking data for any period of less than 24 hours and applying the 24-hour standards to such findings. While Antismokers will speak of those guidelines when referring to findings covering periods of a few hours, minutes, or even seconds, the EPA’s strict rule of application calls for observations shorter than 24 hours to be averaged out over full 24-hour periods with unmeasured periods set to a pollution level of zero for meaningful comparisons to their health standards.

    Such a strict application is clearly not reasonable in extreme situations – e.g., with our cannibal kettle or cup of java, or in a garage with a very high carbon monoxide reading for twenty minutes – but the EPA’s warning is clearly meant to prevent precisely the kind of wanton abuse that is so often employed in antismoking arguments regarding briefer exposures outdoors, in cars, or even during an eight-hour workday. That warning has been consistently, blatantly, and deliberately ignored by antismoking advocates in their quest to terrify the nonsmoking public and increase support for smoking bans.

    Another gambit used to gull the gullible is to compare situations that are so dissimilar that the comparisons are totally pointless, a subset of our Commander Almost Zero Fallacy. On August 25, 2009, a new study was featured in Tobacco Control titled “Secondhand tobacco smoke concentrations in motor vehicles.” The news release about it warned that “After 1 to 3 cigarettes, airborne concentrations of nicotine were 72 times higher in cars with smoking compared to smoke-free cars.” That sounds pretty impressive, even downright scary, until one stops to remember what’s being compared here: cars with no one smoking in them – and therefore with no inherent source of nicotine at all – versus cars where people were actively smoking. It’s similar to the previously analyzed OTS study where students in the middle of smoke pits were found to have 162% more exposure to nicotine than students who weren’t around smokers at all.

    It’s sort of like saying tomatoes have 162,000% more nicotine in them than apples. That could be quite true, since apples have pretty much no inherent nicotine in them at all, but it says nothing at all about the danger or safety of tomatoes – which are quite safe to eat despite having quite measurable quantities of that highly addictive and deadly neurotoxic poison in every luscious bite. And, as we’ll see in more detail later on, some popular brands of baby shampoo have 87,000 times the concentration of formaldehyde as the smoke-filled air of your corner pub – but that doesn’t mean that the mum shampooing little Edgar’s auburn curls should be locked up for child abuse.

    Such figures and comparisons are absolutely meaningless in terms of any real measure of concentration and beyond absolutely meaningless in terms of any effect on someone’s health and well-being. It’s like claiming that suburbs with swimming pools are more dangerous to live in than suburbs without swimming pools because, on average, there would be more deadly chlorine gas in the air of the pool-loving ’burbs.

    One of the researchers in the Tobacco Control study above, Miranda Jones, gave a bit of insight into the motives for presenting smoking-in-cars study findings in this way when she observed in the media release that “Fifty-three percent of the smokers surveyed said that being unable to smoke in the car would help them to quit smoking altogether.” With that statement, Ms. Jones nicely demonstrated the true motivation for these studies: the promotion of the social engineering goal of a reduction in smoking. The health threat to children is just a boogeyman created to support the larger behavior modification program.

    ::cleaning up piles of antismoking grey matter… hmm… surprisingly small amount for the number of exploding heads…::

    P.S. The original is extensively referenced but it didn’t translate into this pasting and I’m all tuckered out at the moment. Lemmee know if you really need it though and I’ll try to stop back and put it up!

    • roobeedoo2 says:

      ‘cleaning up piles of antismoking grey matter… hmm… surprisingly small amount for the number of exploding heads…’

      Because most of the explosions are contained, Clicky..? Hmm… MJM probably hadn’t thought of that…

      • I’m sorry..

        A complaint has been submitted to the management.

        Your video clip shows people driving without their seatbelts on and is a bad influence for The Chidlren.

        – MJM

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Mike since 1983 when ten passed the first seatbelt law I have sworn to never wear one until the law is abolished……….I haven’t ever worn one and been stopped a few times and even ticketed once for 10 bucks by a rookie cop. The judge had the same idea of individual freedom that I had and thru the ticket out in Lebanon ten about 4 years ago.

          Ive tried like hell to get ticketed for smoking but for some reason the cops just haven’t and wont ticket anyone in ten over that stupid law either………..I want my day in court to expose the madness and junk science.

        • beobrigitte says:

          A complaint has been submitted to the management.

          Your video clip shows people driving without their seatbelts on and is a bad influence for The Children.

          And, it is 7 people in the car!!!

          (I haven’t heard this song for ages – brings a smile to my face! And memories of the 1st of May tour where two of us sat on the edge of the little sun roof of a beetle because the other 6 were occupying the seats.)

    • garyk30 says:

      Being in a car is, actually, being ‘indoors’.
      Seems to me the real standard to apply is the OSHA standard for indoor/workplace air quality.

      Those standards are almost impossible to exceed in normal life.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        The proper standard to compare to is the OSHA standard for indoor air quality for respirable particulate (not otherwise specified) for nuisance dusts and smoke. That standard is 5000 ug/m3 on a time-weighted average (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) and is intended to be protective of health over an average working life of 30 years!

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

          This sorta says it all

          These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          I don’t recall seeing any babies sucking on tail pipes……………but going down the hiway behind a semi could be called that lol

      • Rose says:

        Indoors on private property.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Well said, Rose!

          Actually, these days it isn’t really worth spending a lot of money on a car. Drivers these days are REALLY fearful. The amount of people driving 40mp/H in a 60mp.H zone is steadily increasing. And they do REALLY stupid things!!!! (Perhaps they feel “safe”?)

          As for kids….. Sorry, you are no longer getting a lift – even when you are drenched and shivering in the cold, or need to be taken to hospital. (for the latter: get your parents to phone an ambulance). It is that simple.

          When I get my life back I will work out a compromise. I’m a tax paying ADULT. And I have been that for a long time. Remember that at the next election.

      • beobrigitte says:

        We do have an invasion in peoples’ PRIVATE property here. Clearly my generation survived well enough to carry the youngsters nowadays. And the latest on offer is intenrship for ‘oldies’ to carry on working beyond retirement age.
        That means that we, the ones who grew up with smoking almost everywhere are actually the HEALTHY proportion of our society nowadays.

        Food for thought……..

  6. Clicky says:

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      no wonder the cops don’t want to enforce a stupid law………..look at the insanity already

      • beobrigitte says:

        If I was a honest cop I wouldn’t either.
        The two guy who came out when I was burgled were really nice people. They did tell me that I had little chance to see my property again and that the insurance at best only covers part of it. (True)
        However, the guys also saw the ashtrays I provide.
        The police officers are people. Like you and me. And fed up with idiotic legislation.

        Food for thought.

        That does remind me of the clicky friend; he is reading and has nothing to post.
        I expected more…… But then, it’s easy to overestimate…..

  7. harleyrider1978 says:

  8. Rose says:

    I’ve been listening to this tripe on the BBC off and on all day.

    Smoking, cars and quack science

    “People think that by opening the window they are clearing the air, but what actually happens is the air is sucked in from outside and pushes the smoke backwards, straight towards the passengers in the back seat.”

    I feel slightly better now.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Miss Rose everyone knows when you crack a window the air gets sucked out not pushed back. The Nazis have lost it all now making that claim.

      • beobrigitte says:

        Yep. And it’s easily proven. Just open your car window about 2cm and watch where your smoke is going.

        The Nazis have lost it all now making that claim.
        They lost credibility long ago. The minute they fed (dimwitted) politicians “research” financed by themselves. Surely, if I am to disregard any research the tobacco industry finances (it no longer can do so) I also have to disregard any research financed by tobacco control&friends. That leaves only INDEPENDENT research to be taken seriously.
        At this point it is time to list the rest up your sleeve…..

        Here I would like to mention the (non-smoker) Prof. Grieshaber, who – working for the Krebsforschungsinstitut – set out to find out the danger of second hand smoke. He fully expected to confirm what tobacco control financed research published.
        When his results showed that staff in a smoky bar actually showed LESS occurrence of lung cancer, he found himself under attack.
        I, personally have only respect for Prof. Grieshaber (and Prof Rohpol, who also has written a wonderful book) – both are of the last few remaining HONEST people group.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Indeed, the BBC must have run this stupidity all day long. Just before they had interviewed some “members-of-the-public”…. A 60cigarettes/day smoker welcoming the smoking ban in cars as much as the smoking ban in pubs? *Laugh*. And then the woman who guiltily admitted that she was “an addict”… By then I really laughed.

      Seriously, though. I’m actually glad the BBC is bleating this nonsense continuously. Perhaps enough people will now insist that the TV license fee will be scrapped. If the BBC wants to slash some of it’s programmes it can go ahead. These days there is nothing worth watching on TV, anyway.

      That does remind me of something else: The BBC laments the “fat epidemic” we apparently are experiencing. But it continues to churn out silly programmes like the bake off thingy…….
      Calories and sugar galore!
      I guess the BBC makes it’s money from mindlessness.

  9. beobrigitte says:

    The approach is a blow to ministers who pushed through the legislation on the advice of health experts.
    I do have a question: We all hear this word “EXPERT” numerous time/day. What EXACTLY is a health expert?
    Also, if any of them do get ill at some point of their “expert” life, are they still health “experts”?

    “At least three million children are thought to be exposed to dangerous fumes in their family car.”
    Actually, a toddler in a buggy being walked along a busy road ends up breathing in dangerous fumes. How much was wiped of VW shares recently?

    The Pope seems to have taken to referring to God as “the all-merciful”, just like Muslims.

    I think I get the idea. Just like all the countries in Europe are to be merged into a single state, so all the religions are going to be merged into one, and part of that will probably mean getting Sharia Law and women having to wear veils and alcohol being banned. In practice it will mean everyone having to become Muslims, and Christianity being sidelined. That’s going to be great success, isn’t it? Just like the EU.

    The first thing springing to mind is what the internet sex sites would have to advertise:

    The single state of Europe will have a few problems to solve: a problem occurs when dictating an European language. How on earth will the French NOT be offended, when English becomes the new European language?
    Then, the Dutch cafes with cannabis openly on sale? And more, the legal brothels in Germany?
    Furthermore, the few European countries which do not have a blanket smoking ban? (In Germany only 2 Bundeslaender have a total smoking ban.)

    The European government will pump taxpayers’ cash into “public health issues” (“smoking can kill”) whilst IS continues it’s incredibly well financed crusade and bombs Brussels.
    That way the Pope finds himself meeting god (sorry, Allah, I mean) a little earlier than thought.

    The BBC in the meantime continues to hail more smoking bans and the beheading of smokers by covering these LIVE.

    I have a new name for the state of Europe: Absurdistan.

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Meanwhile my wifes out signing my name to papers for a new car a KIA SOUL 2016 model………YIKES!

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

  12. slugbop007 says:

    The Chinese have manufactured an air filter for car interiors. Gets rid of most of the bad air. Tobacco Control wouldn’t accept that. No compromises with them.

  13. richard says:

    I smoke in the car which is also carrying my son who’s 12. As mentioned above, the slipstream sucks most of the smoke outside. Nevertheless, his school has attempted to brainwash him about tobacco, despite the fact that he can’t buy, or even see, tobacco in shops.
    I reminded him that Viking warriors in their longhouses warmed themselves with a fire on the floor with a hole in the roof for a chimney, of the cave paintings completed by the light of rush torches, of Sitting Bull and his warriors smoking their pipes in defiance, unconcerned by a fusillade of shots from a group of prospectors in the Black hills, and that the type of men who lived by the sword, ate mammoths, and who fought armed invaders aren’t afraid of a little bit of smoke, especially not from a burning leaf, that any aroma therefrom in defiance of people who try to tell you what to do is the smell of freedom, and that anyone who cries in distress because someone else is smoking is not quite right in the head.

    • roobeedoo2 says:

      Nice imagery, Richard. I tried using Merlin and mixing magic potions (words) from ingredients (letters/sounds) to help my son Kit with his spelling (he has (had?) Verbal Dyspraxia; English homework was very trying ;) ). What did wonders, though, was a fantastic speech therapist from the NHS. It was amazing to watch him bloom through months of repetitious play.

      As far as smoking goes, I had a completely different approach, to that nasty trick schools play on kids, outlined here:


      Yes okay… *sigh*

      Erm, this is a bit embarrassing *opens hands* …to get the bigger picture, you need to click on the images… there are gifts hidden behind gifs… or something like that. Personally, I think Clicky’s a bit of a wag ;)

      Alright, happy now?

      *rolls eyes*

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.