Safe Speed Forums

Gentlemen, I give up.

That's the best thing any smoker can do.

Touche! Nice one, Johnsher.

If you're still there, B Cyclist, let me explain what's going on. Like all fair-minded people on this site, I am open to persuasion on virtually anything by means of rational debate supported by robust evidence.

You come up with a statement - an interesting one - that cigarette ends are more persistent polluters than McDonalds wrappers (we assume you mean the polystyrene carton) but provide no evidence to back this up apart from a hopelessly unscientific and unattributed "analysis" of litter contents. You then expect us to go hunting for the evidence to support your case.

That is not the way a good discussion is conducted. Nor is it "astonishing" that I should ask you for some more facts.

Where would Paul Smith, the founder of this site, have got by blurting assertions without carrying out the rigorous research needed to back up his arguments?

The fag end / McD issue does not bring any bees to my bonnet, but I do like to hear proper debate if we're going to discuss these things at all. Simple as that.

Yes, I'm still here!

I guess if you look back at the whole thread and see how many posters were content to throw their smoking rubbish out their car windows you will see where I was coming from. I wouldn't consider throwing rubbish out my car window, regardless of whether I believed it was bio-degradable. It isn't a very nice habit. That is where the Chav bit comes from...

If you Google cigarette end degrade there are numerous references. It is the cellulose and the chemicals in the butts that causes the most concern. I guess the chemicals are a combination of the tar and similar that collects when the ciggie is smoked, along with the chemicals that are put in there. Whilst there does not appear to be a consensus on the length of time a butt will take to degrade there is a spread from about 18 months to 20 years!

I'm quite happy to accept that they are less of an issue than I think they are, however I couldn't find any appropriate evidence!

hi B cyclist
i was reading c+ and a debate on litter in countryside, and a comment struck me re this debate drinks containers.... i know its off thread but this was made by cyclists who blamed others for discarding them when finished.. a bit like stones glass houses

_________________
Audere Est Facere.....To Dare Is To Do

yes, it's so considerate of them. One of my previous cars was set on fire by someone doing this - it landed on the seat which went up nice and quick (I wasn't in the car at the time).
Then there's all the bushfires started in the same way...

Thank you, B Cyclist, for that considered reply. I do know where you're coming from and agree entirely that non-degradable litter is foul, in whatever form.

Piles of fag ends, such as you see swept up by the wind on a pavement, are indeed a revolting sight. But I think our anger would be best directed at the mountains of litter we see by the roadside, cast by mindless louts out of their car windows.

There are few more revolting sights than the bottles, cans, food wrappers etc we see strewn along almost every road (especially on the central reservation) where the sweeper never goes. How anyone can sling a plastic container into the great outdoors is beyond me. It also suggests they either don't notice or don't care about the heaps of rubbish others have left.

Having said that, a fraction of a gram of vegetable matter and tiny scrap of tissue paper isn't exactly environmental vandalism, so I'm still going to chuck my roll-ups out (carefully, of course)!

"Smoking and driving?"

.....not for very long!

Apparently a ban is being mulled over in Oz, US and Gemany.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,3 ... 55,00.html

This has as much to do with road safety, public safety and health & safety as it does with safety pins. No, it is further evidence that politicians the world over cannot resist interfering in people's private lives whenever the opportunity arises.

Smokers have become the last permissable hate-figure, made all the more fashionable by other countries who take action against them. Human rights leglislation now makes it impossible to pick on other groups of people (with the possible exception of Chavs), so smokers now take the full force. Anyone can say what they like about them with impunity.

Politicians? A plague on them all (well, most of them).

A lot of people who don't smoke seem to think
smokers are pests. These people have never
smoked, so they cannot judge how smoking
affects people: regarding the addiction.

As far as banning smoking whilst driving goes,
hahaha, oh yeah I can really see cops enforcing
that one on the guy smoking a cigar in his Bentley!

It would never work, just because of that.

I’m not going to give details, but I’ve had a hand in designing sensor equipment which could be converted to detect a lit ‘death-stick’. Future ‘Smoking cameras’ are not an impossibility.

Given the recent ban on smoking in the workplace, I wouldn’t be surprised if smoke detectors were now introduced into company cars and taxis.

This contains an important point (and truth) - smokers are indeed a soft target, with little support outside of fellow smokers, but the erosion of liberty the constant attacks on them signify often seems to go overlooked. What we all need to consider is "who is the next soft target"? It could be us?

Surley a smoker with only 1 hand on the steering wheel is not in full control of his vehicle, and therefore liable for a £30 fixed penalty?

People who eat or drink while driving have been fined in this way, so why not smokers?

...or removing a hand from the steering wheel to change gear.

If you want to see a massive increase in road rage incidents, just ban drivers from smoking.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

I think you will find that eating and drinking have greater impact than smoking - for a start I would contend that they require more obstruction of the field of view, often require repositioning/tilting of the head, and many people tend to blink when swallowing - also I suspect that because they involved picking things up and putting them down, they also lead to move taking of eyes of the road. Also smokers don't tend to remove a hand from the wheel and critical moments (predictable ones that is, of course)

The main dangers from smoking are not the act of smoking itself but:

Lighting a cigarette
Dropping a cirgarette
Throwing one out of the window and having it blow back in

All of these can be avoided with planning (light up only when stationary) and care (dispose of cigarettes in a responsible manner)

Thats a fair point, but gear changes are neccessary. Smoking is (arguably) not. It would be intresting to know if anyone has ever been stopped for it.

I think a ban on smoking would be quite petty, and also unenforcable.

I think that a ban on smoking behind the wheel would be the catalyst to galavanise motorists into action against the anti car lobby.(And i suspect that deep down the government knows it -so have never tried it)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

It would be interesing to know the extent of compliance in countries where smoking at the wheel is banned.

I suspect many smokers simply ignore it. I certainly would.

So what kind of a law is that?

Be interesting to see how many firms start to enforce no smoking bans in company vehicles - very few i imagine - very easy to say , then the employees are entitled to stop every so ofter for a fag break - so the 8 hour shift then becomes about 6. Suspect many managers will turn a blind eye unless some dedicated anti smoker complains.Still then cheaper to let them travel alone.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I'm not a smoker and couldn't care less providing you don't light up in my car, but this subject does intrigue me.

Smokers are good at handling their cigarettes - fine, I can accept that.

I'm quite good at eating and drinking though, and people are stopped and fined for eating or drinking whilst driving.

Can anyone explain the difference?

This isn't an attack on smokers, rather an attack on double standards.

Why should someone be fined for sneaking a drink of Coke or a sly munch on a Mars bar when smoking whilst driving is allowed?

Smoking is neither here nor there for me, but I do like to eat and keep myself hydrated when driving long distances, without having to pull off at every motorway junction for the next mouthful. Thoughts anyone?

Why is smoking less of a danger than consuming food stuffs?

_________________