smoking!!!!!

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by Wiglaf

Reckless driving can kill a bystander more quickly; why is there no education against that?

Are you talking about in the schools? That's a large part of driver's education classes. And, if anything, they've been going overboard trying to educate kids against drinking and driving:

DWI shock tactics at school defended - Education - MSNBC.com

While I approve of the intention, I am horrified by the means the administration at that school chose to get their point across.

[Wiglaf]

I said reckless driving, not drunk driving. Speeding, unsafe lane changes, distractions all contribute. Furthermore, drivers ed is a single class not a concerted multi-grade level plan of attack with a corresponding ad campaign. Furthermore, outside of drunk driving, the emphasis has typically been on harming oneself not about how others are harming you.

[Ursa major]

I'm confused: what do they teach you when you first learn to drive in the US? Don't they explain how to drive safely (including how to spot problems ahead and how to deal with multi-lane roads)?



That school's shock tactics seem more than over-the-top, by the way.

[Wiglaf]

Originally Posted by Ursa major

I'm confused: what do they teach you when you first learn to drive in the US? Don't they explain how to drive safely (including how to spot problems ahead and how to deal with multi-lane roads)?



That school's shock tactics seem more than over-the-top, by the way.

They scare you about drunk driving and reckless driving and discuss some proper driving such as the three second rule.
However, it is a few week course and is soon forgotten.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Of course they teach all those things, Ursa, and at an age where the kids are likely to remember them and find them relevant -- when they are old enough to get learner's permits.

As for drugs, alcohol, and cigarette smoking, plenty of kids take those up when they're still in grade school, so it seems like you can't begin that sort of education too young.

Wiglaf, I'm just curious. Since it sounds to me as though you don't like your children being taught about the dangers of second-hand smoke, how would you feel it they came home from school at the age of nine or ten and started critiquing your driving?

[Wiglaf]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

Of course they teach all those things, Ursa, and at an age where the kids are likely to remember them and find them relevant -- when they are old enough to get learner's permits.

As for drugs, alcohol, and cigarette smoking, plenty of kids take those up when they're still in grade school, so it seems like you can't begin that sort of education too young.

Wiglaf, I'm just curious. Since it sounds to me as though you don't like your children being taught about the dangers of second-hand smoke, how would you feel it they came home from school at the age of nine or ten and started critiquing your driving?

She critiques her mother's driving; I drive safely.
As for smoking, I simply don't understand why as long as a smoker smokes away from others why there should be further issue.
My concern for my daughter includes many other issues beyond second hand smoke.
A four week class for 15 yr olds is not the same as school plus an on going ad campaign.
Why is smoking more evil than every other evil in society? Regulations are fine but I would prefer 1)a clearer delineation between courteous smokers and the effects of smoking or being arround discourteous smokers and 2) if they would put half as much effort into the prevention of illegal activity. A mention about the value of responsible driving in the form of an occaisional PSA or on a DMV renewal or more frequent retakes of the written drivers test wouldn't be all bad.
California took a good idea and then rather than use what worked to reduce other harmful activities has been flirting with condemning smokers as well as inconsiderate smoking.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by Wiglaf

California took a good idea and then rather than use what worked to reduce other harmful activities has been flirting with condemning smokers as well as inconsiderate smoking.

As you'll have gathered by now, I have a completely different idea than you do about whether this has been happening or not. I don't know what else I can say.

[Quokka]

Originally Posted by ktabic

Or, according to the World Health Organisation, 1.5 million people a year, world wide. Which is a tad lower.
Coincidently, even if you managed to avoid all causes of cancer, you still have a 25% chance of getting a cancer, caused by random variations in the basic cell operations of your own body.

Actually it was WHO where I got the 5 million figure.

WHO | Tobacco key facts

[Drachir]

Originally Posted by Ursa major

I'm confused: what do they teach you when you first learn to drive in the US? Don't they explain how to drive safely (including how to spot problems ahead and how to deal with multi-lane roads)?



That school's shock tactics seem more than over-the-top, by the way.

Sorry to have to tell you this, Ursa, but compared to Britain getting a driver's license in Canada or the US is laughably easy. The "written" test is mostly multiple choice and the driving test consists of being albe to parellel park and basically steer the car correctly for a few blocks. You have to be pretty careless not to pass the first time. And once you have a license you pretty well have it for life.

[Drachir]

Originally Posted by pyan

It wasn't a moderator, Drachir, or even a human, come to that.
The word is one of those that is automatically asterisked by the forum software, which can lead to some bizarre censoring...and I'm not spinning you a ****-and-bull story....

Yes - I figured it was a bot. I just thought it was funny as bleeping it actually makes it seem vulgar while ignoring it probably mean it would have gone unnoticed.

[Wybren]

Originally Posted by Drachir

Sorry to have to tell you this, Ursa, but compared to Britain getting a driver's license in Canada or the US is laughably easy. The "written" test is mostly multiple choice and the driving test consists of being albe to parellel park and basically steer the car correctly for a few blocks. You have to be pretty careless not to pass the first time. And once you have a license you pretty well have it for life.

Wow, that is kind of scary. While the test to get your learners permit is a relatively simple multiple choice test, once you have your permit you need to have at least 100hours of driving time recorded in a diary showing that you have driven in many different scenarios (night, rain, highway, residential etc..) then the test for your license is pretty strict, you can fail if you have accumulated 9 minor errors (not shoulder checking, not looking in your mirrors, indicating too long or not at all) and then there are the fatal errors which are instant failure.

Back to the smoking issue, do other countries have those explicit anti smoking adds, with the people with the mouth cancer, or gangreen etc? or is it just us?

[Vladd67]

We have ads like this
YouTube - get unhooked

[HardScienceFan]

Over here as well.
Horrifying texts,designed to scare people away from smoking.
Did it work?
Not in the least

wow this thread has expanded,and derailed somewhat
which i like

I posted on F(ine)P(articulate)M(atter) beacuse that is a widespread byproduct of industrialized societies.

Nobody seems to give a rodent's behind,in the governments of the Western World.


New fractal modelling suggests the body does NOT deal well with FPM.
any addiction which interferes with somatic functions and which reduces sensible socaial interactions is bad..IMO

[BookStop]

Here is one of my favorite anti-smoking ads.

YouTube - You don't always die from tobacco.

The smokers I know don't find this particularly scary, unfotunately.

[Wybren]

Thats a pretty good ad Bookstop.

here are some of ours