No Smoking Allowed

Legal issues to write about today....A proposal to ban smoking in all buildings, even restaurants, passed in my ,state legislature today. Many states have laws against smoking in public buildings (we already have a law that is similar, but not as comprehensive as this new proposal will be if it becomes law) so this is not novel for a U.S. state.
But one part of the proposal also bans smoking in moving vehicles when young children are inside the vehicle. Under the no smoking with kids provision an adult who lights up under those circumstances would have the vehicle stopped by police and a ticket issued to the offender. The fine is $150 per offense or 24 hours of community service work.
It's a good law because when a society recognizes children in its laws there is a tendency to believe it is serious about ridding itself of the bad habit (smoking). Already smoking is prohibited in most buildings, including schools. The site of teachers leaving school during lunch or a break to smokes across the street from the school is amusing. Only a few do it, because smoking has become a fairly rare sight the past 20 years.
About 2 in 10 adults now smoke, with the numbers declining all the time, due to the fact that smoking is now considered socially unacceptable (sigh...why can't cell phone use in public also be), a vulgar unhealthy habit. The more society legislates against it the easier it is to define smoking as undesirable, making the number of people smoking far fewer. This is one example of politicians acting responsibly, for the sake of their constituents.
What constitutes rape? Does a rapist have to directly physically assault the victim? That question was addressed in Ohio the other day when a man was sentenced to 20 years in prison for impregnating his teenage stepdaughter with a syringe. Yep, it wasn't considered assault or even sexual assault, but rape even though there was no sexual intercourse. According to the court testimony the rapist, John Goff, and wife forced stepdaughter Shenna Grimm to be inseminated at a time when John's wife could no longer herself conceive.
Both of the parents said the girl consented but a minor can not legally do so. John not only was convicted of rape, but also the lesser charges that most people thought would apply in place of the rape conviction- those of sexual battery and child endangerment.
It's an interesting case. Given that nature of the rape and makes one wonders how even newer technology will apply to laws that were written before the technology was discovered. Using a syringe to rape will surely be an anomaly and some newer method of rape will come before a court that will make it harder to define whether the crime was rape or some lesser sexual battery. Any opinions on this?