It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How far is too far when referring to smoking bans? - Canada

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Mods, please feel free to move this thread if it's been posted in the wrong spot.


A recent poll shows that more Canadians are supporting the bans on smoking in public places. So much so that they're wishing to take the bans to local parks and beaches. Some people wish to go as far as putting a time-line as to when you can't smoke outside in public areas and when you can.


August 17, 2011 According to a new national survey from Ottawa-based Abacus Data, a majority of Canadians back restrictions on smoking on patios before 8pm and in parks and public beaches.

Nationally, 61% of Canadians surveyed said they either strongly (47%) or somewhat (14%) support a law that would restrict smoking on outdoor patios before 8pm while 25% opposed the proposed measure.

Similarly, 58% of Canadians said they either strongly (44%) or somewhat (14%) support a law that would restrict smoking in all public parks and beaches while 30% opposed the idea.


With this being said, I do not agree whatsoever with creating a ban to that extent. I am a former smoker and got out of the habit long before these bans started taking place, but I am beginning to feel pity on people for not being able to have rights and freedoms within this country. A dirty habit shouldn't be the cause to forbid someone from enjoying a public setting just because some people seem to have an issue with the habit being performed (granted it's not an illegal activity). I understand fully that it stinks and some people absolutely detest it, but I'd imagine it'd be upon those people to take actions and leave the vicinity instead of forcing people to quit or take it elsewhere, in public especially. Even simply asking the smoker to move politely has more of a better outcome, in my opinion. If it was a matter of stench and toxins, perhaps designated smoking areas can be created in public vicinities such as a park or a beach setting, but to go as far as banning it altogether is outrageous. If it was a matter of litter, I see no harm in designating ashtrays in the parks like they've done with garbage bins.

I personally do not mind someone smoking around me, nor my child, in any public place so long as they aren't blowing it directly in either of our faces on purpose. If they are casually beside the two of us and light up a cigarette, so be it. They have just as much of a right to be there as we do.

It makes me wonder if they'll try to ban smoking on private properties in the long run, such as in one person's own backyard, simply because someone in the yard next to them can smell it.

On the Facebook page of a local radio station, they questioned what people thought about the results of this poll, and more people criticized smoking and said it should be made illegal. Do they not realize how much money the government pulls in from cigarette sales in general? I feel like if they stopped making and selling them, then property taxes and other taxes would just increase ten-fold, not like we need them any higher than they currently are.

So far, my city has a ban on smoking in bars/restaurants, public transit properties and inside bus shelters, and within 9 meters of any mall entrance. Not to mention the rules of privately owned businesses and whatnot. They've also banned smoking in vehicles when children under 16 are present, and that is something I promote. People can even get fined if caught throwing a cigarette butt on ground...

But to ban smoking in generally public places, or to put a time-line as to when you can smoke in a public place? Unrealistic.

How far would you say is too far when it comes to bans like this? I am not asking for judgement on my opinion in specific. However, I am asking for the opinions of others.

Here is where you can find the poll results - AbacusData.com
edit on 18/8/2011 by andriod because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by andriod
 


The same people are sitting at home getting their kicks from none other than FOXNews. I love people!





posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by josh2009s
 


Haha no kidding! And this is why I don't own cable - so I can go out and enjoy public situations just as much as the next guy.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
In ontario I can be fined for smoking in the company vehicle I drive up to 5000 dollars . I find this to be frustrating as I am the only one who is ever in the van and nnone else has ever drivin it or rode in it and I've had it for a few years now.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by metaldemon2000
 


How often are you allowed smoke breaks though? If they limit you, then I can see the issue.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by andriod
 


Whenever I feel like it. I work without supervision. The problem is I am on the road alot. Its not the situation its the principle



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by andriod
 


Dear andriod,



It makes me wonder if they'll try to ban smoking on private properties in the long run, such as in one person's own backyard, simply because someone in the yard next to them can smell it.


It has already happened in some cities, including the one I live in. By the way, I am a smoker, my lungs are fine, the habit is filthy and I know the risks. I was asked to research second hand smoke for the organization I work for about 20 years ago. I went to an Industrial Hygienist (who didn't smoke) and asked what research had been done. I expected to find some plain and definitive research, he explained to me that there was no good research and that it was all bad and misrepresented the science. Let me give some examples.

One of the most famous was where women who smoked while they were pregnant. The children were tested and it was discovered that the smoking had effected the kids. This study was used to prove that second hand smoke was bad; but, it wasn't second hand smoke, it was first hand. He showed me that all the studies were garbage and that based on air testing there was no negative effect a foot away. I was surprised because I believed what I had been told. First hand smoke is bad, if second hand smoke was bad then I would expect to see some real studies that were truthful and you are not going to see that.

If you don't know it is all a lie then consider the fact that one of the studies concluded that second hand smoke was more dangerous than first hand smoke. Just think about it and you know it is a lie. My organization took the information, buried it and prohibited smoking it our buildings before it was even a law. In the end the laws that were used to regulate smoking are now being turned on people who are overweight, who will be next? Got to keep the slaves healthy so that you can work them to death.

The propaganda is so strong that many people think that only smokers get lung cancer. See if you pollute the air and the water it is no great achievement to get lung cancer; but, when non-smokers get lung cancer, if we can blame it on second hand smoke then big business can continue to pollute.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
First of all.. when you say patio, are you meaning as in a private patio by someones house or does patio mean something else for you?

As for smoking bans, I think any government enforced ban is going too far. Where I live, there's a ban on smoking in any public building. Public buildings are bars, restaurants, movie theaters, food and other shopping areas. I'm not sure what all else it covers, but I do know that casinos are exempt.

They've even gone so far as to have undercover cops go into bars trying to catch people smoking.

I don't think the government has any business forcing any business to be non-smoking under threat of losing their business license. It should be left up to the owner to decide that.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by N3k9Ni
First of all.. when you say patio, are you meaning as in a private patio by someones house or does patio mean something else for you?


I am referring to patios at local bars/clubs/restaurants.


As for smoking bans, I think any government enforced ban is going too far. Where I live, there's a ban on smoking in any public building. Public buildings are bars, restaurants, movie theaters, food and other shopping areas. I'm not sure what all else it covers, but I do know that casinos are exempt.

They've even gone so far as to have undercover cops go into bars trying to catch people smoking.

I don't think the government has any business forcing any business to be non-smoking under threat of losing their business license. It should be left up to the owner to decide that.


I can understand not wanting people to smoke inside bars, restaurants, theaters, etc., as inside can easily become overwhelming with smoke. But banning it outside in public areas is my concern.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


Thank you for your input, I can see where you are coming from. I have to agree, it's more or less propaganda, or for lack of a better term - a scare tactic.

People have been smoking for centuries and have known for many decades how harmful it can be. So why only recently is that realization being advertised?



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
living in vancouver now / was having a smoke outside the skytrain station last week & some krazy women tried 2 snatch my smoke out my hand while swearing at me telling me how I'm polluting the enviroment / her health.

I was close 2 giving her a backhand but security arrived right on time



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
I just find smokers are not polluting the air any more than vehicles do, or factories, mills, and such. There are far worse situations out in everyday living that one should be concerned about than someone smoking five feet away from them.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Ijust do not understand all of this. The taxes off of smoking are in the billions. Now if every one stopped smoking right now the whole mess would come crashing down in a day or less. I just not understand all the fuss and all the while they are making so much money off it it. It is like sawing off the limb you are sitting on.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by andriod
 


Dear andriod,

Thank you for your very nice response. I do wish to clearly state that I do no believe people should smoke, yet, I do. It is highly addictive and my father died from complications due to chemotherapy because he had lung cancer. I don't want anyone to think I am promoting smoking, I smoke and say it is bad for me.

A new thread has just begun that shows what I was discussing as being the reasoning behind criminalizing smoking. It is about the food police.. Job creation and the Nanny State in action : The food police, here to help you!

I do not believe in suicide; but, how do we make it illegal? I mean there are laws against it, why? After 25 years together, my ex-wife decided to cheat on me and divorced me. While this was going on I half of my family and friends died from various things. I saw a therapist to help me talk it out, he was shocked that I never contemplated suicide; but, I hadn't. More than happy to die, just unwilling to cause it myself, at least directly. This is the point, the therapist knew that I should have been suicidal, you see sometimes we can understand why someone would be logical in considering it (and I am totally opposed to suicide). Here is the thing, if you are suicidal, then by definition, things can only get better; but, the pain can be so much that some consider it. So if it can be a rational decision for a moment, why is it illegal? Because we need you to work until the work kills you.

You asked a question about smoking and I discussed regulating health at all, in a round about fashion. There are companies that will not hire someone who smokes. We will cause them to pay more in insurance, blah, blah, blah. We only want healthy slaves. How many companies require physicals to take desk jobs? Most? The Americans with Disabilities Act will fine you for not hiring someone because they have cancer; but, you can refuse to hire a smoker who doesn't. Does that make sense? We are slaves, that is okay; but, we still get to choose some things, allow us that simple choice over what we eat, drink and enjoy. That is my opinion. Be well.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
In ontario I can be fined for smoking in the company vehicle I drive up to 5000 dollars . I find this to be frustrating as I am the only one who is ever in the van and nnone else has ever drivin it or rode in it and I've had it for a few years now.


I OWN my own business vehicle.. sole proprietor, only me working and I can STILL be fined for smoking in my own freaking car!

For the rest of you, get off the pot, I mean REALLY? YOU are complaining about my cigarette smoke while you drink water from a plastic bottle and you don't ever worry about your carbon footprint when it inconveniences you? GIVE ME A BREAK!!

I live on a busy street and I can not leave my bedroom window open for the exhaust that collects in my personal sanctuary. My teenage daughter is allergic to smoke and we have NEVER smoked in our house, now you tell me I can't smoke outside? REALLY??

Get the carcinogens out of food, get the government to stop spying on our internet, get rid of nuclear power because GODS forbid, we have a natural disaster and we're all glowing! Concentrate on the things that matter!

Smoking does NOT cause lung cancer! Less than 10% of cigarette smokers actually get cancer.


In fact, the data used is biased in the way that it was collected and the actual risk for a smoker is probably less.
Really, read the report.

Smoking has health benefits
60% lower risk of Parkinson's disease
Tourette's syndrome patients have increased control of muscle tics and verbal outbursts
Smoking slows the effect of alzheimers in patients who already have it, and smokers are way less likely to get it to begin with.
Schizophrenia, ADD, OCD, Sleep Apnea, and Colitis to the list of diseases which are benefited by nicotine use.


"Smoking may actually help decrease the side effects of antipsychotic medication" (although, to be fair, it can also cause a bad reaction.. so tell your Shrink that you smoke before taking any antipsychotic meds.) ...

"Cigarettes boost DHEA which is a sex hormone that increases libido and helps trim your weight." Smoking also boosts memory functions.


I'm much too tired right now for more research, but I will check back in tomorrow in this thread..

THE point is.. HOW DARE YOU dictate to me my lifestyle choice when you have much larger things to be concerned with? My cigarette smoke OUTSIDE is going to harm you more than carbon monoxide and (pick from a plethora of other environmental influences)? [ie: solar radiation, acid rain, carbon emissions, etc.. etc..]

What abhors me most is the fact that ATS' motto is DENY ignorance. You are quick to deny what mainstream media tells you when it suits you and yet you jump on the bandwagon to believe what you're told with this issue without so much as taking it upon yourself to learn about the issue before mouthing off?

Think about that when you're drinking your bottled water while eating barbecued steak! (Oh yeah, doesn't grilling cause cancer? OMG READ MEAT!!!)

End of rant now, because I could go on for pages here!

~EDIT~ Don't take it personally when I way "you" I mean the people who agree with this... this is a touchy subject for me

edit on 18-8-2011 by Invariance because: apologies



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Invariance
 


I couldn't have said it better myself, and I'm now a non-smoker.

I fully support smokers and their decisions because it justifies their rights as a Canadian citizen to be able to do what they please with themselves.

Thank you very much for the info and the research done to get it. Hopefully it sheds light.


What I find amusing is no one here on ATS has backed up others' ideas to ban it in public areas. Everyone who's posted so far seems to disagree with said results.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Nothing is too far, it should be banned outright.

But the governments wont do that because they get too much money off the manufacturers.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by andriod
 


I dont have to go home and have a shower if Im near a mill or car.

Get too close to a smoker and their stench is on you for the rest of the day.

Smokers, imagine the worst BO youve ever smelt, thats what you smell like and even worse than that is its transferable and stays on you until you shower.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Flyer
 


Don't stand so close, then...or seek help for your strange condition.

Back before the UK ban, we were told "You can't have non smoking pubs along side smoking ones cos everyone will want to go to the smoker's haunts. Just goes to show ya how how uptight and prissy the antis are. In fact, I'd bet a fair wedge that they are exactly the sort who would have dressed up in white sheets when it was ok to hate black folks.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
reply to post by andriod
 


I dont have to go home and have a shower if Im near a mill or car.

Get too close to a smoker and their stench is on you for the rest of the day.

Smokers, imagine the worst BO youve ever smelt, thats what you smell like and even worse than that is its transferable and stays on you until you shower.


I have to go home and take a shower after I sit next to the guy who marinated in his cologne on the bus!

B.O. REALLY? We have things called mints, you speak of a few and apply it to the many here.

Car exhaust, other people's perfume and a number of other offensive odors sting my nostrils each day... and those odors stick with you.

Skunks, people after playing in sports, different foods, and pets to name a few things that are offensive odors that also stick to your clothes, thus they should be illegal too.

While we're at it, outlaw fish because I'm allergic... outlaw AXE cologne, because it's nasty.. Let's make garlic illegal ... OH AND manure, we MUST get rid of that too!

In fact, let's get rid of EVERYTHING I don't like.. why? Because I don't have enough to do but sit and complain about what other people are doing.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join