Yay or Nay to Canada's smoking laws?

Show all answers

MasterPython

The laws are not really about protecting children. They are about distracting from the fact that smoking is a huge source of revenue. Not only does it make the government billions of dollars in taxes it lowers health care cost and Canada Pension Plan payouts. Dieing is always expensive and the sooner people do it the cheaper it is. And since there are not enough people paying into the Canada Pension Plan reducing the number of people collecting is the only way to stave off it's inevitable collapse.

Noelle W

no i don't personally. which is more important? the health of your children or the satisfaction of our nicotine addiction?

*ajidamoon* the Eh team

If there was anything at all beneficial to smoking then I might be inclined to say it would be a violation to a smokers right, but that would still be stretching it. I know too many people who have never smoked a day in their life, yet have died, or are still currently dieing in a long and painful process, all from the second hand smoke of their spouse, or from the workplace. Its about time those of us who do not wish our teeth yellow and lungs filled with poison have some rights to relatively clean air! Now if they would just stop hovering in doorways in packs, so I could pass by with my children without having to push through a cloud of smoke that would be great.
*My hubby has had to restrain me several times from getting out at a stoplight, yanking open someones door, and slapping a cigarette out of their mouth as they sit there, puffing away with kids in the backseat, windows open a tiny crack. These are the same people who scratch their heads in wonder when the doctor tells them their child has asthma.

I do agree there needs to be more anti-drug campaigning as well.

***Yes, I know asthma is caused by many things, and can also be genetic. That was just an example. I have witnessed it many times while working at CAS. Parents distraught over their child's diagnosis, and the costs of the inhalers, as they stand over them smoking that $9 pack of butts. Why expose your child to something so harmful for your own selfish reasons, is the part I don't get. Is it more important than your child's, or your other passengers health, to have that smoke, while driving? Could they not wait until they get to their destination, or if the "craving" is that strong, pull over for a smoke break? I would also like to point out that I do have major concerns about the environment as well. I was co-chair on a committee to make my community a "greener" place, have been part of many campaigns to cut the use of pesticides, artificial fertilizers and have petitioned the government about more stringent pollution regulations on corporations. My husband modified the exhaust system on our vehicle. I have solar panels on my home. I am doing my part. So, I do not feel I have tunnel vision. I have been affected by smoking my entire life. My parents smoke/d, Three out of four of my grandparents died from lung cancer. My former place of business was a smoking establishment for many of the years I worked there. I am thankful for the smoking ban, as it is an issue that comes up less and less, as the people I care about wise up, and quit, and I no longer have to worry about it in public.

Leon

I don't think it's a violation of smokers rights not to be allowed to smoke in public places but it might be a violation of the right of a bar owner to decide if smoking should be allowed inside his property. Then again, if this bar owner were allowed to decide and he would allow smoking, it might be a violation of his employees right to a safe workplace. And then you could say that they could choose not to work there but with every other regulation on safe workplaces, we do try to make them as safe as we possibly can and there is really no pressing need to allow smoking everywhere.

geek_girl22

If someone wants to buy their death by smoking then by all means go right ahead... but Im not paying for the life and the consequences that someone else has chosen!! If you have a right to smoke, I have a right not to enhale your toxins!!!

I SUPPORT THE BY-LAW!!

Karen C

I don't know if it is a violation of rights or not. What I do know is that where I live used to be a perfectly lovely corner of Ottawa, smokers and all. Today it is a drug pushers haven and it is not perfectly lovely anymore.

The various governments have done their level best to facilitate the drug users and pushers. They supply their housing, a small income, their needles etc etc. And property here is being physically destroyed by people with no respect for others. Meanwhile, the seniors, many of whom smoke and have for decades (these zealots should live to be their ages and as healthy as they are!) are made to feel like criminals in their own homes because they have a smoke.

One day the taxpayers are going to open their eyes and see what a two faced political game is being played on them when perfectly good buildings need to be destroyed because they have been abused; when there is no money left for people who paid for pensions and medicare and they can no longer get it because it has all been wasted on placating drug users/dealers.

And when they find out that the bribe Mr. Harper gave them last election is not being used as much for them as it is being used to bring more drug-addicted-at-birth babies into the world by silly girls who cannot control their hormones and their drug use and ignorant men who cannot keep their zipper up. Guess who pays for the upkeep of those kiddies? The Taxpayer. The silly thing here is that the people having babies like they were rabbits, are not the voting type so the politicians do not even get that singular benefit from Mr. Harper's bribe.

Smokers are an easy target. They never had to hide. The Smoking ban is nothing more than a smoke screen so that people do not look into and question the government enabling of illegal drug users. If the money spent on anti smoking ads was spent on anti illegal drug campaigns, my community might still be a lovely place to live. A ride on the bus would be a pleasant thing to do - right now it is a good place to get bullied and cursed at by kids with no upbringing - their parents are lost in a coke or crack induced fog. If that money was spent on anti illegal drug campaigns, it might be safe to sit outside at night without having a thief rip you off for his next fix.

I am not, by the way, saying that smoking is a clean or healthy thing to do. I am saying that the focus on it far exceeds the need and removes any focus that should be on drug addicts and their spawn and the cost they are to the public purse.

A violation of smoker's rights? Maybe! A violation of Taxpayers money and a smoke screen? Most definitely

Eric S

The USA has done the same thing. Washington, DC and New York do not allow smoking in bars any longer.

It is to protect the RIGHTS of non-smokers whose health is being affected by smokers. Overwhelming stats show that second-hand smoke can increase cancer by 10-fold.

It is not just Canada, it's EVERYWHERE

mj_puce

No, people smoking in my airspace is a violation of my right to breath clean air.

Besides the obvious and well documented increased risk of cancer from breathing second hand smoke, there is also the immediate effect that many people get sinusitis from breathing second hand smoke. Some people even have asthma attacks. It also makes our clothes and hair stink, ruins our enjoyment when we're eating out, and makes the air smell stale and depressing. If you want to suck on your death sticks, it's right that you should at least have to do it outside were the smoke will dissipate, or in the privacy of your own home or vehicle.

T.O.

Yay

Melanie B

I like the law. It's my right not to have to breathe in that poison while I'm eating at a restaurant.

Why should non smokers have to give up their right to health because you guys have a filthy habit?

Everyone knows the dangers of smoking so it would be irresponsible of the government not to step in and do something to protect the community.

Stargazer

they applied smoking ban all over. non smokers are set on attack. i respect non smokers. why can't they respect smokers. all we ask is a tiny space to smoke ...... outside the building, frankly , is it too much to ask ???

Edit - to those who think i might not respect non smokers... i do, when kids are around me, i do NOT smoke by respect of thier health. i try to understand why some non smokers would actually attack physicly a smoker

JuanB

The laws are headed in the right direction, but can still continue the good work with more limitations.

Violation of Smokers rights? Do I have the right to pull out a handgun and shoot you in the head just because I feel like it? No. It is a generally accepted legal principal that one person's rights only go as far as when they start imposing on other people's rights. I can't shoot you because it effects your health, and I can't blow smoke in your face because it effects your health.

K B

My problem with most of the answers here is that they all seem so selfish and dishonest. If your children's health is so important to you, why are there no similar campaigns against the pollution put into the air by vehicles and by manufacturing? There are alternatives like the Zenn car for city driving. I have never seen a campaign to make them legal for the protection of the children.

And the manufacturing districts sometimes have so much smog you could cut it with a knife. Again, if your children's health is so important, why has no one set up a soap box outside of the parliament buildings and begun screaming? This anti smoking has nothing to do with children's health. It has to do with the self interests of the writers.

I personally do appreciate some of those laws btw. It is nice not to have smoke floating around while I am eating lunch in a restaurant or flying from here to there etc. But as long as the responders who claim 'it's for the sake of the children' do nothing about these bigger and more all encompassing forms of air pollution, I say they are self motivated in their responses, not child or health motivated.

And it is ok to be self motivated. It is wrong to use your children and others to make yourself feel better about being selfish and until such time as you speak up against the other forms of air pollution (complete with just as many health issues), then sorry but I think you are all dishonest. A little "To Thine Own Self Be True" is in order here I think.

BTW: Asthma is caused by a number of things and is often genetic. Smoking does not help the situation, this is true, but it is not the One and only reason why people suffer from it and to speak of it like it was the only reason is really playing the role of the ostrich to the hilt. I am very surprised to see such tunnel vision coming from ajidamoon who I have come to think of as one of the real thinkers here.

Caring girl.

Yah because smoking is bad for your Heath.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: