Hi, Juan;
A few days ago I heard on the news that about 200 people die each day from infections caught while in hospital!!! That is something to ponder over!
Curb on car-smoking
- Thread starter dancing-loon
- Start date
A few days ago I heard on the news that about 200 people die each day from infections caught while in hospital!!! That is something to ponder over!
Hi, my new friend!;-) How's it going?
During their RIDE program the police will nab them!! Kids and smoke in the car??... Wham! 200 dollars, please!:lol:
Well, it is meant to make parents, grandparents aware of the health-danger second-hand smoke poses for children. Except for Colpy :roll:, most smoking parents will eventually get the hang of the law, I'm sure.
I absolutely agree. I can't stand our government and their insistence on treating us like children.
I grew up with both my parents smoking in the car. It didn't kill me or give me asthma. I don't think that was a very considerate thing to do but there sure as hell shouldn't be a damn law made about it.
I really can't stand how we're being manipulated in this country. I liked this country once but that was quite a while ago. It's starting to smell a lot like tyranny around here.
The ban is probably a good idea...but,incredibly difficult to enforce.
Perhaps Ottawa might consider making cigarrettes an illegal product...but,don't hold your breath...there are far too many tax dollars to be made from their sale.
I've often wondered about all the diligent moms who take their chilkdren for daily walks,in their strollers...the children are exactly at the right level to inhale every bit of car and truck exhaust(filled with all manner of particulate)...surely this has an effect,too.
Perhaps Ottawa might consider making cigarrettes an illegal product...but,don't hold your breath...there are far too many tax dollars to be made from their sale.
I've often wondered about all the diligent moms who take their chilkdren for daily walks,in their strollers...the children are exactly at the right level to inhale every bit of car and truck exhaust(filled with all manner of particulate)...surely this has an effect,too.
I grew up in a small residence with someone who smoked 3 packs a day. They literally lit their next smoke with the one being butted out. There is no doubt in my mind that it affected me. I collapsed during a peewee lacrosse practise unable to breathe. I loved the game, started when I was 6 and left when I was 13 because I couldn't take the running. It took me years to connect the dots, that my home environment probably contributed to my limitations in the sport. As a teenage I took up smoking and have struggled with it since. I still have the odd one or three. I'm all for people having the choice to smoke, or not. If anything it should be allowed in all bars, where people choose to go. Kids don't choose to stay home or drive alone. Forcing kids to smoke, even if second hand, is in my opinion wrong and it should be backed by legislation. It's next to impossible to enforce but at least it sends a clear message that it is wrong. There is nothing right about it. Claiming it a personal right of dad doesn't cut it. It's a person's right to own a gun but they can't shoot pop cans off the tops of their kids heads with it. He can smoke alone or away from kids to enjoy his right. Kids can't make that choice.
Between the lack of ability to enforce it AND the relatively high rate of voluntary "compliance" already ( I smoke but will NOT smoke in ANY confined pace with kins in it- I have even smoked outside "smoking" homes cos I thought it was not right with kinds around regardless of how the "adults" wanted things done) this whole deal is a gigantic non-issue, and also is INDEED the "slipery slope" that Ol Dalton caled it initially
Once our own property, and whatever may happen on same, becomes the business of the government (and I know certain stuff is, but in the OLD days you had to be doing something CRIMINAL for them to bust yer door down, not just something ill-advised or discouraged) then there is basically nothing they can't do, nowhere they can't go
#juan- there was a study released a few weeks ago that prety much proved that people living "unhealthy" lifestyles were MUCH cheaper on the health-care front, Colpy's right (and you can frame that last phrase co I ain't gonna use it too often)
Once our own property, and whatever may happen on same, becomes the business of the government (and I know certain stuff is, but in the OLD days you had to be doing something CRIMINAL for them to bust yer door down, not just something ill-advised or discouraged) then there is basically nothing they can't do, nowhere they can't go
#juan- there was a study released a few weeks ago that prety much proved that people living "unhealthy" lifestyles were MUCH cheaper on the health-care front, Colpy's right (and you can frame that last phrase co I ain't gonna use it too often)
Hi mabudon; haven't seen you around for a while....Good to see you back.
Back to the topic....Something over 800 people in Canada every year die of lung cancer and heart disease brought on by second hand smoke. When smoking kills what are basically innocent by-standers, it can't be ignored. Another sad point is that a good number of those deaths will be the children of the smokers, and those children weren't given a choice.
I'm not suggesting that people should smoke around children but what I do question is the purpose of all these anti-smoking laws. They are difficult to enforce, if not impossible, and there are other ways of getting the message across. So what is the real point?
My concern is that once taking our freedoms away can be justified because of health concerns, which in reality is the government trying to save money, how many other liberties are going to be examined the same way. I am not an aphid to generate money for the government and I don't like that we are expected to behave like that. It is unacceptable.
Another concern is that anti-smoking was a Nazi policy and dreamed up by Adolph Hitler. If we are going to start adopting his policies then where does it stop? We all know Hitler was great at justifying removing peoples civil liberties but we should know that there is no justification in removing civil liberties. What other Hitler policies are we going to adopt? I was listening to the CBC and a politician was seriously proposing separate schools for native people - haven't we heard that one before? His argument was that it might improve native peoples scholastic achievement. Again we have a justification for the unjustifiable.
It seems to me the government is out of control and as with Hitler, anti-smoking, that is, the removal of civil liberties, should be a real alarm bell.
It isn't governments job to tell us what we can and can't do. If we accept them in that role there is no telling how far their justifications will take us. It is a very slippery slope.
My concern is that once taking our freedoms away can be justified because of health concerns, which in reality is the government trying to save money, how many other liberties are going to be examined the same way. I am not an aphid to generate money for the government and I don't like that we are expected to behave like that. It is unacceptable.
Another concern is that anti-smoking was a Nazi policy and dreamed up by Adolph Hitler. If we are going to start adopting his policies then where does it stop? We all know Hitler was great at justifying removing peoples civil liberties but we should know that there is no justification in removing civil liberties. What other Hitler policies are we going to adopt? I was listening to the CBC and a politician was seriously proposing separate schools for native people - haven't we heard that one before? His argument was that it might improve native peoples scholastic achievement. Again we have a justification for the unjustifiable.
It seems to me the government is out of control and as with Hitler, anti-smoking, that is, the removal of civil liberties, should be a real alarm bell.
It isn't governments job to tell us what we can and can't do. If we accept them in that role there is no telling how far their justifications will take us. It is a very slippery slope.
Scott;
don't dump the baby with the bathwater!!! The government isn't forbidding you to smoke, just don't expose your kids to the stink and danger. If you must argue about that and get Hitler to take the blame... you are way off topic, my dear.
don't dump the baby with the bathwater!!! The government isn't forbidding you to smoke, just don't expose your kids to the stink and danger. If you must argue about that and get Hitler to take the blame... you are way off topic, my dear.
I don't think I am.
I live in BC where some very draconian laws are about to come into effect and they all but forbid smoking. The laws dictate where, when and how I can use tobacco products. For example; the new regulations forbid any tobacco products in the work environment! What possible justification is there for banning smokeless tobacco in a work environment? I doubt very much there is any claim about the harm done from second hand smokeless tobacco chewing!
No, I'm right on topic.
Now they are talking about bringing back segregation in Canadian schools!?!?!
It's outrageous and it is Nazi.
Scott Free
Let me guess; you are a smoker. I used to smoke three packs a day.......I quit almost twenty years ago after about three hundred attempts to quit. I used to get frustrated in movie theatres because I wanted a smoke half way through the movie. Drove my wife crazy. Are you old enough to remember when all the stores were closed on Sunday and if you were out of cigarettes, there was always the long butts in the ashtray....What a stupid habit........I'm over it now though........except when I see someone enjoying a cigarette with a cup of coffee in the morning.........I get a barely resistible urge to snatch the cigarette out of that person's hands and have a long, loving drag.........Just kidding........:lol::roll:
Let me guess; you are a smoker. I used to smoke three packs a day.......I quit almost twenty years ago after about three hundred attempts to quit. I used to get frustrated in movie theatres because I wanted a smoke half way through the movie. Drove my wife crazy. Are you old enough to remember when all the stores were closed on Sunday and if you were out of cigarettes, there was always the long butts in the ashtray....What a stupid habit........I'm over it now though........except when I see someone enjoying a cigarette with a cup of coffee in the morning.........I get a barely resistible urge to snatch the cigarette out of that person's hands and have a long, loving drag.........Just kidding........:lol::roll:
I'm on on again off again smoker. I enjoy a good cigar.
My argument isn't from a personal perspective specifically on smoking. My argument is that we have a clear example of how these sorts of laws violate our liberty and when people accept governments role in those violations and accept the justifications (lets face it anything can be justified) then we are on a very dangerous path.
What's next? Mandatory exercise? Eugenics? Euthanasia? Dietary controls (like a tax on food the government doesn't like)? There is no end to the evil any government is capable of.
"For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism, it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and, hence, the century of the State" (Italian Encyclopedia 1932). The German brand of fascism, National Socialism, was characterized also by racist (as opposed to purely nationalist) beliefs. Let us recall further that, everywhere in the West, public health doctrine has drifted from public-good concerns, such as sanitation or contagious diseases, towards a frontal attack on individual choices and politically incorrect lifestyles."
- For Your Own Good, Jacob Sullum
"The relationship between fascism and public health is probably more symbiotic than Proctor admits. After reading The Nazi War on Cancer, the careful reader will be well positioned to understand why fascism requires strong public health policies. For the fascist State needs "valuable human material" -- or, as we would say today, healthy "human resources". Nazi slogans reported by Proctor are more explicit than what present-day crusaders would dare to employ: "Your body belongs to the nation!" "You have the duty to be healthy!" "Food is not a private matter!" Again anticipating today's health fascists, the Nazis' National Accounting Office outlined the so-called economic costs of smoking. Erwin Liek, sometimes called the father of Nazi medicine, thought that curing cancer required moving from "care of the individual" to "cancer prevention on a large scale -- for the entire people" (p. 25). - Heil Health by Pierre Lemieux
- For Your Own Good, Jacob Sullum
"The relationship between fascism and public health is probably more symbiotic than Proctor admits. After reading The Nazi War on Cancer, the careful reader will be well positioned to understand why fascism requires strong public health policies. For the fascist State needs "valuable human material" -- or, as we would say today, healthy "human resources". Nazi slogans reported by Proctor are more explicit than what present-day crusaders would dare to employ: "Your body belongs to the nation!" "You have the duty to be healthy!" "Food is not a private matter!" Again anticipating today's health fascists, the Nazis' National Accounting Office outlined the so-called economic costs of smoking. Erwin Liek, sometimes called the father of Nazi medicine, thought that curing cancer required moving from "care of the individual" to "cancer prevention on a large scale -- for the entire people" (p. 25). - Heil Health by Pierre Lemieux
Last edited:
No A/C and don't want to smoke out the kids. T's why the window's down. Second-hand smoke's not good for 'em....:-?
Woof!
Last edited:
I love the Nazi part!! Good thing they don't talk back, so you can dump anything that bothers you on them.:lol::lol: Scotty Scotty!:roll:
As to smokeless tobacco.... you chew and?.... you SPIT!!! IIIIIgitt!!! Spitting that brown slime anywhere on the ground or floor...YUCK!
ukeright: I like BC and its laws!!! :lol:;-)
I have never heard or read that the Nazis had segregation in their school system. Whom were they segregating, anyway?
We in Canada already have segregation! There is the Public and then the Catholic School, plus large numbers of Private Schools.
There was talk in Toronto to try and put the Black students into a school of their own. Not a bad idea, I think. Perhaps the attendance will be better, the violence will be down and most importantly they will learn something and can secure better jobs later on.
Y'know what's scary is talking with the cardiologist three months after the surgery (four years ago March 3) and being told if I'd still been smoking a pack a day (I quit a year and change before) he couldn't have repaired the blockage.
Woof!
Woof!
Looks like I like to pick on you, but just can't help observing that you are against all the good things... things meant to make your life healthier, more enjoyable.
No worries, I have a think skin. :lol:
I'm not against the "good things" it's just I consider liberty the "best thing."
I just don't buy into popular propaganda. I'm not saying smoking is healthy when it clearly isn't but it isn't as unhealthy as the "experts" claim and certainly not as unhealthy as a society that destroys liberty over it is. If someone smokes and dies of cancer it is because they smoked and their cause of death goes down as smoking related. If someone else gets the same cancer but doesn't smoke it is considered unfortunate.
My point is that the statistics are being rigged by hysterical experts not by evidence. The evidence is that we all die and that smokers die a little sooner and it costs the health care system less when they die as it does when a non-smoker dies; these facts, though, fly in the face of politically correct hysteria and so are over looked.
I'll give you an example: my grandfather had mouth cancer in his late 70s. He had beaten prostate, bladder and bone cancer in his 60s (against very improbable odds using holistic medicine). He died on the operating table from a heart attack when they tried to remove the tumor. He had made the mistake of mentioning that when he was 19 he tried smoking once for a month on a farm in Saskatchewan and didn't like it.
The doctor wrote down the cause of death as smoking related! That is clearly an hysterical finding from an "expert."
I have personally studied the findings from "experts" and found that they ignore certain studies by less PC experts and their calculations are off by about 50%, and when they say smokers cost society huge amounts of money they are outright lying their "expert" faces off.
So yeah, I like freedom, liberty and I don't care much for hysteria.