Gun Control is Completely Useless.

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
is the move to crush cigarette smoking also simply the state attempting to reserve all power to itself?

because I kind of thought it was the state trying to reduce the harm being done by tobacco.

sort of like gun control is the state trying to reduce the harm being done by guns.


Funny. I don't need a license to buy tobacco. I don't have to pass a multi day course to buy tobacco. I don't need a background check every day to buy tobacco. I don't need my wife's permission, nor do I need references, nor do I need to pay an $80 license fee. I don't have to keep my smokes locked up, I am not subject to search without legitimate warrant, the police do not arbitrarily get to ban my brand of smokes and throw me in jail for 10 years if I fail to comply, and I can keep as many smokes as I like in a pack.


So what is this campaign to end the harm done by tobacco, and how does it compare to gun regulations?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Where are the intelligent comments?

The anti gun nutbars are not capable of Intelligent comments.

is the move to crush cigarette smoking also simply the state attempting to reserve all power to itself?

because I kind of thought it was the state trying to reduce the harm being done by tobacco.

sort of like gun control is the state trying to reduce the harm being done by guns.

If the government was actually trying to reduce the damage done by tobacco they would ban cultivation and Indian cigarettes. But they are not because it is big money and lots of government jobs.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
Funny. I don't need a license to buy tobacco. I don't have to pass a multi day course to buy tobacco. I don't need a background check every day to buy tobacco. I don't need my wife's permission, nor do I need references, nor do I need to pay an $80 license fee. I don't have to keep my smokes locked up, I am not subject to search without legitimate warrant, the police do not arbitrarily get to ban my brand of smokes and throw me in jail for 10 years if I fail to comply, and I can keep as many smokes as I like in a pack.


So what is this campaign to end the harm done by tobacco, and how does it compare to gun regulations?
Seriously? Someone has to describe to you the measures that have been put in place to reduce and discourage smoking?

And btw you do need a drivers license in order to buy smokes.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Seriously? Someone has to describe to you the measures that have been put in place to reduce and discourage smoking?

And btw you do need a drivers license in order to buy smokes.


No you don't dummy
Anything that proves your age will do same as buying booze..
Acceptable Identification (I.D.):


  1. Driver’s licence issued by the Province of Ontario.
  2. Canadian passport.
  3. Canadian Citizenship card.
  4. Canadian armed forces card.
  5. Photo card issued by the L.C.B.O.
  6. “In addition, I.D. that includes a photograph of the person, date of birth, and appears to have been issued by a government is acceptable.” O.Reg. 48/06 Section 3(1))
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36



The decrease in smoking in our society hasn't just happened.

There has been massive government intervention. And its a good thing.

They are now faced with the vaping craze and they are trying to figure out how to discourage it.

And I hope they can do it. There is a plan to reduce smoking to 5% by 2035.

Smoking control works - and I hope it keeps on working - because it benefits the public -
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Seriously? Someone has to describe to you the measures that have been put in place to reduce and discourage smoking?

And btw you do need a drivers license in order to buy smokes.


Bullshit.


You need ID, if the clerk suspects you are under 19.


And a driver's license is not a license to buy tobacco.


In 2011, Canada had 2.05 gun deaths per 100,000 people, from all causes (homicide, accident, suicide) With 36 million Canadians, that means about 725 deaths.


That means 55 dead from tobacco for every single person that dies from gunshot wounds.


Fifty five to one.


And according to your own stats below, the number of people that smoke is roughly double to the number of gun owners.........


fifty five to one.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,041
6,160
113
Twin Moose Creek
Bullshit.


You need ID, **if** the clerk suspects you are under 19.


And a driver's license is not a license to buy tobacco.


In 2011, Canada had 2.05 gun deaths per 100,000 people, from all causes (homicide, accident, suicide) With 36 million Canadians, that means about 725 deaths.


That means 55 dead from tobacco for every single person that dies from gunshot wounds.


Fifty five to one.

I bet a lot less die from second hand gun smoke :)
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
Bullshit.


You need ID, if the clerk suspects you are under 19.


And a driver's license is not a license to buy tobacco.


In 2011, Canada had 2.05 gun deaths per 100,000 people, from all causes (homicide, accident, suicide) With 36 million Canadians, that means about 725 deaths.


That means 55 dead from tobacco for every single person that dies from gunshot wounds.


Fifty five to one.


And according to your own stats below, the number of people that smoke is roughly double to the number of gun owners.........


fifty five to one.
so I guess that means you think the government is trying to reduce smoking in order to reserve power all to itself?

I see no reason why you would abandon being a gun nut just because of facts and stuff.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
so I guess that means you think the government is trying to reduce smoking in order to reserve power all to itself?

I see no reason why you would abandon being a gun nut just because of facts and stuff.

I understand that your lack of cognitive ability cripples you when we are dealing with comparitive statistics, so let me spell it out for you;


55 people die from tobacco for every one that dies from gunshot wounds.



Yet the state has not attacked tobacco use with the same vigor as they have attacked firearms ownership.


Explain.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
I understand that your lack of cognitive ability cripples you when we are dealing with comparitive statistics, so let me spell it out for you;


55 people die from tobacco for every one that dies from gunshot wounds.



Yet the state has not attacked tobacco use with the same vigor as they have attacked firearms ownership.


Explain.
The state has been aggressively attacking the smoking problem in every way it can think of.

And it has been succeeding
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Seriously? Someone has to describe to you the measures that have been put in place to reduce and discourage smoking?

And btw you do need a drivers license in order to buy smokes.

What jurisdiction would that be in? Certainly not British Columbia!
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
Canadian cancer death rate down: Lower smoking rates, better screening and treatment account for drop, but much more needs to be done to tackle leading cause of death in Canada
09 May 2012

TORONTO -

The cancer death rate in Canada is going down, resulting in nearly 100,000 lives saved over the last 20 years (1988 to 2007). Despite the drop in the death rate, cancer is still the leading cause of death in Canada. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2012 was released today by the Canadian Cancer Society, in collaboration with the Public Health Agency of Canada and Statistics Canada.

Declines in death rates were seen in all four major cancers: lung, colorectal, breast and prostate. Between 1988 and 2007, overall death rates dropped by 21% in men and 9% in women.

A smaller decline in the women’s death rate is due to the increase in lung cancer deaths among women over the same timeframe. This increase is thought to be due primarily to the fact that women’s smoking rates did not begin to decline until the 1980s, whereas in men, smoking rates began to decline in the 1960s. It takes time before decreases in population-wide smoking prevalence translate into drops in lung cancer incidence and death rates.

Tobacco use, along with unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, excess body weight, alcohol consumption, over-exposure to the sun and exposure to environmental and workplace carcinogens account for a substantial number of cancer diagnoses and deaths each year.

“A large body of evidence has accumulated over the last 30 years showing that about half of cancers can be prevented,” says Gillian Bromfield, Director, Cancer Control Policy, Canadian Cancer Society. “Even greater gains can be made in reducing cancer rates if more is done to help Canadians embrace healthy lifestyles and if governments do more to create policies that encourage people to make these changes. The Society remains committed to informing Canadians about how they can reduce their cancer risk and advocating for governments to pass policies to make healthy choices easy choices.”

Tobacco control and lung cancer

The decline in smoking rates among men is a significant reason for the overall drop in the death rate for men. The lung cancer death rate for men dropped by 30% between 1988 and 2007. Among Canadian males aged 15 and up, smoking has declined from a high of 61% in 1965 to 20% in 2010.

Among women, however, the lung cancer death rate has not dropped yet, although it has now stabilized. This is because smoking among women peaked later than among men and saw substantial declines beginning only in the 1980s.

In 1965, 38% of Canadian women smoked, compared to 14% of Canadian women who smoked in 2010.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women. More Canadians die of lung cancer every year than the combined deaths from breast, colorectal and prostate cancer.

Overall, current smoking rates among Canadians (males and females combined) is 17% (2010), compared to 25% in 1999 and 50% in 1965. Smoking accounts for about 30% of all cancer deaths. It is linked with an increased risk for at least 18 types of cancer, including lung, larynx, oral, stomach, pancreas and kidney.

“While we have made significant progress in reducing smoking, an enormous amount of work remains to be done,” says Rob Cunningham, Senior Policy Analyst for the Canadian Cancer Society. “It is essential that government regulatory and programming initiatives be strengthened so that smoking rates can be driven down as fast as possible.”

For example, tobacco control measures should include:

the fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer
the Pap test for cervical cancer
screening mammography for breast cancer
The number of new cancer cases continues to rise steadily as the Canadian population grows and ages.
Canadian Cancer Statistics 2012 was prepared and distributed through a collaboration of the Canadian Cancer Society, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Statistics Canada, provincial/territorial cancer registries, as well as university-based and provincial/territorial cancer agency-based cancer researchers.

For more information about Canadian Cancer Statistics 2012, visit the Society’s website at cancer.ca/statistics

The Canadian Cancer Society is a national community-based organization of volunteers whose mission is the eradication of cancer and the enhancement of the quality of life of people living with cancer. When you want to know more about cancer, visit our website Canadian Cancer Society or call our toll-free, bilingual Cancer Information Service at 1 888 939-3333.

For more information, please contact:

Christine Harminc

Senior Manager, Communications & Media Relations

Canadian Cancer Society



Read more: Canadian cancer death rate down: Lower smoking rates, better screening and treatment account for drop, but much more needs to be done to tackle leading cause of death in Canada - Canadian Cancer Society
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Yeah, and he put that in the mouth of Fagin, a criminal who ran a gang of child thieves.

Not surprised you quote him with approval.

You're really f**ked up today, Bones! :lol: (Like most days) It was Mr. Bumble unless I've lost my senses completely.

Don't sweat it, It isn't the first time you've pulled this shit. :lol:

People who deliberately post bull shit on the forum should be permanently banned!

Bone's name might be added to this list. :lol:

Hope you are NOT depending on this forum for clients, Bones! :lol: :lol:
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass — a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience."