No rights even in your own home

[illandreth]

Read this on CTV webpage today. Is this Canada's version of ASH?

CTV News | Health unit pushes for apartment, condo smoking ban

The health unit wants the province to enact legislation that protects residents in multi-unit dwellings from exposure to second-hand smoke

Why do smokers pay taxes.....way MORE taxes than non-smokers when we obviously have no rights and we're just paying to help those persecuting us.

 

[props76]

Remember we don't smoke anymore. YAH. Don't have to worry about that BS.

I owed a shop where we all smoked. Those smoking laws came in, we just ignored them. How are they going to prove to are smoking in your apartment?

Yeah another stupid law that really isn't enforceable. From cell phones driving, to going to fast they steal your car, to the guy caught smoking in his truck, to losing your licence at .05 when you aren't even legally drunk. The stupidity is unreal. The only good thing is there are so many of these stupid laws, its going to be impossible to enforce them all.

 

[illandreth]

Remember we don't smoke anymore. YAH. Don't have to worry about that BS.

Actualy we do need to worry as this is merely another example of the rights being taken away from everybody, just more obvious with smokers.

Even though if you have changed strictly to vaping rathing than smoking, this still affects us. Right now what we are doing with vaping is illegal, since it is illegal to import electronic cigarettes as per Health Canada, and there are no e-cigs manifactured in Canada we are all guilty. We have had the right to legaly Vape taken away from us, the article linked is just another example of how our country is moving further and further away from being free.

 

[props76]

just another example of how our country is moving further and further away from being free.

You really thought you were free?

There is no such thing. Was I ever allowed to do hard drugs? Maybe I should be, and if I was free, it would be without question. I'd be harming no one except myself. But I'm sure your response to that will be, that's a dumb example, of course hard drugs should be illegal.

Right there my friend, you become no different to those that you speak ill of.

 

[Kempton]

I am pretty sure it is only e-juice with nicotine in it that is "illegal". The e-cig itself is fine and any "0" % nicotine e-juice is fine.

In Canada, compliance of electronic cigarette use with public smoking bans is currently under review.[17] In March 2009, Health Canada called for the immediate cessation of imports, sales, and advertising of electronic smoking products containing nicotine, and advised Canadians not to purchase or use any electronic smoking products. Under the Food and Drugs Act, electronic smoking products containing nicotine require market authorization before they can be imported, marketed, or sold. No market authorization has been granted for any electronic smoking product.[10]

You see that it states "containing" nicotine. So it is just the E-juice. And as I know quite a few "law" enforcment people who use these and their wives. I'm not too worried about "health Canada" kicking in my door.

Actualy we do need to worry as this is merely another example of the rights being taken away from everybody, just more obvious with smokers.

Even though if you have changed strictly to vaping rathing than smoking, this still affects us. Right now what we are doing with vaping is illegal, since it is illegal to import electronic cigarettes as per Health Canada, and there are no e-cigs manifactured in Canada we are all guilty. We have had the right to legaly Vape taken away from us, the article linked is just another example of how our country is moving further and further away from being free.

 

[illandreth]

I am pretty sure it is only e-juice with nicotine in it that is "illegal". The e-cig itself is fine and any "0" % nicotine e-juice is fine.

E-cigs without nicotine is useless for me. The whole point of me switching to e-cigs was to get the nicotine without all the tar, co2, 4000 chemicals etc. I won't used the "approved" NRTs as I have seen and heard of too many side effects. Zyban I cannot get based on medical history, Chantrix has that nifty suicidal side effect, as for the patch, my mother never had a heart problem until she went on the patch and it nearly killed her. Cleared up nicely after she went off the patch and back to smoking analogs....figure that.....

 

[Nuck]

Hopefully they would require science to back the proposal with studies showing cause and effect within the units. Of course, there is little hope this will be the case.

Props...analogies in any debate are worthless. Hard drugs are not a legal product.

illandreth, you are absolutely correct. The apathy of Canadians has resulted in an increasing erosion of personal freedoms over the past 50 years. Many think that if the issue doesn't directly impact them they don't need to worry about it. They're wrong.

 

[nojoyet]

Read this on CTV webpage today. Is this Canada's version of ASH?

Hi illandreth
My opinion, not necessarily fact, is that CTV have an anti-smoking bias. They have backed off considerably in recent months after a heap of enough already comments from viewers but it seems to be popping up again locally.

It comes in waves, like nausea.

There are very strong anti-smoking groups in this Country and presently much pressure to ban smoking in apts./condos and that is not all. Give anti-smoking, non-smokers rights, etc a Google or p.m. me and I'll find some links for you.

Hi Nuck
"The apathy of Canadians has resulted in an increasing erosion of personal freedoms over the past 50 years. Many think that if the issue doesn't directly impact them they don't need to worry about it. They're wrong."

You are very right and it is time we all smartened up!

Certainly impacted a wheelchair bound and blind 94 year old relative who lived for several years in a facility. Imagine making her wait for a push and then someone to reluctantly stay with her while they sat in an uncovered and unheated courtyard. At least that was private, I understand they now have to go out to the parking lot. This lovely person smoked for 74 years and amazingly had no smoking related illness but got more than her/anyone's share of smoking related punishment. IMHO that is targetting, cruel and certainly not in any way better for her health or her escorts' than allowing her a comfortable indoor space. In fairness, it was a very good facility.

 

[SquirrilahFish]

dont you guys have ...... clinics?

 

[props76]

You are very right and it is time we all smartened up!

Its not us or "all" that need to smarten up, its the people who want to tell other people how to live their lives that need to smarten up.

MADD is a great example of just how stupid the do gooders are. Their ad where "my son was killed by drinking and driving" tear jerker, always turns out their son was tanked and drove off a bridge with their 5 friends in the car. The fact that they were well over the limit, and we have laws on the books for that right now, doesn't even stop them. How anyone with any self respect would do anything other than hide their face in shame is beyond me. Instead they look for pity, while pressuring for stupid laws, where now if I have a beer with dinner there is a realistic chance that although legal not drunk (under .08 but over .05) I'm going to get my car stolen by the police, license taken away without trial, and brutal insurance rates.

The stupidity here is beyond belief, as it is with all the non-smoking non-sense.
But to some people, being and idiot that organizes this stuff is not just a hobby, its their life, its what they are about, its the root of their sole. To fight this sort of ..... you have to devote just as much effort at they do.

You can't possibly fight everyone of them.. You have to pick and choose your battles. To me, the apartment smoking ban is not enforceable. What are they going to do, send the police to kick your door down? So its best just to ignore.

 

[TheRealRob]

Props.. I hear ya.
Sometimes I feel like collecting all those idiots up and shipping them to another planet where, they can all go live peacefully together and let the rest of us get on with our normal lives.

 

[Nuck]

How is drinking and driving in any way related to the personal freedom to indulge in a legal product in your own home?

When I was a bit younger a full 50% of the accident fatalities involved alcohol. I suspect the number is similar today. It doesn't "always" turn out to be some kid getting trashed and running off a bridge. It involves adults getting trashed and running over some 6 yr old on the sidewalk who was unlucky enough to be out playing that day.

First you use illegal hard drugs and now you turn to homicide and those silly people that try to reduce it. You really need to work on the analogies.

 

[props76]

How is drinking and driving in any way related to the personal freedom to indulge in a legal product in your own home?.

With all due respect, you are a bit slow on catching the similarities..

Last I checked alcohol is a legal product............

Don't even go there on 50% of accidents involve alcohol. Most accidents happen in rush hour, and bad weather, open your eyes. Most days on the way into Toronto in rush hour you will pass at least 1 fender bender. You think someone is hammered at 8am on their way to work? 3 am on the way home from the club or bar its rare to see a crash. The 50% figure is pure BS fed to you be the MADD "tell you how to live your life" type idiots.

The fact that they lie, and will tell you anything, from 50% of acidents are from drunk driver, to second hand smoke is more harmful that 1st hand, shows you how far this sort will go to try and control your life in accordance with their standards.

What is also scary is that people buy that BS.

 

[Nuck]

With all due respect, you are a bit slow on catching the similarities..

Last I checked alcohol is a legal product............

Don't even go there on 50% of accidents involve alcohol. Most accidents happen in rush hour, and bad weather, open your eyes. Most days on the way into Toronto in rush hour you will pass at least 1 fender bender. You think someone is hammered at 8am on their way to work? 3 am on the way home from the club or bar its rare to see a crash. The 50% figure is pure BS fed to you be the MADD "tell you how to live your life" type idiots.

The fact that they lie, and will tell you anything, from 50% of acidents are from drunk driver, to second hand smoke is more harmful that 1st hand, shows you how far this sort will go to try and control your life in accordance with their standards.

What is also scary is that people buy that BS.

You desperately need a course in critical thinking. Reread my last post a bit slower:

It mentions that 50% of accident fatalities involved alcohol.

Alcohol is a legal but consuming it past the point of intoxication and then operating a motor vehicle is not. There is a reason for this..drunk drivers kill people. There is an endless supply of statistical data to support this and the laws are based on the science behind it.

I grabbed this from the Madd site to see if the stats were similar to when I was younger, given the greater awareness of the issue:

"According to Transport Canada, road crashes involving a driver who had been drinking killed 864 people in 2000. Legally impaired drivers (i.e. those with a BAC over 0.08) comprised 422 of those casualties, or almost half. A further 90 deceased drivers had a BAC of 0.08 or lower."


I found these when trying to get the exact numbers:

"More recently it has been reported that alcohol contributes to nearly 30 percent of all Canadian traffic fatalities and 44 percent of traffic fatalities in the United States. [2]"

Driving under the influence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I checked one of the sources and it was the Toronto Star Jun/07 so it's pretty recent.

Now the real issue is the freedom to indulge a legal product in your own home that has no evidence that it affects those in attached living units. If studies prove that there is quantifiable harm being done to others, then the law would be logical. Without those studies the law becomes invasive and should be contested by all Canadians, not just smokers.

I look forward to your next post involving some other criminal activity.

 

[props76]

Again you miss the point.

Drinking and Driving is not illegal.. Yup read that one again...

Being drunk and driving and driving is.. No one in their right mind is in favor of some guy 100x over the limit killing people. But we already have laws in the books to deal with that.

The problem we have is when someone comes along, and takes something that is not a problem, drinking a reasonable amount and driving and making it a problem.

That's the same as the no smoking in appartments bs. Taking something that isn't a problem, making it one, so they can tell you what is right to do.

 

[Nuck]

Again you miss the point.

Drinking and Driving is not illegal.. Yup read that one again...

Being drunk and driving and driving is.. No one in their right mind is in favor of some guy 100x over the limit killing people. But we already have laws in the books to deal with that.

The problem we have is when someone comes along, and takes something that is not a problem, drinking a reasonable amount and driving and making it a problem.

That's the same as the no smoking in appartments bs. Taking something that isn't a problem, making it one, so they can tell you what is right to do.

Ok..I'm out.

 

[nojoyet]

dont you guys have ...... clinics?

Hi Squirrel

Just a little off topic!

If you're interested in learning about harm reduction strategies in Canada regarding those issues have a look at
http://vancouver.ca/fourpillars/acrossCanada.htm

or Google

 

[lxor]

What do the politicians you elect do year after year? They create laws. To admit the laws are unnecessary/burdensome is to admit the politician is unnecessary, and most of them would rather die than admit this. They feel far to important, there are careers to consider, and many are far to untalented to venture into the private sector.

I'm not even going to discuss bureaucrats, but quite a bit could be said about their motivations.

Don't want smoking in your building? Fine, declare this before people move in


Democracy does not equate to freedom.

 

[CBWPowder]

Okay just wanted to jump in and make a quick point on the drinking and driving thing and then will go onto the e-cig ban.

Several years ago i got ...... off at MADD and their ****. I started looking into alcohol and trafiic fatalities. Did some digging and found documents online from Stats Canada. They are gone now or impossible to find because it's impossible to find anything on Stats Canada's website. Back on point. These documnets tracked blood alcohol levels in accidents causing fatalities. Now I don't have the numbers anymore but in the majority of these accidents, around 85%, the blood alcohol level was over 3 times the legal limit of .08. Meaning these people were blasted. Not just over the legal limit but at the point of passing out.

Now back to the e-cig ban by Health Canada. When I first started looking into e-cigs about a month ago i did alot of research. Found some extensive research done in NewZealand that was very interesting and informative and also came across the Heath Canada thing. So I wondered what Heath Canada had found that the scientists in NZ hadn't. Couldn't find any Health Canada finds online so I decided to call them. Spoke to several people and finally found out that Health Canada has done zero research on e-cigs and has no intention of looking into them until someone spends the money to apply to them to import/sell them legally in Canada. What the hell is Health Canada there for? Why are they not looking into this? and why would the ban them if they know nothing about them? These are the questions I want answered so I ask the same thing of my local MP. I am waiting fr a response and suggest everyone here do the same.

Sorry about the long post it just pisses me off and when I'm ...... I rant. Happy vaping to everyone and i can't wait until i get my starter kit.

 

[Canadian1]

I had to reply to this,

Drinking kills, this we know. It kills drinkers, drivers, and bystanders. Pretty simple mathmatics. Smoking kills, smokers over time, bystanders over time. Pretty simple mathmatics. E-smoking, does nicotine kill? I have no idea, no math to prove that point. Does PG kill? I have no idea, no math to prove that point. Does banning a process/substance work? Nope, look at the drug war that we've been losing for 25 years. Do studies work? Depends who funds them. Do I believe E-smoking is better for me? Yes I do. Who should you trust? That's completely up to you...