Smoking laws coming into effect Jan. 1

[Fire]

Originally Posted by MJK

Smoking should be illegal.

It is sort of funny on how the government do all these things (anti-smoking ads, high taxes, cover on the smoke cases, no pharmacy and smokes in the same building, warnings on the packages) that cost the taxpayers and businesses millions of dollars to implement, but easiest thing they could do is make smoking/selling cigarettes illegal.

Saying that I don't think they should banned smoking because the black market would be huge and cost too much money to fight. Though I do think smokers should pay a fee for smoking related medical bills.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Fire

It is sort of funny on how the government do all these things (anti-smoking ads, high taxes, cover on the smoke cases, no pharmacy and smokes in the same building, warnings on the packages) that cost the taxpayers and businesses millions of dollars to implement, but easiest thing they could do is make smoking/selling cigarettes illegal.

Saying that I don't think they should banned smoking because the black market would be huge and cost too much money to fight. Though I do think smokers should pay a fee for smoking related medical bills.

We do. Do you know how much a pack of cigarettes costs nowadays?

[flip]

I'd like to make a somewhat off topic rant now.

Things that I hate:

Anyone who hates smoking, anyone who thinks smoking should be illegal, people who are so paternalistic and so self absorbed that they believe that their worldly views should be inflicted upon me just so they can feel better about making me safe. Anyone who shops at Lululemon, anyone who believes anything that Lululemon says isn't complete bullcrap, anyone who works for a company that forces their employees to chart their physical activity on a board for all customers to see so that they can compare and shame the non healthy people.

Anyone who does yoga, anyone who recycles everything, wears their seatbelt all the time, doesn't ever make bad decisions like smoke or do drugs. Anyone who excercises constantly but hates it, anyone who drinks light beer because regular beer has too many carbs, anyone who counts calories, or skips the Cinzeo at the mall because they'll feel guilty, skips desert or office chocalates because they're concerned about their figure.

I could go on but I have to get back to work. That felt nice. I don't think anyone should constantly indulge in their vices but anyone who is equally nazi like about avoiding them is just as addicted in my view. Moderation in all things...

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Locke

I'm all for it. I'm somewhat interested in knowing who the Ninjas on CP are though.

None of your business.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by Fire

It is sort of funny on how the government do all these things (anti-smoking ads, high taxes, cover on the smoke cases, no pharmacy and smokes in the same building, warnings on the packages) that cost the taxpayers and businesses millions of dollars to implement, but easiest thing they could do is make smoking/selling cigarettes illegal.

Saying that I don't think they should banned smoking because the black market would be huge and cost too much money to fight. Though I do think smokers should pay a fee for smoking related medical bills.

Heck, even if it wasn't illigal, I would support making a pack of smokes $30 or $40. At least it would cut down the amount of smokers!

A pack of smokes in the north is already $20.

[flip]

Originally Posted by MJK

Heck, even if it wasn't illigal, I would support making a pack of smokes $30 or $40. At least it would cut down the amount of smokers!

A pack of smokes in the north is already $20.

i would equally support making sportsbikes and snowboards $50,000 each so that people wouldn't burden our health care system with their dangerous activity.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by flip

i would equally support making sportsbikes and snowboards $50,000 each so that people wouldn't burden our health care system with their dangerous activity.

I'm actually in favour of shoes being 500 dollars because of jaywalkers.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by flip

i would equally support making sportsbikes and snowboards $50,000 each so that people wouldn't burden our health care system with their dangerous activity.

You are going to compare sportbike injury bills to smoking related bills? Good luck with that one.

[ken0042]

Just before everybody gets going about health care costs- in one of the other smoking threads (I think the Okotoks by-law one) somebody pointed out that smokers are less of a burden on our health care, as they tend to die young and not need 5-10 years of long term care when they hit 80 years old. There were number to back it up.

I suppose the same could be said for snowboarders and rocket bike riders; however I'm sure their contribution to income tax might compensate for their tax burden a bit. Whereas smokers tend to die right around the time they would be retiring.

[flip]

Originally Posted by MJK

You are going to compare sportbike injury bills to smoking related bills? Good luck with that one.

Ok, then unhealthy food.

I gurantee that health risks associated with poor diet are now FAR outweighing the burden of smokers, and if it isn't now it will be soon because the number of smokers has plumetted but unhealthy people have increased exponentially.

[MJK]

Originally Posted by flip

Ok, then unhealthy food.

I gurantee that health risks associated with poor diet are now FAR outweighing the burden of smokers, and if it isn't now it will be soon because the number of smokers has plumetted but unhealthy people have increased exponentially.

Yes, and you could be correct. But daughter Jane isn't getting sick becuase Dad is eating a big mac.

[flip]

Originally Posted by MJK

Yes, and you could be correct. But daughter Jane isn't getting sick becuase Dad is eating a big mac.

Totally agree that subjecting your children to smoke isn't right. But like I said earlier, it should be stupid people procreating that is illegal, not smoking.

As for the Dad eating a big mac one could point out that his poor diet can be poor for the genetic pool because his bad habbits are going to have an unhealthy effect on his offspring.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by MJK

Yes, and you could be correct. But daughter Jane isn't getting sick becuase Dad is eating a big mac.

But father Jane shouldn't have been smoking near daughter Jane.

That's just bad parenting.

[MJK]

Maybe if it was illegal he wouldn't have been I like to think of the illegal factor as being more of a deterrent than anything else. It would make a lot of people quit and be a lot more discrete about it.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. It was a good argument though.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by flip

I wonder how many of the anti-smoking posters like to drink, or would scream bloody murder if liquor was made to be illegal and shameful to enjoy.

Better yet, as Lululemon suggests, stop drinking pop and coffee now because they will be the cigarettes of the next generation.

Why would things like liquor and coffee be made illegal?

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by MJK

Maybe if it was illegal he wouldn't have been )

That's one can of worms that would be fun opening.

"Sorry little Johnny, you can't play with lego, a bad parent let his child play with it and he choked on some"

Bad parents.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by browna

So if were up to you, booze, cigs, harcore porn, children's toys should all be carried by the local grocer/supermarket/drugstore?

Point being, there's a place for everything, and there's enough other outlets that can carry cigarettes, and I (and enough people running the country) don't think that a store with a pharmacy should be carrying cigarettes.

As you said yourself, its the only product used in moderation that's going to kill you, and those shouldn't be in stores that are explcitly perscribing medicine.

Call it optics or window dressing or whatever you want, but I think it makes sense, and if its that big a deal to you, feel free to stop shopping at those stores that have pharmacies....you have that choice too.

It sure would.

With the current regulations already porn and smokes are covered so no one has to be hurt by seeing them. It works for macs and 7/11 to have porn and smokes. Why wouldnt it work at your local coop? does having a pharmacy in it really change anything.

One thing no on has mentioned yet is this must really suck for the stores. Not so much for the big places like co-op, safeway etc.. as it will be a small hit to the %profit but for a place like shoppers I'd imagine smokes are a larger %. Macs and 7/11 must be loving the changes, they are pretty much exclusive sellers of smokes now, their sales will probably double.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by MJK

Yes, and you could be correct. But daughter Jane isn't getting sick becuase Dad is eating a big mac.

More than the negative impact of seeing her dad eating it and learning bad eating habits that others talked about. How about the fact that if dad loves the big macs I would bet that Jane is eating McD's for dinner most nights too.

[AFireInside]

Originally Posted by MJK

Picture this:

Family of 4. Both parents smoke. Parents both die of lung cancer and then the kids develop all kinds of illnesses from second hand smoke even though they have never smoked in their life.

Good enough?

Non-smoker here..

Has that ever actually happened? Is there concrete evidence of this. If you look at the actual research. There is actually very little evidence that second hand smoke is nearly as bad as suggested.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...y-cause-cancer

There's actually an entertaining episode of Penn and Teller's bull#$% on the topic of second hand smoke.

Unless you are in an environment where you constantly breathing in second hand smoke, its likely to have little effect on you at all. You do realize that once someone stops smoking their lungs begin to repair themselves, and will eventually go back to being a nice pink. So, sorry your 5 seconds of second smoke will do little. Add to that, the only place now where you will be exposed to second hand smoke is OUTSIDE, where, unless you are standing directly next to the cigarette you'll be breathing in very little smoke anyways. Its a ridiculous argument.

If all of you non-smokers are so concerned with second hand smoke how come I don't hear you protesting large diesel trucks and suv's driving around. Surely all the pollution they create has dramatic health effects from the chemicals they put out...

Its sad to me that the government cannot dream of giving up the money it makes off of cigarettes, but is trying to keep the appearance that they want people to stop smoking. They do not, if they did, smoking would be illegal. Its not.

I just can't wait to live in a world where everything is covered in a nerf like coating, cars can't go over 50 km/hr, the only food and drinks available are made from wheatgrass, and everybody stands around holding hands singing kumbayah.

Once again, I don't drink too much (at least these days), I don't smoke, I just think the whining about smoking has gotten annoying.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Swarly

It sure would.

With the current regulations already porn and smokes are covered so no one has to be hurt by seeing them. It works for macs and 7/11 to have porn and smokes. Why wouldnt it work at your local coop? does having a pharmacy in it really change anything.

One thing no on has mentioned yet is this must really suck for the stores. Not so much for the big places like co-op, safeway etc.. as it will be a small hit to the %profit but for a place like shoppers I'd imagine smokes are a larger %. Macs and 7/11 must be loving the changes, they are pretty much exclusive sellers of smokes now, their sales will probably double.

Nothing stopping Shoppers from getting out of the pharmacy business and selling smokes instead.