No Typical Raver

TORONTO, Ontario (AP) -- Smokers were required to light up outside across much of eastern Canada Wednesday, as one of North America's most restrictive bans went into effect.

Smoking already has been banned from most workplaces across Canada but the ban in Ontario and Quebec now extended to public places in general, including bars, restaurants and schools. The ban also calls on employers to close designated smoking rooms and requires retailers to ask for identification from cigarette buyers if they appear younger than 25.

Though similar bans exist in some American states, few are as restrictive as the bans launched Wednesday in Ontario and Quebec, according to anti-smoking advocates on both sides of the border.

"We are very pleased we finally have province-wide legislation protecting all workers and the public from second-hand smoke," said Peter Goodhand, head of the Ontario division of the Canadian Cancer Society. "This landmark piece of legislation is one of the toughest in North America and will save lives."

Not everybody was happy with the ban, however.

"Where do they draw the line, honestly?" Richie Hutton, a cook at a downtown bistro said while on a smoke break on a city street. "Pretty soon they'll tell me to stop eating chicken because the person next to me is allergic to it."

Canada is considered a global leader in its efforts to ease its citizens off tobacco. It was the first country to require graphic warnings on cigarette packages. Nine of the country's 13 provinces and territories have now passed smoking bans prohibiting cigarettes in the workplace and public buildings, bars and restaurants.

"My general impression is that those laws are probably stronger than the laws in the States and I pay tribute to all of you in Canada," said Daniel Smith, national vice president for the American Cancer Society in Washington. "We need these types of laws because we know, scientifically, that second-hand smoke kills."

The bans also calls for partial restrictions on advertising signs and countertop displays for tobacco. By 2008, retailers will be forced to hide cigarettes under countertops or inside cabinets, with "power-wall" displays of cigarette brands banned entirely.

Still, only Ireland, Norway, New Zealand, Bhutan, Uruguay, Scotland, Bermuda and Puerto Rico have smoking bans in restaurants and bars nationwide. A ban on smoking in pubs across Britain has been adopted by the House of Commons and is now before the House of Lords.

The province of Quebec has the highest percentage of smokers in Canada, with 23 percent of the population lighting up, though down from 34 percent in 1998, when the government banned smoking in the workplace. Only 19 percent of Ontario residents smoke -- the second-lowest provincial percentage in Canada.

The Canadian Cancer Society estimates 19,300 Canadians will die from lung cancer this year.

--------------------------------------------------

honest to god, i'd cry if cleveland did this. tears of joy. i can't stand it

__________________
King of the Hullaboard as voted by my peers.

Everybodies_Daddy

It was so nice to go home from a bar or a party and not smell like smoke.

This ban will save taxpayers billions of dollars in health care expenses, doctors, and medical infrastructure over the next several years.

Awesome!

__________________
Dirty Little Secrets

Hot + Dirty

anabolic frolic

the smell of a rave has changed from cigarettes to BO and farts.

No Typical Raver

thanks for my new sig frolic!

DJ Saiyan

I feel so bad for all the bars, clubs and restaurants who spent thousands of dollars putting in specific smoking rooms when the last ban when into effect.

Second hand smoke kills. We know this. If you don't want to breathe in second hand smoke, DON'T GO IN THE FUCKING SMOKING ROOM.

But NOOOOOOOOOOO.

That's not enough.

Give the smokers a place to go indoors? Nope, can't have that.

Oh but wait.

Let's take away smoking OUTSIDE from them too! Patios! You can't smoke on fucking patios anymore!

__________________

DJ Tranzit

honestly, i think it's complete bullshit. (these new smoking laws).
i was in the middle of writing out a big long winded reply, but im too tired to finish, so i'll just leave it at that.

the jist of it was, i have no problems with the laws in place. they are good.
but, this is over the edge.

__________________
Future Perfect Synergy - Gigs Of Free Audio & DJ sets, Event Galleries + So much more

** New - Dj Tranzit - This Is Why I'm Hot - 60 min hardcore fuckery ***

Snuffy

Meh.. I think the idea of second hand smoke killing is rediculous. People are getting paranoid for nothing.

No Typical Raver

you can have my cancer then

DJ Tranzit

i agree second hand smoke is something a non smoker should not be victum to, however they are fighting to remove smoking from almost all areas entirely.

the way I see it is this..
if you don't give the smoker's a place to go, they'll congregate outside of doorways and whatnot. The non smokers have to walk right through there... If they had a seperate smoking section (like most places do), then there wouldn't be that gauntlett of smoke outside each entrance of bars.

If it's so much of a problem, why don't they just make smoking illegal all together?
I'll tell you why. Because it's great tax dollars. They won't take it away.




AND... people want to legalize marijana.
Seriously. common.
Where will THAT be legal to smoke?

They'll be a whole new realm of complaints.
I don't feel like sitting somewhere and getting high because someone else is.
Are they going to make 4 designated areas now?

Hello sir.. welcome to Swiss Chalet. Which section would you like?
- Cigarettes Only
- Marijana Only
- Cigarettes And Marijana
- Straight Edge

Glyce

ROTFLMAO ^^

Our smoking laws now state there is no indoor smoking except on private property if allowed and you must be 50 feet away from the entrance of a public building or 15 feet away from a restaurant. It's kind of annoying for me, but I hate smoking inside anyway.

__________________
Take a look and see, the light still shines in me, In my eyes!

DJ Tranzit

I'm really not much for smoking indoors either.
I found when I used to smoke in my old apartment, I'd literally sit at the computer or infront of the TV, and before I knew it, i'd be 1/2 a pack in.

It's a terrible habit, and one I do want to shake sooner than later.. I've found myself weening off of them slowly, but I still have bad days where I'll inhale 1/2 a pack over 24 hours..

Right now, i'm more or less down to:
1 - way to work
1 - lunch break
1 - way home from work
1 - somewhere around 8pmish
1 - about 30 mins before i go to bed

other than that, I'll smoke when I drink, and when I'm driving. Whenever I get in the car, it's like routine to light up. I find for myself, its not so much the physical addition, as I can go a day without one and not even notice, but the mental addiction. I relate certain activities with smoking. (after meals, getting in the car, drinking)

I will say this much, that having a non smoking girlfriend has made a big difference. Although she may not complain (or say she minds), it still gives you a bit of a kick in the pants not to smoke around them, which in the end, makes you smoke less.


just some observations.

heatheraloo

That looks like my smoking schedule... but weed of course... bong hits mostly.

It is weird though, that its PROVEN ciggys cause cancer and it has just been PROVEN by a 30-year study that weed does NOT cause cancer.. but Imma go down to the gas station to buy some PROVEN cancer causers. This just goes to show the ignorance. Justin Timberlake smokes weed... and is also baffled by the "illegal-ness" of it. Ahh.. we just need more CELEBS to condone it.. we all know THEY really are the ones that influence us.... lol.. so it seems..

__________________
*~*CaFfEiNe KiLlS*~*

PLUR makes my privates tingle

DJ Tranzit

^ that's one of the most ignorant statement I've seen/heard all day.
As a smoker, I'm not defending it. By no means. It's a terrible habit, I'm trying to quit.. It's not easy. At all.

But, having Celebrities endorse or condone something does not make it right in ANY regard. Take for example, this whole deal with Mel Gibson. Should be all have anger directed towards Jews now?... just because he thinks it's ok (or did at the time)?

Of course not.
Justin Timberlake is hardly a "stand-up" celebrity. He was a teen idol pop sensation, who's "band" fizzled off, he broke loose and kept going as a solo artist. He'll be done in a few years I'm sure.. I wouldn't be suprised if we see him on "The Simple Life" in 10 years (or less!).


Everyone preaches how great weed is. Why.. because it mellows you out, tains your judgement, it makes you laugh at most anything, and you've got a severe case of the munchies? Sure.. these things don't directly cause any harm. I agree..

buuuuuuuuuut... take a few puffs, get in the car, and your judgement is tainted. Your motor skills are affected... As you're "slowly" driving down your street, a 3 year old runs out infront of you on the road. You're baked out of your mind.

So what.. you're only doing 15 miles/hour in a 25 miles/hour zone. (You're high right.. so you're driving "mellow").. Still... 15 m/hr will give that toddler a pretty serious hit, knock them down, and most likely run them right over/drag them for a second before you realize you've just murdered a young child.



I could go on with a ton of other references, but I'll leave it at that.

Legalizing weed = no good reason
The people who actually NEED it, get it medically. Sure.. go ahead.. have a puff all you people with glocoma (sp?), arthritis (sp?), and other problems.

But, all you teens/young adults (even grown adults)... what's the fuckin' big deal.. You want to legalize weed because you like to smoke it... great reason you dolt.


What if a couple thousand people liked something along the lines of raping woman. They like the trill of it.. the fight.. the struggle. Should we eliminate the laws against rape now? Obviously not.



I really don't understand some people.

Snuffy

Yes! I can't believe "those people" either, especially considering how well prohibition worked. During the time when alcohol was banned, drunks and crime just vanished!... It was so amazing! Really!

the architech

yeah Tranzit, your argument doesn't really stand up. I mean, I agree with the driving thing, but you could just make driving under the influence of weed just as illegal as driving under the influence of alcohol.

bottom line, it shouldn't be legalized just because we want it to, but the right to smoke it shouldn't be denied when there really isn't a good reason to. weed isn't really hurting anyone (no more than alcohol). I agree that nobody needs weed, but nobody needs cigarettes or alcohol either. hell, nobody really needs ice cream or candy bars either. should we deny people the right to consume those things just because they don't need them?

I'm no pothead, but I can see how stupid marijuana being illegal is. I've been to Amsterdam and lemme tell you, there isn't chaos in the streets or car-grills with small children stuck in them.

__________________
Playgrounds and the City
Radical Reconstruction

DJ_RaNdOmKiD

If I saw that durring prohibition I would have been drinking like a fish just to ensure a lack of contact with any of those lips!!!

DJ Tranzit

and how do you suggest they check for things like driving under the influence of marijana?

they have a breathalizer for alcohol, but that doesn't work for marijana.
I believe you have to do blood or urine tests to find traces of THC correct?

so much for roadside checks.
I have no problem with people who like to have a puff here and there. I just really don't appreachiate people doing it right beside me, then, if I ask them to go somewhere else to do something illegal, they look at me like i'm an asshole.

Drinking a beer beside someone doesn't get them drunk.
But, smoking weed will give those in the immediate area a buzz, or if they catch enough of it, they'll get a bit high, im sure.

Now, if you want to rebut, and compare it to smoking, I completely agree.
Smoking should not be done around those who don't want it. Hence, why they have banned it in public places. I'm for that... and, if they ever make it illegal, I won't start yelling about it. I'll be pissed off, as I'm an addicted smoker, but I'll learn to quite pretty fuckin' quick.

Getting back to the driving thing.. Let's say we legalize it for use within your own home, but solely there. You want to stay at home, get baked, etc... sure thing. But, if you drive, high, then there's a VERY serious fine for it.
Whereas alcohol there is an easy way to determine it, with weed, there isn't..

so, if you ARE found driving impaired (I'm not sure how they'd do this), then instead of a temporary suspension or a loss of licence, you'll loose your licence for an indefinate 7 years + $5000 fine.

That'll sure make people think twice.. right?

Glyce

yeah. it would. As far as checks. They just have to have probable cause to haul you in. If you seem really stoned, or they smell weed, etc. They can take you in and deal with you there.

the architech

yeah, I mean they already do that practically. any minute evidence that there's weed, they search the car and haul you in. I wouldn't be too surprised if a marijuana breathalizer was invented. just because it doesn't exist yet doesn't mean it can't be. besides, the alcohol breathalizer doesn't even work that accurately. the police end up hauling you in and re-testing you anyway.

and I don't mean to sound cocky and referencing Amsterdam constantly, but seriously, it's fine there. the only people who make a big deal about it are the tourists. I mean, if you smoke you smoke and if you don't you don't. the residents don't really care either way (not that I saw at least). you keep it to smoking in your house or designated hash bars (we've all seen Pulp Fiction). there aren't people smoking on the streets and in your face.

heatheraloo

I was obviously kidding about the Justin Timberlake thing, duh.

And I agree with everything the architech said, excluding the "I'm no pot head" remark. He put it very nicely, with the candy bar comment and everything.

And raping women has NOTHING to do with making weed legal, thats the "most ignorant comment I've seen/heard all day" (idiot). Obviously women dont want to be raped, so there is a crime there.

But smoking weed doesnt HURT anyone else just as much as whatever else YOU want to do to YOUR body wont hurt ANYONE else. So sure, cut off your own finger, if you're into that sort of thing, no one can arrest you for it; it's your body, your life. But if your high... (off weed, caffeine, life) and you lets say drive and hurt someone, you will be responsible for the consequences... just as much as someone driving recklessly but completely sober would get in trouble for it.

Its not only that I want to make weed legal b/c I like to smoke it, but also b/c of the 8563958390 other benefits... to name a few.. medical reasons, cut down on crime, less prisoners, more help for those truly addicted, gov't help (students loans, gov't aid) for those "convicted" of a marijuana infraction--and shit, the gov't could tax on it, and give the money to the public school systems.

Tranzit is a moron.....if they made ciggys illegal you WOULD bitch about it... and get them illegally..and no one SHOULD tell you different, cuz you're only killing off yourself and whatever offspring may come of you...

heatheraloo

I agree with her ^^^

DJ Tranzit

still, you completely miss the point.

By smoking weed in public, you ARE affecting others. By me smoking cigarettes in public, those who are inhaling my cigarette smoke are inhaling deadly toxins. It's not their choice to smoke. They want nothing to do with it, but because I am, they are now exposed to it. Just the exact same way that if you smoke weed at the table next to me at a restraunt on the patio, I could be getting high from the smoke off of your weed. I don't want to get high, but because you are, now I am too. That's hardly fair.

I know this seems like a null and void argument, as I smoke cigarettes, but still, I have a right to complain, as it stands, with Canadian law. Cigarettes are not illegal. Weed is.

ANYONE will tell you, that I will not light up right beside them without asking, or already knowing that they are ok with it beforehand. Same thing with anyone who gets in the car with me. Even though it's my car, and I should be able to have a smoke in it while driving if I want, I still ask the passangers if they mind. 75% of the time it's ok, but sometimes it isn't. In those cases I'll have one outside of the car before I get in, or just simply hold off.

When I'm in the car of someone else, I don't smoke unless they are smoking too. I never smoke in the car of someone who is a non smoker, even if they say I can and they don't mind.


Now, as a point to be made:

I have a terribly sore throat today, from a pretty popular cough/cold/etc that's going around. I've had it for the past 2 days. I generally smoke 6-10 cigarettes a day, on average. In the past 48 hours, I've smoked less than 5 thus far, most of them only 1/2 way through, just enough to give me a little bit of nicotine to supress my craving. Why, because I have the will power to regulate myself most of the time. I have no doubt that if I needed to, or had to, I could quit. I just don't want to at this time.



Now, calling me a moron is just silly. I have stated this before, and I'll say it again, that if cigarettes became illegal, I would quit. No questions asked. It's deadly. Hospitals are over-run as it is, and smokers are filling up valuable beds with their problems they wouldn't have, if it wasn't for smoking.


Ok.. i'm done my little bit of a rant, now i'll go ahead and pick apart your post, showing how rediculous it is.

How would it affect the economy? I have no clue. Health care costs would most likely go down, but there would be a lot less tax revenue come in off the sale of cigarettes, so would it even out, or would it be lop-sided? I for one, couldn't even hazard a guess.

DJ Tranzit

were we really supposed to know that?
Here's you're post.

"This just goes to show the ignorance. Justin Timberlake smokes weed... and is also baffled by the "illegal-ness" of it."

Can you please show me where there's sarcasm, or a joking tone noted there?
Keep back-pedling. You're going nowhere.
yes, in general terms, you're correct.
But, use this in context. I said that as an argument against what you said (below - in blue)

Ahh.. we just need more CELEBS to condone it..

I brought up the fact that if thousands of people liked to rape women, should we make it ok to do so? Of course not.. But, going along your lines of thinking, that "thousands of people think it's ok to smoke weed, so why can't it be", I came up with that analogy. Yes, I used extremes, but maybe now you'll understand how off the wall some of these statements you make truely are.
Of course there is. Who wants to be raped? Nobody. It's "against their will".
If it was willingly, then it wouldn't be rape, now would it.

So, compare that to this..
I don't want to be subjected to the smoke from your marijana that you are smoking ILLEGALLY. So, does that mean that you are (in a way) raping me with marijana smoke?
see my post above - specifically the first main paragraph
No, you do affect others with your actions.
Sure, it's your body, but who's paying the tax dollars when you go to the hospital with an infection due to that finger..

Oh, and you can be arrested for attempted suicide.

Although generally they won't arrest you, they'll just throw you into a mental hospital. But... wait! Who pays the bills for that? Everyone else.. tax payers.

So, yes.. your actions affect EVERYONE.. not just yourself.
You need to open your eyes and see the reality of things.. the big picture.
wrong again.
If you're driving recklessly, you can be charged with reckless driving, speeding, etc.. whatever the case may be.

but, if you've been drinking and are above the legal limit, you will ALSO be charged with impaired driving.

With your theory that we should allow people to smoke weed then get behind the wheel, why don't we let people have a few drinks then drive too? It's the same general thing. Your judgement, vision, motor skills, etc are all impaired.
ha. there's very few real advantages of smoking weed.
I'd challange you to name 5 that apply to YOU, that you can't achieve in other ways.
Name even ONE that applies to YOU.
You're joking right? Because the drug dealers would be out of a job? HA!
Look at the big picture. If a drug dealer can't sell weed and be profitable anymore, they are going to move onto other things.
Cocaine, Pills, whatever. Drug dealers generally only know one way to make money. Selling drugs. Just because they can't sell (and make a profit) off weed anymore, do you think they'll trade in their scales for a pair of work gloves and a shovel so they can start doing hard labour?
Guarenteed, no way.
again, you're not serious are you?
the people who go to jail for dealing maijana ONLY is next to none.
It's the large grow operations, and things of that sort.
Many dealers that are busted not only deal weed, but other drugs as well.

If a street dealer gets busted, they may spend a night in jail, but are fined.
These fines pay back into the system. There's no money lost here.
So, by making it LEGAL, you're going to help those truly addicted?
How? By giving them more, but this time its legal?
Please explain this.
wait.. did i read this right?
You're going to give student loans and government aid to those "Convicted" of maijana infractions?!

Are you fuckin' crazy?!
If that's the case, i'll go out and commit some marijana infractions of my own so I can get a student loan. My parents make too much fucking money, so the government won't give me one! Wow.. what an easy way out. Not only am I making some dirty money, but getting even more free money from the government.

I'll agree on this.
Sure.. the tax dollars WOULD be a benifit. There's no doubt about it.
But, lets face it. That money wouldn't go to education. Some of it may, but the majority would go to other things, such as the deficit, and things of that sort. Regardless, it's to things Canada needs to pay off, but the benifit here is only a drop in the pan, compared to the flood that is the negatives.

see my post above.

the architech

actually I think I completely addressed that point by noting that it would make sense for weed to be regulated to one's own home or established hash bars.