F**ked up new Ontario law on selling cigarettes

[Niccolo and Donkey]

So I'm grabbing a few things from the variety store down the street and I notice that the cigarettes on display have all been removed. I ask the manager what's going on, and he tells me that there's a new law in which stores that sell cigarettes cannot display the cigarettes openly any more. Wow.

Cigarettes are like dirty magazines from the 1950s: they're gonna start selling them in brown paper bags, but only after you say the appropriate password.

[Niccolo and Donkey]

Don't want to start another thread, but I can't wait for this:

http://www.mobilemag.com/content/images/15310_large.jpg

[raven]

So I'm grabbing a few things from the variety store down the street and I notice that the cigarettes on display have all been removed. I ask the manager what's going on, and he tells me that there's a new law in which stores that sell cigarettes cannot display the cigarettes openly any more. Wow.

Cigarettes are like dirty magazines from the 1950s: they're gonna start selling them in brown paper bags, but only after you say the appropriate password.They seem to be doing whatever they can in Ontario to fuck over smokers. I don't smoke but come on. Does Ontario really need to babysit people that much? Blowjobs can cause oral and throat cancer (via the HPV virus) too. Are they gonna start banning those?

[Golobulus]

They have the same law in B.C.

[Crowley]

If you smoke as a daily habit you are being suckered anyway, so who cares?

[Crowley]

If one grows one's own tobacco does the Canadian ATF break the door down in the middle of the night?

[Kodos]

Whoever the power company in Toronto is has a shitty group of engineers that can't make up their minds too...

[Jake Featherston]

If one grows one's own tobacco

There's an interesting idea. I wonder how I'd go about obtaining some tobacco seeds.

[Ahknaton]

More business for cigarette smugglers hey?

[Crowley]

There's an interesting idea. I wonder how I'd go about obtaining some tobacco seeds.

Grow lights in the closet. You know they now have LED grow lights which are handier, safer, draw less power, and hardly heat up.

[Geist]

Here's theres a plan to ave no logo on the boxes. You'd just have warnings on them. Its PC gone mad!

[Ahknaton]

Pro-smoking site I found today:

http://www.smokingaloud.com/

[La Cosa Blanca]

Oh my goodness, for crying out loud... Just don't smoke then. Already started? Too bad. There are more important things on Earth to worry about than some stupid little sticks that serve no purpose.

[Count Eustace II]

Well it's a sign of the times where filthy politicians make mountains out of molehills to scare the shit out of Sally Soccer Moms to enable easy passing of draconian laws that further breakup the gathering places of Gentiles, isolating and dividing White folk even further.

[La Cosa Blanca]

Well it's a sign of the times where filthy politicians make mountains out of molehills to scare the shit out of Sally Soccer Moms to enable easy passing of draconian laws that further breakup the gathering places of Gentiles, isolating and dividing White folk even further.

Most politicians are filthy or serving some different agenda if not their own, yes. But scare tactics have always been a good way of keeping people in check though. Even with disciplining or safeguarding children. There is also nothing wrong with Draconian laws, unless you are the offender... Dividing "white folk" and breaking up the gathering places of gentiles? Don't be so sure of such intentions yet.

Have you ever thought that sometimes some governments might actually be doing things that are beneficial and well meant towards their citizenry? Either intentionally, indirectly, or unintentionally?

[Count Eustace II]

Have you ever thought that sometimes some governments might actually be doing things that are beneficial and well meant towards their citizenry? Either intentionally, indirectly, or unintentionally?

No, absolutely not. Government does nothing but serve it's own filthy, greedy, corrupt agendas to maintain its full power and control into perpetuity, regardless if it benefits the People or not. The sleight-of-hand that government employs through its controlled media easily tricks the People into believing that the government actually works for the People.

Smoking cigarettes is but a mere trivial issue, possibly a small nusiance to some, and has been around for decade upon decade upon decade. It's just in recent years that the issue has been blown out of proportion to further divide and conquer people. Government perpetuating it's total domination over the People it's supposed to serve by fearmongering us to death.

Cigarettes were smoked everywhere back in the more free days in America and I don't recall our Civilization collapsing or mass deaths from second hand smoke. Our civilization is collapsing nowadays because of Political Correctness run amok though.

[Felix the Cat]

It's the damned Baby Boomers. They all used to smoke when they were younger, but when they entered their 40s (ie. the 1990s), and started worrying about their health, they quit.

And because they run the country they're trying to make everybody else quit as well.

[Jake Featherston]

Oh my goodness, for crying out loud... Just don't smoke then. Already started? Too bad. There are more important things on Earth to worry about than some stupid little sticks that serve no purpose.

Tell it to the politicians who want to fuck with people who like to smoke.

[harjit]

It's the damned Baby Boomers. They all used to smoke when they were younger, but when they entered their 40s (ie. the 1990s), and started worring about their health, they quit.

And because they run the country they're trying to make everybody else quit as well.
Former smokers seem to be the most militant anti-smokers.

[Jake Featherston]

Former smokers seem to be the most militant anti-smokers.

Yes, indeed. It was actually the 1980s when the anti-smoking hysteria began. In the 70s, most adults smoked, and few bothered to quit. But almost imediately after it wen't 1979 to 1980, all sorts of people started quitting, and they all started claiming (although you don't hear this one as much anymore, thank God), that they were now "allergic to tobacco smoke," and so they tried to make it seem as if you were being unreasonable by smoking in their presence. Even as a little kid, that used to irritate me. The blatant fucking lie that a person who was a pack-and-a-half-a-day smoker last year, is now suddenly "allergic to tobacco smoke" was just too much for my young brain to handle.

[Felix the Cat]

California was ahead of the curve as usual. This hysteria only arrived in Britain in the 1990s (at least that's when I first noticed it)

As for "allergies", the reason most kids under 15 begin coughing and wheezing the moment they enter any remotely smokey/dusty enviroment is because children nowadays are no longer exposed to tobacco smoke in their parents' homes

[La Cosa Blanca]

Tell it to the politicians who want to fuck with people who like to smoke.

Well, there wouldn't have to be any fucking around or telling people what to do in the first place if nobody smoked that much or even bothered with the act...

The occasional pipe, cigar, or such once in a while or ceremonially, sure. But the way the modern distraction addicts have become with smoking their mass produced sticks is ridiculous... Using more than one a day, drying up the air in their dwellings, and constantly wasting money on more packs.

[Felix the Cat]

^^ that's a problem of excessive smoking, not smoking per se

Whereas the current antismoking hysteria makes no distinction at all between the two

[Jake Featherston]

Well, there wouldn't have to be any fucking around or telling people what to do in the first place if nobody smoked that much or even bothered with them...

The occasional pipe, cigar, or such once in a while or ceremonially, sure. But the way the modern distraction addicts have become with smoking their mass produced sticks is ridiculous... Using more than one a day, drying up the air in their dwellings, and constantly wasting money on more packs.

The concept you need to familiarize yourself with in this regard is "freedom" or "liberty." People should be allowed to make stupid choices (and its not necessarily a given that smoking tobacco is a stupid choice*, although it is widely perceived as such). Their family and friends should make some limited effort (or not-so-limited, depending on the severity of the stupidity in question) to dissauade them from making stupid choices, but the government should stay out of it. It should be legal to shoot yourself in the head, if that's what you're into.

Anyway, what's next? Banning John Grisham novels because people should be reading better books? And who gets to decide what is so stupid that it gets banned/regulated/taxed/harassed, and what isn't? And what's the likelihood their judgement will be any good? Smoking is bad, but taking it up the ass from twenty strangers is your fucking civil right. I'd say society has bigger fish to fry than smokers (who actually save society money by dying younger).


*For example, I really didn't start smoking until I was in my 30s, so the likelihood of my having to face respiratory illness and the like from it are small, as I'll probably be dead before I've logged enough years as a smoker to face such issues. Must lung cancer and emphysema cases are old enough to join the AARP, and have a 15 to 20-year head start on me as smokers.

[Jake Featherston]

^^ that's a problem of excessive smoking, not smoking per se

Whereas the current antismoking hysteria makes no distinction at all between the two

Indeed. I've been smoking a lot less these last 2-3 days, and I find I enjoy it more that way. So I plan on smoking less as a general rule, for the purely selfish reason of getting more pleasure out of it. The financial & health benefits are an added bonus.

[La Cosa Blanca]

People should be allowed to make stupid choices.

Ohohoho, No! Hell no.

Only one is bad enough and the most tolerable in my opinion, and should never be repeated again once immediately learned from.

Their family and friends should make some limited effort (or not-so-limited, depending on the severity of the stupidity in question) to dissauade them from making stupid choices, but the government should stay out of it.

More should be done and more effort shown than that. Things could be much better.

It should be legal to shoot yourself in the head, if that's what you're into.

That can be, but some heads are too valuable though. Not that the valuable heads often shoot themselves anyway...

Anyway, what's next? Banning John Grisham novels because people should be reading better books?

More people should read better books. More people... Not all.

Indeed. I've been smoking a lot less these last 2-3 days, and I find I enjoy it more that way. So I plan on smoking less as a general rule, for the purely selfish reason of getting more pleasure out of it. The financial & health benefits are an added bonus.

No surprises here.

Good for you I guess.

[Jake Featherston]

I'm all in favor of a society that tries to bring out the best from its people, sort of like how NS Germany did, but I think there's a limit to how much coercion should be used. Many/most people should be reading more and better books than John Grisham, but once they're passed the age of compulsory schooling, I don't see how the state achieves that. A bunch of people all doing the right thing, because they're scared of being punished if they don't, doesn't strike me as a desirable outcome.

[La Cosa Blanca]

I'm all in favor of a society that tries to bring out the best from its people, sort of like how NS Germany did, but I think there's a limit to how much coercion should be used. A bunch of people all doing the right thing, because they're scared of being punished if they don't, doesn't strike me as a desirable outcome.

No, not ideally achieved or most desirable at all. But that is what it may have to come to if one day there is just no other way or it has become so hopeless.

Many/most people should be reading more and better books than John Grisham, but once they're passed the age of compulsory schooling, I don't see how the state achieves that.

It all begins with creating the right people. Then the right environmental factors and stimuli, proper raising, etc... But that is mostly a story for another time that doesn't have anything to do with smoking.

[Kodos]

Former smokers seem to be the most militant anti-smokers.

Ex addicts of any drug (unless its crack or something that really is harmful from the get go, in all cases and with almost no benefits) tend to be the most militant and fanatical in opposition.

They have to convince themselves that they hated and always hated it or else they'd go back to their addiction.

[Remote]

It's been this way in my state (in the South) for several years now; all cigarettes are sold from behind the counter.

Grocery stores have a special checkout line you have to get in with all your stuff if you want to buy any.

You can't just pick them up yourself and check out with them; you always have to ask for someone to get them for you.

[Józef Piłsudski]

It's been this way in my state (in the South) for several years now; all cigarettes are sold from behind the counter.

Cigarettes have always been sold from behind the counter in Canada. With this new law, shops cannot display cigarettes at all. It so absurd, that my local cigar shop had move all its cigars to a back room and now I have to look through a magazine to order my cigar.
------

Was this a federal or provincial law? I live in the GTA, but attend school in Montreal, and it appeared that both provinces enacted the law at the same time.