TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Health Officials Calling for Ontario Drinking age to be raised to 21
Pages (2): [1] 2 »


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-01-2008 19:53:

Health Officials Calling for Ontario Drinking age to be raised to 21

Remember, today's suggestion is tomorrow's law. This is the same mcsquinty that said last year that outlawing smoking in cars with kids is a "slippery slope" law and now supports it. He also said about a tire tax "no tire tax, no way" in 2005 and now seems to support it.

quote:
TORONTO - Ontario's legal drinking age of 19 does not need to be raised to 21, Premier Dalton McGuinty said Tuesday as he dismissed a call from public health officials in London, Ont., to consider changing the law.


The board of health in London voted 4-3 Monday to request that the legal drinking age be increased to 21 as part of a series of measures to fight alcohol-related deaths and injuries.


But McGuinty said he believes the parents of teenagers would do a better job of stopping young people from drinking than tougher laws.


"If you're going to rely on the law to ensure that your kids aren't drinking underage, then you don't have a good understanding of human nature," he said before a Liberal caucus meeting.


"While we have a law in place which I think has struck the right balance, it's also really important for parents to take a real interest in what their kids are doing, to try to impress upon them the dangers associated with drinking alcohol."


Ontario's legal drinking age was originally lowered to 18 from 21 in 1971, but was increased to 19 in 1979 after complaints that too many high school students were getting drunk.


Only Alberta and Manitoba have the legal drinking age at 18, while it's been 19 in the other provinces and territories since the 1970s.


The London health unit voted to ask other public health agencies in Ontario to endorse its proposal and to lobby the province to change the law after a report from medical officer of health Graham Pollett said alcohol was a factor in 6,000 deaths a year in Canada.


Other measures endorsed by the Middlesex-London Health Unit called for the legal blood-alcohol limit in drivers to be lowered from 0.08 per cent to 0.05 per cent, and for a zero blood-alcohol limit for drivers under age 21.


A 2007 survey of student drug use in Ontario by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found 61 per cent of students consumed alcohol in the past year, and 26 per cent reported binge drinking in the four weeks before the survey.


Other statistics showed 12 per cent of drivers still attending high school got behind the wheel within an hour of having two or more drinks, and 26 per cent reported riding in a car with a driver who had been drinking.


The Gazette, the student newspaper at the University of Western Ontario in London, reported Tuesday that the board of health's actions could be disastrous for business at local bars, but could be a real boon for "entrepreneurs of Ontario's fake ID industry."


Posted by MarkT on Apr-01-2008 20:06:

So you disagree with the proposal (as do I), and McGuinty said no to it as well, but you're still finding a reason to bitch about it?

I think it's safe to say that something proposed by ONE city's dept. of health (barely passing the motion at that) is not going to trigger any action on the part of the provincial gov't.


Posted by trancechaos on Apr-01-2008 20:09:

On another note, i think the city of toronto is running out of things to ban.


quote:
TDSB considers ban on homework during holidays
Tuesday, April 01, 2008 - 07:53 AM
By: 680News staff


Toronto - The Toronto District School Board is considering a ban on homework during March Break, Christmas and other significant holidays.

After weeks of consultation with parents, teachers, principals and community members, a series of recommendations was proposed, including no homework other than reading with parents for kindergarten students.

Students in grades 7 and 8 should be limited to an hour of homework daily and that homework should only cover material already covered in class.

The policy, which still needs to be tweaked, would be expected to be voted on by mid-April, with a plan to implement it by the fall.


Posted by FunkyCrew on Apr-01-2008 20:17:

WHAT!
quote:
Students in grades 7 and 8 should be limited to an hour of homework daily and that homework should only cover material already covered in class.


Posted by Yohan on Apr-01-2008 20:27:

What needs to be done is to lower the age to 16, and increase education efforts to teach about the negative effects of alcohol.

Oh, and enforce the laws with stiff penalties on drunk driving and such.

When you ban something, people will go around and do it regardless.


Posted by capo tutti di on Apr-01-2008 20:29:

This has been brought up and swatted back down atleast 3 times in my lifetime and many, many, many times before.

Good Press for health and youth conscious voters, but in the end cutting out 19 and 20 year olds would effect our revenue and local establishments who serve alcohol significantly.

If this idea has any seriousness, it certainly won't happen without a huge battle ensuing, which would likely take years anyways.


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-01-2008 20:48:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
So you disagree with the proposal (as do I), and McGuinty said no to it as well, but you're still finding a reason to bitch about it?

I think it's safe to say that something proposed by ONE city's dept. of health (barely passing the motion at that) is not going to trigger any action on the part of the provincial gov't.


its health depts that usually first reccommend most bans in this province. So i am very worried that this is even being discussed.


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-01-2008 20:49:

quote:
Originally posted by capo tutti di


If this idea has any seriousness, it certainly won't happen without a huge battle ensuing, which would likely take years anyways.


thats what they said about smoking


Posted by *~LiSa-LoO~* on Apr-01-2008 23:45:

If you're over 21, who cares!


Posted by ChemEnhanced on Apr-02-2008 00:01:

I say make the drinking age 33........anyone caught drinkingh underage should receive a miximum of 25 years in jail and a $1,000,000.00 fine.


Posted by SkyHigh on Apr-02-2008 00:27:

I was 21 when i started using my real ID..

(Didnt have one before then)


Posted by MarkT on Apr-02-2008 00:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
its health depts that usually first reccommend most bans in this province. So i am very worried that this is even being discussed.


yeah...but this isn't even a provincial office. It's London, ON. Who cares. *they* can't even agree as it passed 4-3, lol.

I'll become concerned when several major units band together and decisively call for something to be done.

once again...businesses should be banding together and saying "fuck that" very loudly to their MPPs.

with the # of places that would be impacted, collectively that's a pretty damn loud voice. How many licensed establishments are their in this province? And if even a fraction of them said "we will vote for your opposition if you support this recommendation"...it DIES right there.


Posted by devnull on Apr-02-2008 00:29:

quote:
Originally posted by trancechaos
quote:
TDSB considers ban on homework during holidays
Tuesday, April 01, 2008 - 07:53 AM
By: 680News staff


Toronto - The Toronto District School Board is considering a ban on homework during March Break, Christmas and other significant holidays.

After weeks of consultation with parents, teachers, principals and community members, a series of recommendations was proposed, including no homework other than reading with parents for kindergarten students.

Students in grades 7 and 8 should be limited to an hour of homework daily and that homework should only cover material already covered in class.

The policy, which still needs to be tweaked, would be expected to be voted on by mid-April, with a plan to implement it by the fall.



no wonder people are getting dumber and dumber. lets face, the high school system here doesnt prepare people for higher education!

when i moved here from QC and went to college....i ended up with a bunch of high school idiots that made the school dummy down the program in many ways to ensure the students still pass lol


Posted by devnull on Apr-02-2008 00:31:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
thats what they said about smoking


they should ban smoking in high school for students. Its not legal for them to buy smokes, why should they be allowed to smoke ...


Posted by DigiNut on Apr-02-2008 00:40:

Well, this would definitely guarantee results with the young voters come next election.

What they really need to do is lower the age to 12 and legislate a 4-pint minimum per day.


Posted by malek on Apr-02-2008 01:05:

more buisness for us.


Posted by revival on Apr-02-2008 01:09:

Jez. the local paper called me today asking for my thoughts


Posted by jonnystel on Apr-02-2008 01:16:

meh.. its good and bad... in my opinion people should be able to drink when they understand how alcohol affects them and are mature enough to drink responsibly.. in a way ... this will just make it more of a forbidden fruit and a law that everyone will want to rebel against!

quote:
Originally posted by devnull
they should ban smoking in high school for students. Its not legal for them to buy smokes, why should they be allowed to smoke ...


+1 .. i just quit smoking.. and honestly.. the only reason i started .. was to try to fit in with a certain group of people in high school 5 years ago! i regret it now..


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-02-2008 02:16:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
yeah...but this isn't even a provincial office. It's London, ON. Who cares. *they* can't even agree as it passed 4-3, lol.

I'll become concerned when several major units band together and decisively call for something to be done.

once again...businesses should be banding together and saying "fuck that" very loudly to their MPPs.

with the # of places that would be impacted, collectively that's a pretty damn loud voice. How many licensed establishments are their in this province? And if even a fraction of them said "we will vote for your opposition if you support this recommendation"...it DIES right there.


it all starts somewhere and this is getting headlines... so..... i do worry and have reason to.


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-02-2008 02:16:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
yeah...but this isn't even a provincial office. It's London, ON. Who cares. *they* can't even agree as it passed 4-3, lol.

I'll become concerned when several major units band together and decisively call for something to be done.

once again...businesses should be banding together and saying "fuck that" very loudly to their MPPs.

with the # of places that would be impacted, collectively that's a pretty damn loud voice. How many licensed establishments are their in this province? And if even a fraction of them said "we will vote for your opposition if you support this recommendation"...it DIES right there.


it all starts somewhere and this is getting headlines... so..... i do worry and have reason to.


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-02-2008 02:17:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT

with the # of places that would be impacted, collectively that's a pretty damn loud voice. How many licensed establishments are their in this province? And if even a fraction of them said "we will vote for your opposition if you support this recommendation"...it DIES right there.


funny but that same collective opposition didnt seem to work with the barrage of smoking laws that were imposed on licenced establishments. I dont know of any that were in favour of smoking laws.

In the nanny state, nanny has the final say. period.


Posted by Jayx1 on Apr-02-2008 02:19:

quote:
Originally posted by revival
Jez. the local paper called me today asking for my thoughts


there ya go... its already gaining momentum. All you need now are the "think of the children" crowd to get on the bandwagon and its all over


Posted by MarkT on Apr-02-2008 03:25:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
funny but that same collective opposition didnt seem to work with the barrage of smoking laws that were imposed on licenced establishments. I dont know of any that were in favour of smoking laws.

In the nanny state, nanny has the final say. period.


true...but there is far less public sympathy where smoking is involved.

you can also make a much more direct correlation for businesses suffering should they drop the age to 19. smokers can smoke outside and still patronize a bar, club or restaurant...bar 19 and 20 yr olds from drinking and they have zero reason to be at that bar. given that most restaurants and clubs also pay their bills from liquor sales, it would destroy many businesses.

I just don't see public support (or apathy, depending upon how you look at it) for this law in the way that there was for the smoking changes.

I could care less, personally...but I'll happily support any effort to oppose this silly recommendation.


Posted by Geoffb3 on Apr-02-2008 13:49:

quote:
Originally posted by trancechaos
On another note, i think the city of toronto is running out of things to ban.




LOL agreed its getting a bit much ... however ... as long as teh drinking age thing doesnt happen for another 2.5 years im happy


Posted by barbina on Apr-02-2008 14:26:

oh fuck c'mon
i dont want to move to another new country


Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.