|
New Draconian Smoking Law To Take Effect June 1 in Ontario
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
Just when you thought they couldnt ban anything else except the actual cigarette, Dalton Mcguinty proves us wrong again by coming up with even more creative ways to be our babysitter.
My question is, when will nanny stop? I guess the answer is when we force them to. This being Canada that most likely means never.
And then they wonder why tourism is at its lowest in 40 years? LOL!! DUH!!!
| quote: |
The irony of Ontario's new smoking laws is that law-abiding citizens are treated worse than law-breakers
Anybody wonder if they'll ever actually put smokers in jail?
Give them time because if you weren't already feeling like a pariah, wait until June 1!
You already have to smoke outside, will be fined if you smoke in your car with your kids -- and soon will no longer be able to see your brand of cigarettes on the counter thanks to a new law saying they must be covered from public view.
A routine purchase will become a clandestine operation -- something like buying contraceptives was before the AIDS crisis. No wonder people are flocking to the smoke shops on aboriginal reserves where the prices are often 50% lower and where the rules and regulations are less rigid.
But it will be interesting to see if the Smoking Cops will even dare to venture into some of the reserve smoking trailers and make sure they are complying with Ontario's new display ban. Or will they just nail the small retailers -- the ones who charge full price and collect the appropriate taxes.
UP TO $5GS
Neha Gor, at the Thomas Convenience store on Lake Shore Blvd. W., has not yet installed the customized cover for her "power wall" of cigarettes, which technically means -- as of June 1 -- she will be in violation of the new Smoke Free Ontario law. She could face a fine of $400 to start and it could eventually go up to $5,000. "We will be installing it," she says.
The problem is the installers are so busy right now. More than 5,000 of the province's 15,000 stores that sell smokes have not yet met the requirements.
The main point that needs to be made is if a law-abiding business person like Gor, who is selling a legal product, ends up being fined, the smoking fuzz better get out there and do the same with those who are not quite as law abiding -- specifically the illegal sellers who prey on children near schools with a van full of every cigarette brand available.
The ministry of health promotion insists nailing mom-and-pop stores is not their interest, but promoting health is. Hopefully, the smoke inspectors, employed by individual community health units, are hearing what is being implied and don't take the parking assassins' zero-tolerance approach.
These small stores are already being put through the wringer -- with the loss of the advertising revenue from big tobacco companies and the fact they have to pay up to $2,500 to make the changes to their stores. To nail them now could put some out of business and would not be a nice way to treat the very people who collect millions of tax dollars for the province.
Meanwhile, some stores are smartly ahead of the curve and have already started the clumsy practice of selling these hidden cigarettes that everybody knows they have. At the Holy Smokes location in a Loblaws plaza, along Queen's Quay, you'd almost think they were no longer in business. The closed shelves look just plain weird. And it's going to get worse, too, since their cigar humidor, as of June 1, will no longer be open to customers.
"They will have to choose their cigar from a list and we will go in and get it," said employee Tabatha Carey, adding that eventually the humidor will be covered too.
This is a smoke shop, for heaven's sakes. Everybody who goes in there knows what they sell.
"It's back door prohibition," says Arminda Mota, president of MyChoice.ca, a tobacco company-funded lobby group which is trying to fight this spirited onslaught of the powerful anti-smoking tree huggers. "They are treating us like kids, but still collecting billions in tax dollars."
She argues this is akin to putting alcohol back behind the counter at the liquor store on the grounds that booze kills people, which it does. And you could argue to hide away potato chips, pop and lottery tickets, too, since as Mota says: "They are all bad for you."
With the enormous cost of cigarettes, and with this latest bureacratic remedy, the black market can only grow. Ontario Convenience Stores Association president Dave Bryans says that's the part that bothers him the most -- the fact that the people selling cigarettes legally are being treated worse than those who sell them illegally.
"This is a dumb law that only a moron could come up (with)," says occassional cigar smoker Cliff Goldstein. If I were a retailer of cigars I would not obey it. Retailers have a right to display their wares. I, as a customer, have a right to see what I'm buying before I buy it."
Not in healthy Ontario after June 1, buddy boy.
|
The irony of Ontario's new smoking laws is that law-abiding citizens are treated worse than law-breakers |
|
|
| Cosmic Fur |
| I disagree. All retailers are going to play dumb with, "oh we're just displaying our wares," but everyone knows they're just trying to tap into the smokers cravings by making it impossible to miss seeing cigarette packs whenever you go anywhere - gas stations, convenience stores. They're exploiting people's addictions to cigarettes, plain and simple. |
|
|
| Skipper |
I wonder if you made smokes $100/pack, the laws of supply and demand would kick in.
lol @ draconian, so dramatic! |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
I disagree. All retailers are going to play dumb with, "oh we're just displaying our wares," but everyone knows they're just trying to tap into the smokers cravings by making it impossible to miss seeing cigarette packs whenever you go anywhere - gas stations, convenience stores. They're exploiting people's addictions to cigarettes, plain and simple. |
If its a legal product should they not have the right to display it for sale and legal consumption just like any other product? This whole excersize is just plain stupid and actually kind of scary. What's next on their agenda? Fatty foods? Alcohol? Women? All bad for your health as well! (Especially women) hahahah |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
I wonder if you made smokes $100/pack, the laws of supply and demand would kick in.
lol @ draconian, so dramatic! |
I would say that "dramatic" is forcing everyone to hide their product behind plain unlabelled brown shields. The law even says that you cannot even ask a retailer which brands they have. You have to know what you want before you go in. Im thinking that buying nuclear material for a dirty bomb on the black market will be easier than buying a pack of smokes soon. LOL! |
|
|
| Skipper |
| Honestly I didn't even read the article. I'm just LOLing at the new phrases you throw in to your nanny state posts. |
|
|
| Cosmic Fur |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
If its a legal product should they not have the right to display it for sale and legal consumption just like any other product? This whole excersize is just plain stupid and actually kind of scary. What's next on their agenda? Fatty foods? Alcohol? Women? All bad for your health as well! (Especially women) hahahah |
but why do I never see any other product other than cigarettes behind the cashier? |
|
|
| iant56 |
will the store fronts still be plastered with
'19+'
'WE ASK FOR ID'
'WE ID UNDER 25'? |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
hiding cigarettes does nothing to stop people from smoking....its the Government trying to satisfy all the non-smokers who think their 16 year old will start smoking because they see cigarettes behind the counter....how about putting the chocolate bars behind the counter because your fat ass kid keeps eating them.
what bothers me the most is that the stores have to front the money for these renovations. If the government is enforcing this then maybe they should front the money for it. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
but why do I never see any other product other than cigarettes behind the cashier? |
Because by law they were supposed to be back there. In the 80s they banned consumers from holding the product before they bought it. Thats also why in the 80s the smoke vending machine was banned in Ontario. Another first.
The government makes rules, then complains when you abide by them.
Ontario only seems to lead the way when it comes to bans. If only we were this innovative in entreprenuership and job creation! |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
Honestly I didn't even read the article. I'm just LOLing at the new phrases you throw in to your nanny state posts. |
Perhaps you should read the article then? |
|
|
| chico |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
If its a legal product should they not have the right to display it for sale and legal consumption just like any other product? This whole excersize is just plain stupid and actually kind of scary. What's next on their agenda? Fatty foods? Alcohol? Women? All bad for your health as well! (Especially women) hahahah |
they are just restricting it, despite being legal it is potentially harmful and they want to keep it out of view from kids going into stores which is just an extension of banning advertising of smoking products. they have done it with alcohol which is restricted to LCBOs unlike many other countries where you would see it openly in the supermarket. you also wouldn't see guns in a glass cabinet at the corner store when you pick up your paper.
all these things have age limits so i would interpret it as preventing encouragement of young people before they are old enough to make educated and mature decisions.
women also have age limits, but they are harder for government to monitor the distribution of.
fatty foods don't cause specific damage to health unless mis-used over a period of time. although this is also true of alcohol, it carries other dangers on a more immediate basis due to it's intoxicating effects hence requires monitoring. whether this is true of smoking is entirely debatable. |
|
|
|
|
