|
Mcguinty's ban-a-thon continues - If you are under 21 don't expect to have a life! (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Orko |
Sure enough...
| quote: | McGuinty seeks teens' Facebook feedback
MURRAY CAMPBELL
Globe and Mail Update
November 25, 2008 at 11:18 AM EST
TORONTO — Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty says he wants to use cyberspace to engage young people who are upset about his government's proposals to put new restrictions on the province's graduated drivers' licence system.
He said he is "really keen on hearing" from the tens of thousands of people who have joined groups on the Facebook web site to oppose the government's plans. But he said calls for province-wide public hearings miss the point because he believes young people will not come to legislative meetings.
"I think we need to find a way to get on Facebook," Mr. McGuinty told reporters today. "I think we need to find a way to engage in a dialogue in a social network where they are."
More than 110,000 people have signed on to the main Facebook site opposing the legislation introduced last week that would extend the zero-tolerance rules for alcohol to any driver aged 21 or under and increase the time it would take to obtain a full licence under the new graduated licensing scheme, which has been in effect for 14 years.
There is little controversy about those moves but there has been a groundswell of cyber opposition to a provision that would prohibit G2-licensed (or intermediate) teen-aged drivers from transporting more than one unrelated teenaged passenger for the first year of their licence.
The amendments to the province's Highway Traffic Safety Act were introduced after the Premier was lobbied by a father whose 20-year-old son crashed his speeding car into a lake last summer after an afternoon of drinking, killing himself and two friends.
Mr. McGuinty earlier called the proposal "a modest restriction on their freedoms" but seemed today to be willing to hear from his teenaged opponents. He said he wants to hear what they are prepared to undertake to keep Ontario's roads safe.
"If not this, then what?" he asked. "What responsibilities, what assurances can they provide us that they'll do what they need to do to keep themselves safe?"
The government would face one hurdle in using Facebook to deal with the new bill's opponents – government computers currently block the web site.
"We'll have more to say about this," Mr. McGuinty said when he was told about the Facebook prohibition.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...y/politics/home |
And right there is the problem. He wants to be assured some how that teens will keep them selves safe, basically saying that they cannot be trusted. So because a few are idiots, like that kid, and his father, the majority are going to suffer? It is a good first step that he wants to use a new medium to engage young people, but he obviously has a mental block, before even beginning the consultations. |
|
|
| MarkT |
here's a good one that should have people freaking out. I caught the blurb on CP24 this morning and found this:
| quote: | IN BRIEF
Hamilton eyes smoking ban in public housing
The Canadian Press
November 25, 2008
Hamilton -- The city is considering banning smoking in its public housing.
A report on banning smoking in all public housing buildings, as well as beaches and parks is expected to be released in June of 2009.
The proposed ban has raised questions about whether prohibiting smoking in private homes could be a violation of human rights. |
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...tional/Ontario/
never mind that larger issue of legislating what goes on in the privacy of your own home...but public housing obviously impacts particular socio-economic groups, so you're essentially discriminating against low-income earners and telling that they can't smoke in their own homes unless they move out of public housing? wow. |
|
|
| Intangible |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
here's a good one that should have people freaking out. I caught the blurb on CP24 this morning and found this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...tional/Ontario/
never mind that larger issue of legislating what goes on in the privacy of your own home...but public housing obviously impacts particular socio-economic groups, so you're essentially discriminating against low-income earners and telling that they can't smoke in their own homes unless they move out of public housing? wow. |
I wish smoking was illegal everywhere but your own private property.
I do agree with Mark about the 'public housing' though. It seems a bit unfair, unless there is common living areas amongst people (I am not too sure how public housing works).
But the beaches and parks... FABULOUS :) ... too bad this wasnt for Toronto. |
|
|
| FunkyCrew |
| don't we already have a law prohibiting smoking on balconies? I have a friend who complains that people now smoke inside their condos and the smoke comes through her vent |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orko
Sure enough...
And right there is the problem. He wants to be assured some how that teens will keep them selves safe, basically saying that they cannot be trusted. So because a few are idiots, like that kid, and his father, the majority are going to suffer? It is a good first step that he wants to use a new medium to engage young people, but he obviously has a mental block, before even beginning the consultations. |
well McGuinty seems to like banning things so it's no surprise that Facebook is banned too lol
|
|
|
| TO guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by dEsidEL
well McGuinty seems to like banning things so it's no surprise that Facebook is banned too lol
|
I do find it odd that McGuinty can ban Facebook for provincial employees, yet at the same time recognize the utility of it. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
here's a good one that should have people freaking out. I caught the blurb on CP24 this morning and found this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...tional/Ontario/
never mind that larger issue of legislating what goes on in the privacy of your own home...but public housing obviously impacts particular socio-economic groups, so you're essentially discriminating against low-income earners and telling that they can't smoke in their own homes unless they move out of public housing? wow. |
Why not? we have allowed it to infringe on other adult's rights. Why stop now? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Intangible
I wish smoking was illegal everywhere but your own private property.
I do agree with Mark about the 'public housing' though. It seems a bit unfair, unless there is common living areas amongst people (I am not too sure how public housing works).
But the beaches and parks... FABULOUS :) ... too bad this wasnt for Toronto. |
See my above post and use this example as exhibit A |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by FunkyCrew
don't we already have a law prohibiting smoking on balconies? I have a friend who complains that people now smoke inside their condos and the smoke comes through her vent |
Time for her to move to a detached house then |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by TO guy
I do find it odd that McGuinty can ban Facebook for provincial employees, yet at the same time recognize the utility of it. |
I find it moronic. A good example of how ill thought out socialist policies and bans are. I hope they rub mcguinty's face in this. |
|
|
| TO guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
I find it moronic. A good example of how ill thought out socialist policies and bans are. I hope they rub mcguinty's face in this. |
they won't.
As you know, politicians have been using facebook for a while now. Maybe there's a *huge* difference between the needs of the politicians and the needs of the civil service .... :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by TO guy
I do find it odd that McGuinty can ban Facebook for provincial employees, yet at the same time recognize the utility of it. |
What? Really? Unless it was being used for government business, which it obviously was not, then employees should not have access to wasteBook at work. It was conceived and introduced as a socialisation tool, something you don't need to do at work, while being paid.
If, the right people deem it to be useful for public consultations, then those people directly involved in those projects should have access to it, for the purpose of government work, not keeping in touch with relatives or friends. Until that time, I support the ban, as it was a waste of tax payer's money. |
|
|
|
|
