Montreal Smoking
According to the Montreal Gazette the blogosphere has some interesting posts on the change for smokers in Montreal. I had not seen too much on this but clearly this is a major social change so I thought I would do my own research.
Doing a Google Blogsearch on ‘Montreal Smoking’, I got the following top three items:
Last: Part II – 3 June 2006 by Vila H.
Some took seats in the non-smoking section, and no one bothered to stop them.
It occurred to me that we had all come for the same reason: to be here on the
last night of smoking in Montreal, before our small corner of the world changed. …
The Smoking Section – http://thesmokingsection.blogspot.com
Smoke – 30 May 2006 by Grad School Avenger
Which brings me to the Montreal smoking ban. I have always been in favour of smoking
bans in general, even though they have also always elicited a primal terror in me.
I have never been willfully naive about the dangers of smoking, …
Avenger’s Mansion – http://avengersmansion.blogspot.com
Montreal Goes Smoke Free May 31st – 29 May 2006 by Adrian
Montreal, a city known for the love of cigarette, goes smoke free on May 31st.
Had you told anyone this ten years ago, you would have gotten a strange look.
Montreal, and all of Quebec, have always been known as a smoker’s haven. …
Adrian’s Lemon Juice Blog – http://adrianspeyer.blogspot.com
So Google doesn’t seem to have found too much on this. Actually there’s a new kid on the block this week in searching for blogs. That’s ASK. It has some nice features but the search on blog posts didn’t turn up anything particularly relevant on Montreal Smoking. Perhaps that shows that most folk are accepting without too much protest the sound logic of this important change. So let’s all breathe easy.
A city of 3 million, and all we have to talk about is the smoking ban. The last 7-8 posts revolved around this subject. It’s really getting annoying.
I wish somebody would write more about something interesting going on in this town.
Cheers,
Actually Ask.com has been around for over six years. You may have also known it as AskJeeves.com. They were up concurrently for a long time, but it seems Jeeves has left the building.
I’m sure there will be another smoking post Wednesday night.
The new thing, Frank, is that now Ask has a blog search that is completely independent of the normal web searches via ask.com. If you use askjeeves.com it still gets redirected to ask.com.
Oops, Sorry Barry, I missed that part. Thanks.
I’m in agreement with Thomas
“Montreal, a city known for the love of cigarette”
O_o
Is smoking really that bad?
With all these government-paid ads on TV, radio, daily papers and magazines saying not only that all smokers will die from tobacco consumption, but that “second hand smoke” will cause the death of thousands non-smokers, many people now believe that only by standing next to a lighted cigarette, their life expectancy will go down the drain.
The truth is that second hand smoke kills less than flu, pneumonia, traffic accidents and many other things(1). The public health crusaders want us to believe that lung cancer can only be caused by cigarettes and that all smokers will die from this habit, which is false. Only 10% of smokers will die from lung cancer(2). The cigarette consumption in Greece is higher than in North America, but lung cancer is not. People in Finland are more likely to catch lung cancer than Americans even if they smoke half as much. Why don’t we hear those facts from our politicians and the so-called interest groups fighting on our behalf?
The answer is simple: people who fight tobacco use are not caring scientists but political activists who want to impose their lifestyle to all. Those tobacco fighters are supported by junk scientists and by politicians who seek votes by alarming people.
This is not to say that tobacco is 100% risk-free, but certainly not as risky as health bureaucrats want you to believe. And even if tobacco was as bad as some say, should the state regulate its consumption? The answer is no. The mission of a state (if any) should never be to try to modify personal preferences.
State against “risky” lifestyle
The main reason why the state is chasing smokers wherever they can be found is because of our socialized health care system. This is the ultimate justification. The cost on the system would be too high and therefore we (whatever that means) must sacrifice some preferences to preserve our “free” and “universal” health care system.
“Even if tobacco was as bad as some say, should the state regulate its consumption? The answer is no.”
Now, if it’s true that a smoker will die younger, isn’t this money in the bank? Smokers could in fact save the system from bankruptcy by paying a lot(3) and not using the services, leaving beds in hospital for old “healthy” people. Also, if a large proportion of the voters and many politicians wish to have socialized medicine (whatever the reasons are), then they should not complain about paying for it. Isn’t this what “solidarity” means?
Some time ago the Quebec government mentioned they could impose a new tax on every bottle of sodas to pay for the Montreal Olympic Stadium’s maintenance. The French government is currently working to impose new nutritional requirements to the fast food industry. All companies that would not follow the new rules would not be able to promote their products trough TV, magazines and other medias. Recently, a politician in Ontario recommended that beer and wine companies selling in Canada should have caution labels on every bottle they sell. All those measures were imposed on the tobacco industry to reduce smoking.
The pattern is clear: you give one inch to the State and it takes a mile. All those laws restricting individual and commercial freedom are voted by politicians in “free and democratic” societies. Could democracy only be two wolves and one sheep voting for dinner?
In a free society, the state does not regulate peaceful economic transactions, even when the transaction concerns “risky” products such as alcohol, cigarettes and drugs. In a free society, the government doesn’t tell bar owners they can no longer welcome smokers as costumers. In a free society, the law recognizes bars, restaurants, hotels and clubs as privately owned businesses, not as “public places.”
Unfortunately, recent history has shown that the fight against tobacco is a top priority for many governments of western countries. Smokers and business owners that are threatened by the Quebec law – and non-smokers who disagree with the law – should try to resist as much as they can by doing small things such as joining any web site dedicated to smokers’ freedom.
I’m not a smoker – ok, I’ll have a cig or 2 when I’m drunk – and I think banning smoking in bars is the most ridiculous thing ever. If government wants to encourage non-smoking bars, give tax breaks or something to bars who are willing to enforce it… but to make it illegal to smoke – while getting drunk, to me, just makes no sense. It just doesn’t add up. Should it be illegal to drink too much? Or like the guy from the Rant I was mentioning earlier says: what’s next? Should screaming be illegal past 11pm, because the good people who work 9 to 5 (of which I am) need their sleep?
I was reading the editorialist of the Mirror this week and he had a great point: now that bars and discotheques are unauthorized to smoke in, what will mask the smell of people’s sweating bodies? Imagine: you’re at El Zazium on St-Denis, with it’s 7 foot ceiling, it’s 2 am, 32 degrees mid-July and the place is bopping – I’m sorry to say I haven’t yet been since June 1rst, but I can only imagine the place must reek. Please God, give me second hand smoke before the nasty BO of some sweaty dude.
Just watch now as Loft parties will become more popular than ever.
Wy do the righteous feel their way is so great, they MUST impose it on others? If smoking bothers you so much, why not move to Toronto? Toronto isn’t bad, it just might be a better fit for some people.
Let’s make some analogies, for the hell of it:
- Smoking is bad because: it’s bad for the smoker and causes collateral damage (second-hand)
- Drinking is bad because: it’s bad for the drinker and causes collateral damage (drunk driving, fights, public embaressment at office parties)
- Taking the plane to Tibet is bad because: every time a westerner goes there, stays for a month and leaves, that dude rubs off Tibet, which becomes that much more like the West and less like Tibet, until one day there will be no more interest in going to Tibet. Collateral damage: the massive amounts of greenhouse gases created by taking the plane – do you really need to go there, considering it mortgages the future of our planet? let’s make it illegal, it’s for our best.
*sigh* then people wonder why I love the Habs so much. It’s because when you’re watching the Habs, the problems of the world aren’t a worry for about 2 hours. Except when Zednik is coming off the wing while holding his stick with only one hand. CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ZEDNIK TO HOLD HIS STICK WITH TWO HANDS!!!
GO OILERS!
oh, and here’s Gilles with une grosse 50
The Smoking ban in Montreal is severe and ridiculous….
I think the ban is ridiculous and severe.
And how come we didn’t get to vote on it? Are we not a democratic society?
You know…this is just the beginning….There are now talks about banning perfum in public places! I kid you not! Hey, the natural odor of swing is fine but not Chanel no 5? Or other cheap substitutes? Yeah, I really want to get a good wiff of BO from my work collegues….
Arrrrghhh…When I moved to Montreal 20 years ago, I fell in love with this city, the lowlifes, the mutli-ethnic favor of it, the bar life, the general europeen feeling, eating a delicious meal and then having, in the smoking section, a nice cig to top it all off etc…Everybody fit in, freaks, buisness types, moms, kids etc. And seriously, it feels like it’s slowly dying and becoming more…well, like Toronto. Hvae you been to thebar in Toronto? They suck.
I hate the arguments against smoking. I hate it when people tell me what I can and cannot do but still snort up the tax money I fork out to enjoy myself in my little habit. I like ads and campains that encourage people to stop smoking. That’s fine.
Sure, they love collecting cig taxes and have no trouble taking them for whatever projects they want to do but tell us we can’t smoke anywhere. Hypocrites.
If I continue on their stupid train of thought (they don’t want to pay for our health care because we supposedly drain the health system big time), this is what comes to mind:
We should ban abortion!!! We all pay taxes that go into health care which then fund abortions. Why should I pay for this? I’ve never had one and maybe I’m against it, maybe I’m not. Why should I have to pay for all those dumb girls or rape victims!!!! – They knew birth control exists!
We should fine all obese people who have 20 or more extra pounds on them!!!
When they get older, they will be riddled with health problems…I don’t want to pay for their triple bypass surgery!!!!! Screw them! Ban them from all public places!!! The sight of them makes me sick!
Oh, and we should also ban people who screw without condoms!!! I’m not going to pay for medical treatments for people who get infected through sex! Let them die!!!!
They had sex without condoms!
We should also limit alcohol consumption in bars to 2 glasses per person…Because medical science has discovered that 2 drinks a day is ok but not more, it’s very unhealthy!
We should ban alcohol now that I think about it and serve tea only – because coffee is bad for you too.
And we should publicly hang anyone who does not obey these laws because to throw them in jail…Well, it costs us money we shouldn’t have to fork out because WE ARE GOOD HEALTHY PEOPLE AND WE ARE BETTER THAN ANYONE WHO DOES NOT OBEY US AND THEREFORE ONLY PEOPLE WITH AN IQ OF 140 OR MORE WILL BE ALLOWED TO VOTE!!!
AND THEN! WE WILL RAISE INCOME TAXES BECAUSE AFTER BANNING ALL THIS, THERE WILL BE NO MORE MONEY. WE SHALL ALL LIVE FOREVER AND EVER!!!!
All I know is, as a society with a universal health care system, we should accept all health problems. That’s the f’ing point of a universal health system.
If not, lets go private, hey I’ll be the first one to sign up because this system sucks anyway. By the way, does anyone know of a good family doctor who still accepts patients?
I’ve been looking for over two years.
Anyway, I just want to vent this one. It’s kind of useless because all the crazy non-smokers are completly unreasonnable to discussion anyway.
Feels good to know I’ll make their blood pressure rise a bit and bring them that much close to a stress induced heart attack.
PS: Passive aggressive behavior should be banned also. :)
Two weeks late and still whining… so sorry for you.