Comments on: Smoking trucker story – still smokin’

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:28:51 +0000

# Jon Says:
October 14th, 2009 at 6:40 pm

@ RW:

âNo, Jon, smoking is not the âbig dealâ hereâ

Thatâs almost a side-issue. Itâs mainly about big corporations still being allowed to sell highly addictive and, utlimately, lethal âproductâ.

Cheers!

Would that include alcohol too? As I hear no one moaning and bitching about that….and it is so much worse!!

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:14:38 +0000

@ RW: “Jon, thatâs a nice red herring ”

I’m an ex-smoker whose sympathies are with smokers.

Cheers!

By: JAKOMO

JAKOMO — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:25:35 +0000

I heard on the news that the RCMP solve only 1 out of 10 serious crimes, I’ll bet that also applies to city cops. I guess they are too busy doing the easy stuff like like sitting in ‘our’ cars and giving unwarranted tickets to honest hard working people. They could be doing what they are paid for – solve crime.
I thought we lived in one country, but it seem like we live in a bunch of small satellite countries: I just came back from Quebec where I bought two cartons of cigarettes for $45 each, in Alberta we pay $81 for the cheap brand.
In one province you break the law for one thing, in another it is legal.
I am sick and tired of people who have obviously never lived in the real world, and the little shysters who get elected, somehow, and then ‘run’ us as dictators would; that is not representation, that is not what we hired them for. We pay them, but that’s not enough so they tax us as they please and the money disappears – I think that is how the American revolution started, NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION – let’s face it, we do not have representation…
That my friends has everything to do with anti-smoking laws and the excuse for raising taxes on cigarettes, your freedom of choice has been removed, the government gets most of the money from the sale of tobacco. Next they will be (are) targetting obese people. Now they want to ‘privatize’ health care, in Alberta anyway. Who is next, or what rights will be removed tomorrow – it will not end until the people make it end.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:22:42 +0000

“Thatâs almost a side-issue. Itâs mainly about big corporations still being allowed to sell highly addictive and, utlimately, lethal âproductâ.”

Jon, that’s a nice red herring you’ve got there, but your line of thinking is obvious. You’re anti-smoking, so instead of coming right out and lobbying for it to be banned (A SIDE ISSUE), you’re supporting using petty nanny-state tactics as an alternate method to get the same thing done via harassment and intimidation by the police. Is this the way you want society to function?

Your anti-smoking hysteria has blinded you to the core issues around this incident. Your readers get it, why don’t you?

By: Thomas

Thomas — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:18:07 +0000

Coulter is quoted as stating, âbutting out while driving also eliminates one more distraction, says the story, adding she compared it to, âtalking on the phone and driving, which has recently been outlawedâ.

âThey deemed that to be a distraction,â says Coulter. âSo lighting a cigarette, to me, is a no-brainer.

Is this Police spokeswoman an idiot? Talking on the phone while driving has indeed been outLAWED by those who are elected by the people of the nation to draft, enact and bring into force law.

So far there is no law on any book or any study to craft a law that states that cigarette smoking in a car causes accidents or exaggerated distraction from the road.

THE POLICE DO NOT MAKE OR DECIDE LAW they are only there to enforce LAW which has been duly passed by the elected representatives of the people.

This man should contest the ticket – he will win because there is no law against smoking for that reason and a truck cabin does not constitute a workplace in which more than two people carry on business as per the very law she is trying to use as an excuse for abusing her authority.

I won’t say abusing her power because the police have no power to create law on a whim of opinion in the first place.

By: nonsmoker1

nonsmoker1 — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:12:04 +0000

So, the cigarette is bad for him but all of the toxic chemicals that are flowing from the engine and into the air/vents, cabin are good as mom’s apple pie? I suppose the people breathing the exhaust of every car in front of them are breathing pristine air.

Are cigarettes bad? Yes, no doubt about it – but if you live in a major city Cigarette smoke is the least of your worries toxic air wise.

“Thatâs almost a side-issue. Itâs mainly about big corporations still being allowed to sell highly addictive and, utlimately, lethal âproductâ.”

So is Alcohol – what is your point?

By: arny

arny — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:09:46 +0000

For all that are stating that it is about the freedom and using your own tax dollars to provoke, humiliate, taunt, and just show pure stupity.
I’m all for ya. I am not a smoker and I hate it with a passion, but like stated it has nothing to do with that.
I hate the way this country ties up the courts with such stupidity and rapist,child molester, murders, thieves from big corporate fraud to tax scam artists have back room deals made with thieving lawyers.
Then there is this hard working trucker trying to scratch out a living when this overpaid pom pas, over pensioned civil servant parasite lays a charge of $300 to his already overtaxed fuel, income, and even the very cigarette he was smoking in his own f’en truck.
Give me a break only in Ontario home of Bob Rae and all those other idiots the run the province.
Wish those parasites would go out and get a real job in the private sector.
There should be a tax revolt in this country and make these idiots accountable

That’s it I’m done

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:00:03 +0000

Alcohol any different?

Does it affect other besides the one takng it?

Does it impair driving?

Does it cause medical costs to go up for everyone?

etc etc etc

Now lets look at high salt and high fat and high sugar products. Rinse & repeat.

Who here is going to slay the pillsbury doughboy? (poke in belly button: Teeheehee)
:/

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 21:40:39 +0000

@ RW:

“No, Jon, smoking is not the âbig dealâ here”

That’s almost a side-issue. It’s mainly about big corporations still being allowed to sell highly addictive and, utlimately, lethal ‘product’.

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 21:37:38 +0000

No, Jon, smoking is not the “big deal” here, FREEDOM is! It’s all about freedom from micro-management of the nanny-state do gooders. Smoking is merely a rung on the ladder when it comes to those who will bring tyranny for ‘the greater good’.

BTW, Neil MacKenzie is clearly not grasping our rich Canadian heritage of individual liberty over collectivist interests. That’s OK. He’s not a politician, just a low-level bureaucrat on a power-trip. These are the same types of people that would like to regulate many other facets of your life for ‘your own good’, such as what you eat, alcohol consumption, what TV you watch, what you say, what political opinions you keep, and so on…. it never ends. Could you picture the absurdity of this finger-wagging ninny running across a corn-field to a farmer operating a big combine?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 21:11:12 +0000

Lets not pretend smoking doesnât kill or harm (or the organics and inorganics used in it to make the nicotine delivery to the brain as fast as possible, which is more toxic than tobacco itself).

let’s also not pretend thats what this is all about either. thats why wipo lied too. It’s about second hand smoke.second hand smoke which has proven to be harmless and wipo tried to suppress it. it’s about people that make up hazards to fear to stop others from doing something they don’t like. it’s about the fact that someone doesn’t like a stinky smell so makes up a bunch of lies to force poeple to conform to their standards. second hand smoke hamr has been proven to be a myth and wipo tried to hide it since liberty restricting laws are based on this lie. nice sidestep tho

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:20:53 +0000

http://www.ohscanada.com/issues/ISArticle.asp?aid=1000343878
Neil MacKenzie, the manager of tobacco programs for the Windsor-Essex County Health Unit, said even a farmer’s enclosed tractor would be considered a work environment.

“Whether or not you have the sunroof open or windows down … it’s an enclosed workplace and you’re prohibited from smoking in that vehicle,” MacKenzie told Windsor radio station CKLW.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 20:01:37 +0000

a nice and slow convoy blocking the roads there and some trucks with defective brakes on the highways that can’t roll will do

By: al

al — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:56:31 +0000

If the truckers got together and threatened to not bring the goods to and from ontario i bet that rule would be changed dam quick.
this trucker should demand his money back and an apology from the idiots who thought this one up.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:55:39 +0000

JAKOMO, if you work at home then it is against the law. Maybe someone will call the cops on you?

By: JAKOMO

JAKOMO — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:48:02 +0000

Don’t ever tell me not to smoke in my home, on my property or in my vehicle; those are mine. Before you tell me not to smoke outdoors, take a good hard look at the emissions from the oil and gas facilities, as well as all other industry emissions, all the way down to your vehicle exhaust; when you have stopped those (which you will never be able to do), then try and take away my freedom. Yes, the time for Canadians to fight for their rights, all their rights is near, very near.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:38:23 +0000

funny how the opp fined the truck driver. truck drivers are usually the first to come to the aid of a police officer when they are in a bind on the side of the road or when they are pursuing someone.
the officer should be fired just because of this fact.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:18:58 +0000

Tobacco company tried to cover up smoking risks: Report
http://www.montrealgazette.com/Tobacco+company+tried+cover+smoking+risks+Report/2102888/story.html

Lets not pretend smoking doesn’t kill or harm (or the organics and inorganics used in it to make the nicotine delivery to the brain as fast as possible, which is more toxic than tobacco itself).

However, this is not the issue of the last two stories, so we can all leave the kitten and baby killing out of the comments since it adds no value to this trucker being stopped and fined for smoking in his own truck which is fed regulated. BTW: they went to the Minister with this (ie prov vs fed laws) and the minister refused to comment.

Next they will stop you from eating a twinkie if you drive beacuse it’s a distraction and an artery clogger (which is the #1 killer in Canada). This outlawed?

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:06:22 +0000

That badge… interesting! Paul McCartney wore it on his Sgt. Pepper band uniform, but in photos it appeared to say “O.P.D.”…

…which pundits at the time said stood for “Officially Pronounced Dead”.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:59:12 +0000

Gotta link to back that up? I find that hard to believe. Convince meâ¦

ok, as soon as you provide a link to one death 100 percent attributable to second hand smoke and nothing else deal ? no list of stats. a real confirmed case with no other potential cause.