In Ottawa, people are not allowed to smoke inside in public places. Do you think this is stupid?

Question

People in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada may not smoke in inside places in public, restaurants, etc. It is the law. What is your opinion?

Answer 1

No. Why should I have my lungs poisoned just because someone else wants to poison theirs?

It is very simple logic.

Answer 2

Its not just Ottawa its all of Ontario.
I don't think its such a big deal. How many times do you go into a restaurant or something and people are smoking. Not everyone in this whole world smokes. And its nice to be in a smoke free area. You can breath the difference from a smoking room from a non smoking room.

If you really want something to think about, think about this.
There's a city in Ontario where a hospital has signs everywhere saying no smoking. They do not allow smoking in their parking lot or anywhere near the hospital. Workers and patients have to smoke outside on the side walk. The reason why they did this was to see if it will reduce the amount of people coming in with lung cancer and stuff.

Ontario did the no smoking law for a reason and we just have to wait and see how it turns out.

Answer 3

I think that this is not stupid.

It is a selfish think if you don't think about the others in a public place. Think about the other people who hate the smell of smoke. Also, it is not healthy for others. People who don't even smoke can get lung damage too, by being around people who smoke. That is NOT fair. Just think about it, getting someone sick for what you did. This is not a healthy world with people doing drugs, and it is getting worse every day. Smoking kills and if you're that stupid and you don't care right now, you will finally realize at one point in life how stupid you were. One person smoking does not effect only that person but others too.

I understand that peole do get addicted, but that is no excuse to stop. I know a lot of people who've done something to stop themselves.

okay well i gave a whole speech.
kind of got off subject too, but i had to put some say into it. =]

Answer 4

If smoking (i.e. secondhand smoke) actually posed a health risk to others, you could see the point of such laws (we have them in many US cities now, too.

But if you look behind the rhetoric of the anti-smoking activists, go past the official sounding pronouncements on the various websites, and look at the actual scientific reprots these that are used to justify these laws, you will find that there is not evidence of harm to others from the kind of limited exposure you get in public places. In shorte, its nonsense.

Please note--I did not make this up. For example, you can go to the 2006 US Surgeon General's report on the subject, and look at the bibliographies for the actual research studies. I did--and the"evidence" doesn't exist. Its as simple as that. Those reports--the ones that even address the topic--do not conclude that secondhand smole in public areas is dangerous. The most any of them found is that prolonged exposure--say if you are a nonsmoker married to a smoker--poses a slight risk.

But we have become such trustingsheep that we let these people continue to regulate our lives more and mored. Now NYC is banning "transfats"--telling us what we may and my not eat. Our children can now legally be monitored via their computers by (state) school officials--without theneed for a court order or all those pesky warrents and nonsense about civil liberty (no, I am not kidding--that IS being done--as a matter of policy--in seeral school shstems).

Geroge Orwell had it right--he just got the date wrong.

Answer 5

I think it is a good law. Being a non smoker is tough when you are always surrounded by a cloud of smoke whenever you get outside of your house. Imagine how people with asthma feel, or expecting mothers. Public places should be smoke free regardless of where it is.

Answer 6

This is happening everywhere, It is getting popular all over the states to ban smoking inside public buildings.

Answer 7

tobacco is a legal product on which the users pay a lot of tax. many people don't like to be around smoke, for a variety of reasons, and that is certainly their right. However; government has no business taxing a product, then prohibiting its use. Whether or not smoking is allowed in a bar should be the sole decision of the bar owner, and the only stipulation be that he/she prominently post their chosen policy. Folks can decide before entry whether or not they want to be in this place.

Answer 8

It's like that in many places all over Canada, not just in Ottawa. I'm a non-smoker, so I'm pleased with it.

Answer 9

first they came for the unionists. i didn't protest because i wasn't a unionist. then they came for the merchants. i didn't protest because i wasn't a merchant. next it was the catholics. again i wasn't catholic so i didn't speak. then they got the doctors. i wasn't a doctor so i didn't say anything. then they came for the farmers and again i ain't a farmer so what do i care. then they came for the jews. not being jewish i shrugged and thought how much better off we were without the unioniosts, merchants, catholics, doctors, farmers, and jews. now there are coming for me but there is no one left to protest. and here is another quote from the past "A lie told often enough and loudly enough will become the truth." Who said that was it Bill Clinton George Bush, Richard Nixon Margaret Thatcher or who?

Answer 10

Next they'll be passing laws to prevent poisoning the water supply! How the Ottowa government justify trying to protect non-smokers from the toxins smokers are voluntarily ingest I will never understand! It's almost as if they are trying to improve the health of their citizens!

Answer 11

I don't think it's stupid at all. Even in designated "smoking areas", people are exposed to second-hand smoke i.e. waitstaff, busboys, etc...it's okay if we want to go ahead and kill ourselves, but shouldn't other people have the choice of whether or not they want to inhale along with us?