Share.

42 Kommentare

  1. DogeDoRight on

    Not sure if a ban is really necessary. Smoking rates have been on a downward trend for quite some time now.

  2. WiseDebt7345 on

    Sure. let’s legalize weed, decriminalize hard drugs, and then ban smokes.

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    I am already tired of this double-standard nanny state government.

  3. VirindiObserver on

    Not sure banning things ever truly works and it’s rare for me to even smell cigarettes these days, I feel like the problem is sorting itself out.

  4. 2EscapedCapybaras on

    Will they ban possession of tobacco products or just the ability to purchase them? What about growing it yourself (you’re allowed up to 15kg per year)?

  5. Carrisonfire on

    I don’t see this applying to native reserves so it will be completely useless.

  6. ChiefRunningBit on

    I’m fine with smoking but make butt littering a federal crime. Shit make littering a crime in general.

  7. If we go this route, we might as well ban alcohol too because it’s far more harmful to society as a whole than cigarettes could have ever dreamed of being. This is just hypocritical bullshit.

  8. CheeseSauce_86 on

    I feel like there’s less new young smokers, and far more elderly that smoke even with health issues and in some case, with cancer/remission.

  9. Unhappy_Hedgehog_808 on

    What a joke, the governments in this country, provincial and federal, make absurd amount of tax revenue from tobacco sales. It’s billions of dollars a year and they have zero idea how to replace that revenue other than raise our taxes more.

  10. srry_u_r_triggered on

    If you’re worried about your health, do what I do, and don’t smoke cigarettes! Not sure why this government feels the need to ban it outright, considering the current regulations are perfectly effective. It’s not the governments job to control every aspect of your life.

  11. fendermonkey on

    It would feel odd in 30 years if two guys, one 49 years old and the other 48 go to buy a pack of smokes and the cashier can’t sell to the 48 year old. 

  12. 1mYourHuckleberry93 on

    Whatever. Create a black market and let the indigenous get rich, you’re never gonna stop people from smoking. Prohibition doesn’t work

  13. AnAntWithWifi on

    I hate smoking, but we know bans don’t work. I’d rather see more measures put in place against vaping.

  14. PerfectBlueberry6378 on

    Considering how much of the cost of smokes is taxes.. I wonder if itll cause an increase in taxes required to be collected

  15. Minami_Shimokawa on

    This is getting ridiculous. It really feels like a slippery slope now. I don’t even smoke and never plan to, but that’s not the point. We’ve got the social media ban coming. Like what’s next, are they gonna go after alcohol too? Where does it actually stop?

    It just feels like constant government overreach, a little more every time. Now it’s just rule after rule and it never really goes the other direction.

    Anyone else feel like this is going too far?

  16. Look at australia and its black market, that’s exactly what’s going to happen if we ban it

  17. This is absolute BS. How about they drop it and get back to more serious matters.

    ETA reading the article- they’re looking at it but doesn’t sound like it’s concrete whatsoever. Was a response to a question about what the UK did which is ban it for people born after 2009. Would not impact current smokers.

  18. I’ve said it before and I will say it again, mere disapproval of the majority can never justify using violence to prevent people from engaging in a fundamentally non-violent act. Every act of prohibition is an egregious violation of individual liberty. We are not free unless we are free to do stupid things that the majority disaproves of. Nothing any parliament or legislature says or does can ever make it wrong for individuals to poses and consume so-called ‚restricted‘ substances. The only thing the state achieves with acts of prohibition is to undermine its own legitimacy by demonstrating a failure to understand the limits of public authority.

  19. CringelordCameron on

    This will do nothing other than give the black market a total monopoly over tobacco sales. Smoking and nicotine in use in general is on the rise among young people, and almost none get their tobacco from a government approved store, it’s simply too expensive. I’m part of Gen Z and a vast majority of people I know purchase tobacco, vapes and nicotine pouches on the native reserve for a fraction of the legal cost. A ban would be totally useless in preventing this.

  20. Who buys legal cigarettes anymore anyway?

    Not hard to get a carton on the rez for $40. This would impact nothing because there isn’t the political will to prosecute these cases. Contraband tobacco and cannabis are openly sold to anyone all over the country and none of that product is duty paid.

  21. CocodaMonkey on

    I really can’t see this doing anything in Canada besides annoying a few smokers. The few smokers I still know pretty much all buy native smokes because they are cheaper. There’s also no way they will stop natives from selling smokes so really all this would potentially do is force the few smokers not buying from natives to switch to cheaper native cigarettes.

  22. Support for rampant smuggling ‚being looked into‘.

    Banning things people are used to enjoying never works.

    Attack demand, not supply.

  23. DisorientedViking on

    Maybe they should put a ban on murder, stranger attacks, domestic violence against women, drug dealing and all of our societies issues, cuz right now that’s a free for all with no consequences, of course this is granted by our kangaroo progressive courts.

    But hey let’s focus on banning darts so we can push it underground and enable the criminal element to clean up on selling smokes.

  24. ---0celot--- on

    There was a hilarious episode of “Yes, Minister” that explained the governments internal opinion on the matter. I believe it’s S2E7.

    Some of the reasoning: Cigarettes generate billions in tax revenue.
    * Smokers tend to die earlier, which means:
    * They don’t draw pensions as long
    * They require less long-term NHS (it was a UK show) care, especially for costly elderly illnesses.
    * Therefore, smokers are described (in chilling bureaucratic language) as:

    “A most effective form of voluntary euthanasia.”

  25. mr_shaboobies on

    Why would we treat cigarette’s any different to vapes and weed? It’s already restricted in all interior public spaces and most people already don’t like it. Why bother dealing with something that is slowly going away on its own?

  26. Ironic that we spent like 40 years weaning the country off smoking cigarettes only to legalize smoking weed.

  27. I’m against cigarettes since they are very unhealthy but I’m also against the government telling a grown person what they can and can’t consume.

  28. Every construction site is already full of guys hacking rez darts because packs at the gas station got too expensive. You may as well keep the tax revenue stream, you’ll never eliminate smoking completely

  29. Good fucking luck, you be losing tax dollars to the reserves, which is happening already.

    People are adults, death by alcohol or cigarettes is slow. Tax it.

    Maybe instead do like Australia did and legalize prostitution. Get women off the streets away from the pimps and make life safer for everyone. And tax it.

  30. Prestigious-Car-4877 on

    Okay. Is it stupid? Yes. Is it unhealthy? You bet. Are people gonna just buy native smokes? You betcha.

  31. DeanersLastWeekend on

    And how do we make up all that lost tax revenue? People will just buy even more of their smokes on reserves. Let adults be adults

  32. Kingofcheeses on

    Seems like the only time our government acts decisively is when they ban something that adults enjoy

Leave A Reply