If you were in control?

Janice - posted on 07/09/2012

What a great idea Stella! I was in a club in HS for a short time called "natural helpers." We helped out at a soup kitchen and some community events. But the club was small and eventually it ended due to lack of interest. I think the "you owe me" attitude is too prevalent and mandatory community service would be good for all. Of course many students may bitch and complain but I think the more normal it became the more students would be welcoming of it.

Lakota - posted on 07/09/2012

Yes! It infuriates me to see some of these parents who condone their kids behavior with their inaction.



It would do a lot for kids. Would surely teach many of them respect for others and what hard times really are. It would also help with their self esteem. Helping others always makes you feel good about yourself.



I love that show. Maybe I could be a Secret Millionare one day. Yeah, right. LOL

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/09/2012

I like that idea Stella. In my school back in Rochester we had service club and in one class I took senior year we also had to do volunteer work. I think it would show these kids that they need to work for things and hopefully turn out a better generation than what we have now. What with little troglodytes bullying the bus monitor and parents whining that their bully child is in trouble.

Some kids don't even have to be pushed into volunteer work too which is also nice. I was watching Secret Millionare last night and there was this one boy who actually started volunteering when he was 4 and started his own group to help out homeless kids.

Lakota - posted on 07/09/2012

I would also make it part of the school curriculum that the kids do some sort of community service every semester. They could volunteer at soup kitchens, habitat for humanity, humane societies, yard work for the elderly, etc.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/08/2012

Thanks Kristi, I hope so too. We now have a total income of 2290 a month and 910 of that goes to rent then about 330 or so to bills. The rest is gas, groceries and whatever we want. An extra 400$ or so would make it easier for DH to knock off his credit card bills and save for going to visit a friend of ours in the next province. Of course working for a game company would make it even easier and help elimintate the credit card and student loan debt altogether.

Kristi - posted on 07/08/2012

I wish I could do that here. I am on disability, also. Up until recently, there is no way I could have handled working. I was also married and my husband made enough money for us to make ends meet. I think I might be able to handle something part time but I'm told a different story everytime I inquire about it so I gave up. I do, occasionally house/pet sit for people when they go out of town. They can't take their dogs or cats with them and they don't want to kennel them and they also don't want to worry about leaving their house sit vacant, so my daughter and I "move in" while they are away. When that comes up, it's a nice little bonus! But I would have no problem with random drug testing. Almost anywhere you work now requires it. It's only right. Good luck to your husband finding a job he likes! : )

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/07/2012

Thanks Kristi. It seems to work out here in Canada- you can be on disability and still work so you feel like you're not just living off the government. They even have programs to assist people on dissabilities to find work. My husband just started one last month- he goes in on Tuesday to give them the two lists of companies he's applied for. List one is game companies (he just finished school) and list two is employment for part time jobs.

Kristi - posted on 07/07/2012

I hear ya, Janice.The crooks always find a way. Then it leaves the innocent people, who really do need help, left to cut through the red tape and try to get enough to feed their families. They don't make it very easy to get on it and they don't make it very easy to get off it. I like the idea Megan had about letting people work part time to help out without having their benefits reduced, giving people a chance to build self worth, get back on their feet and actually get off welfare, instead of mom or dad trying to pick up any type of part time work they can find, have their benefits cut to next to nothing and then quitting the crappy job because they made just as much on welfare and didn't come home smelling like fish guts. But I guess there isn't much we can do about it, which is why we're on here working it out while the rest of our tax dollars are being used to pay for the salaries of the Big Dogs that should working it out in WA, DC.

Janice - posted on 07/07/2012

Yes, as far as I understand that was the entire state of FL. It is extremely aggravating knowing that there are people who are in the system and yet still find a way to pay for their drugs. I was surprised and annoyed by the findings myself. But unfortunately people will always find a way to scam the system. It only takes 2 weeks to get pot out of your system and I think this is the majority of users. Its not that hard to quit for a bit and drink lots of juice to pass a test. Also many, many women dont report their boyfriends as living with them (and in some cases their husbands). So the guy/dad is making money and the mom just pretends he doesn't exist. They dont go to your home and check.
I remember one day a woman I worked with mentioned the assistance she got. I was quite shocked because I knew her husband was a dentist. She in all honesty swore up and down that no one is required to list their husband on the app. I had never seen an app. for assistance and she was a bitch so I didnt argue with her but I knew she was wrong. Not sure how she got away with that. Obviously that was not a drug related story, but its not hard to lie and the man power it would take to check on all these liars would cost even more.

Not quite sure what the solution is.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/07/2012

My brother has to get random drug tests at Frito Lay because he moves the trucks. I wouldn't mind submitting to drug testing either because I receive government assistance (go CCTB!) and my husband is on permanent disability (it's so odd to me to call ADHD a disability because I have it too) Also when I do work I'm either in people's homes or with people with disabilities so I would like to know that the people I take care of are safe with my co-workers and myself.

I've seen enough people in New York who really do abuse the system. I took care of a woman whose daughter and her children and boyfriend all were living off of her and her SSI as well as the daughter's disability and they all were on drugs and growing pot in the house. It was so nasty! They really pissed me off because they were using the woman's SSI checks to buy her a little bit of food then buy Vicodine and cigarettes and beer for themselves!

Yeah, after that I would also figure out a way to put the SSI or disability money on debit cards so you could only purchase food, clothing and other necessities (maybe amusement park passes at a discount) just like the EBT cards do for food and other things. Ok I know it's a bit controlling, but after taking care of some people I could see this being needed.

I would also figure out how to impliment programs for people on welfare or disability in the US to be able to work and make up to a certain amount a month without losing their benifits. They already so something like that here in Canada. My husband is allowed to make up to 500$ a month before money is taken from his disability check.

MeMe---Past And Present (-.-) - posted on 07/07/2012

They are considering doing drug testing here, in Canada (yes, I said Canada, Isobel) for social assistance clients. It will probably be a while before it happens, if it happens but I do think it is a good idea. I wouldn't mind my tax dollars going to this, since I know (lived in the neighbourhoods for 7 years, while I was on assistance), there are many that ARE using and selling while on assistance.



Tax payers are beginning to get pissed off. Especially those that are drug tested to work, of which we have many here, due to the oil rigs. They strongly believe and are pushing, that if they have to be random tested to work, then those getting their hard earned tax dollars should be too. I have to say, I agree.

Kristi - posted on 07/07/2012

Janice--

Was that the whole state of FL? Because I can tell you right now the city I used to live in, there were many abusers of the welfare system. I do understand your point about needing to still feed and house the younger children. However, IMO, she has the choice to discipline him/her, a little better than she was, she can call the cops and have him arrested, she can put him in a group home, make him get a job to pay the bills while the benifits are suspended, they are tough decisions but had he been afraid of the consequences for this behavior in the first place, chances are, he wouldn't have participated. Why should tax payers have to support a drug addict? Most employers require you to agree to random drug testing. I did think about the cost effectiveness of this initiative, but decided, again onlt in my opinion, that cleaning up the welfare system was more important. But, I suppose that is like cutting off my nose to spite my face. I just get sick of seeing lazy people use their welfare checks for cigarettes, (which I know I didn't address here), just letting their kids run wild because it's easier than parenting them, selling their food stamps for drugs and doing this all from a new Escalade. So, I guess I would need to come up with a cost effective way to revamp the whole system! ; )

Anna - posted on 07/07/2012

I would also make it mandatory for everyone to retake a driving course and test every 3 or 5 years. If people want the privilege to drive, they should have to prove that they are capable of doing so in a responsible, educated manner. That being said, I would also invest in public transportation systems, like improving bus systems and planning/building high-speed rail lines. This I would hope to accomplish by providing monetary incentives to cities and states, and maybe create some jobs in the process.

Janice - posted on 07/07/2012

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/20/27...

Here's the article

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/07/2012

:P

Janice - posted on 07/07/2012

Kristi i agree that it makes sense to require drug tests for welfare recipients. Unfortunately I just read a report that it is not cost efficient. They have implemented this in Florida and only a small percentage of drug tests came back positive. So small that is actually cost the state thousands of dollars to drug test rather than saving money. I dont have the time right now but I'll see if I can find the article later.
Also I think 16 is too young. A mom may not be able to control her 16/17 year old teen but still need to feed and house her 12 year old.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 07/07/2012

Ok COM now what did I do?

Kristi - posted on 07/07/2012

I am with Anna and Stella.

Any people over the age of 16 and living in the home of someone receiving government assistance of any kind, must have a drug test before approval and a random test every 3 months thereafter. If any, one, of the household members does not comply or is found with drugs in his/her system, all benefits are suspended immediately and until, A) that person is no longer a member of the household and that can be proven, in which case your benfit amounts would be adjusted or B) that person submits to a random test every month for 3 months and comes back clean, your benefits would be reinstated and remain the same. I would also mandate the test be a blood test as I believe they are more accurate and can detect a much larger chemical base. (I think that's the phrase I'm looking for, it's really late ; )) I would also adapt some sort of plan to get people of assistance and back into the work force, job training, technical college with job placement plans (loans they have to pay back upon placement), something like that. I haven't really thought that part of it through.

I would make crimes against children and those of sexual predators, federal offenses with harsh punishments and very little room for a plea bargin. No early release. Certain offenses would carry mandatory lifetime parole upon release because most of the sex offenders don't/can't change. Children need to feel safe and be able to trust us when we tell them that it's ok to tell on daddy for hitting them because daddy won't be able to hurt them anymore (he won't be out in a month or 24 hours on $500 bail). I would close some loopholes and open some doors when it comes to searching for evidence against child abusers and sexual offenders so they couldn't get off because I found a photo album of kiddie porn in the desk instead of on the desk. Obviously, all of this would be a HUGE, complicated process because of the wide range of crimes committed by child abusers and sex offenders, sometimes one in the same. You can't totally disregard a person's rights because they may be a predator. And the punishments, though all harsh, cannot be the same for every crime. The punishment for an 18 year old having "consensual" sex with his 151/2 year old girlfriend against her parents wishes, cannot be the same as a 25 year old molesting a 12 year old child of either persuasion nor can be the consequences for a mother smacking her 16 year old kid in the mouth for calling her a whore for the 1,000 time (and the kid called 911 to be vindictive) as the consequences for a mother who tosses her 16 year old down a flight of stairs because the dishes weren't shiney enough. Hey, if they can take away your rights because you said, "da bom" in the name of freedom, then I can take them away in the name of Grace or Elliot or Jordan....

Those are the 2 things I would initiate as soon as possible. We need to provide the help to those who truly need and deserve it and protect our future by protecting the ones who cannot yet, protect themselves. That's my story and I'm stickin to it!

Lakota - posted on 06/28/2012

If I were in charge I would create a way to find out if the people on welfare/food stamps really need it or if it's being abused.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/25/2012

It's quite possible. My brother and SIL smoke and neither of them smoke in their house so it doesn't smell like smoke. DH's friend and his wife smoke outside as well and their apartment doesn't smell like smoke- if it did DH couldn't go up there. My FIL is a chain smoker so his house that was once a storage shed reeks of smoke DH got a toaster from him and the parts that couldn't be cleaned are still yellow. His appliances are all yellowed from smoke and well it smells a lot like smoke. I've worked in enough homes where you can tell the difference between homes where people smoke outside and homes where people smoke inside.

The smoke smell does linger- I wear a washable jacket when I go visit my FIL and I wash my daughters' and DH's stuff too. Smoke gives me a head ache after not smoking for 5 years.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/25/2012

That's very possible. But I'm only speaking from experience in like 4 houses. For all I know they aren't even truthful when they say they never smoke inside. But that's been my experience so far.

I remember as a kid not being allowed to bring our winter coats in to my grandparents house for Christmas and we had to put our clothes out in the garage that night when we changed out of them and any clothes or stuffed animals was kept outside in the garage a number of days or weeks until my mom brought it in and washed it and then haven't to us. I don't ever remember smelling smoke as I entered their house, but I was a kid, and maybe it just lingered more then I realized at the time.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/25/2012

Laura---Meme, the fact is that the people I know who smoke smell of smoke all the time. And even though they smoke outside their houses reek of cigarettes. If I smell smoke I'm inhaling the fumes so if they're house smells like smoke I don't go in!

My home does not smell of smoke, at all. My mother quit smoking 15 years ago and I promise, she would never ever come to my home, if it smelt even a wee bit of smoke. Same for my in-laws and my few friends that are non-smokers.

I would have to say, these people you know, do not wash their clothes and bathe regularly or keep their home very clean. Since there is no reason (except the ones I listed) for their home to smell, if they don't smoke in it.

I can sell my house as a smoke-free home. Since the family that owned it before us did not smoke in it either (and they were the first owners).

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/25/2012

Meme, the fact is that the people I know who smoke smell of smoke all the time. And even though they smoke outside their houses reek of cigarettes. If I smell smoke I'm inhaling the fumes so if they're house smells like smoke I don't go in!
I will hang out with them outside but I wouldn't invite them over. They all live in the apartments around me so we only ever see eachother outside anyways. It's not rude at all to not invite them over.
And yes, if they quit smoking I'd be able to be closer friends with them because I'd be able to literally BE closer to them since I'd not be having to wander away every time they lit up.
Having an occasional drink or even frequent drinks isn't an issue for me with friends as long as they're cool with the fact that I don't get drunk nor do I want to go out drinking. Most of my friends are moms anyways and most don't drink much

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

Good idea Anna.

Anna - posted on 06/24/2012

After reading a few articles the last couple of days, I'd like to add that, if I were in charge for a day, I would create MUCH harsher penalties for child abusers and sexual predators. I would also castrate those rightfully convicted of sexual abuse and assault.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

I'm not saying you're making a big to do over 3rd hand smoke, Laura DH and I were talking about it and there was a guy who got a cancerous tumour behind his ear just by leaving his cigarette behind his ear. Of course that wasn't 3rd hand smoke, that was from everything in the cigarette. But I believe you missed the point Meme and I are making that you're missing out on a person by being petty about a bad habit.



Also I fail to see how you're friendly when you can't be bothered to invite someone over for coffee or a movie night because they smoke. I wouldn't call someone I can't hang out with in their home a friend, just an accquaintance and I wouldn't call it being friendly.



DH's friend who smokes- that's his only bad habit. He rollerblades, does stunts, doesn't eat fast food and takes very good care of his kid. In some ways he's healthier than DH. Because DH has been known to put 1/4 cup of sugar in his tea

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/24/2012

Laura---I'm saying it IS hurting me AND my kids to be close friends with a smoker. They give off second and third hand smoke and I will NOT subject myself nor my kids to that kind of damage.



First of all second hand smoke comes from being beside the cigarette. So, if they go outside, there is no 2nd hand smoke coming with them, back inside. Also, 3rd hand smoke has not been shown to cause any type of problems for anyone, even babies (unless the smoking is happening IN the room and causing 3rd hand smoke that way). You also are not going to have any 3rd hand smoke unless you are sniffing their hair or eating it. It doesn't fill a room. You really should do some research on that, I have and a lot, at that. ;)



ETA:

It doesn't matter though. As I feel you are being rather judgmental. I love life, I just smoke. Doesn't mean I don't live life to its fullest. My grandmother smoked and she lived to the ripe old age of 104. Then my grandpa did not smoke and he died at 57. Life has no guarantee's.



Yes, not smoking is best. However, I know people that do not smoke but eat like they are starving ALL the time. They are huge and each one of them has diabetes. Yeah, sorry but I AM healthier than them.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

LOl Well Meme, if you want to sleep with the person and have an actual relationship as more than friends I can understand not wanting someone who smokes if you don't like it. That's why I quit when my husband mentioned he couldn't be with someone who smokes. It also wasn't a big part of my life- I only smoked 2 a day between shifts and my brother kept stealing my packs! I loved my husband more.

However someone who drinks when I don't or smokes when I don't is fine. I've taken care of a few smokers who I had a lot in common with including a love of history (this includes my FIL) and books. As long as I don't have to make out with anyone who smokes I'm cool.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

Meme you proved my point right there. You said ". If it isn't hurting them, in anyway shape or form and they still refused to realize that some people have negative vices but are great people, than I would stick my nose in the air and walk right on by. "
I'm saying it IS hurting me AND my kids to be close friends with a smoker. They give off second and third hand smoke and I will NOT subject myself nor my kids to that kind of damage.

I am not judgemental either. The ladies I know who smoke could never tell I have an issue with them smoking. Because I DON'T. I don't care that they're ihaling that crap but I do care that my kids not inhale it. So I'm nice kind and friendly but not too close. Why is this so hard for you to handle?
I wouldn't be inviting them over or going to their houses or stuff like that. It's just an issue I won't compromise on

It's not a personality altered but it is a health risk. I probably do feel somewhat better then smokers just because I couldn't imagine harming my body like that. I truly want to live as healthy and as long as I can and I'd never imagine doing something so dangerous. Doesn't mean I think I'm a better human being then smokers, it's just I feel I have a passion for living best I can, and if I'm going to do a naughty unhealthy thing I go eat some ice cream :) we all have our weaknesses but for me it's been easy to simply never smoke one time and not travel that road.

I do speak my mind sometimes Megan, but not when it's not necessary and would offend or hurt someone else's feelings. And I'd feel like by asking someone to not smoke around my kids I'd be implying that they're doing something wrong or not being good enough already or implying they're a bad person for not doing it already etc. so it's much easier to just keep our distance.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/24/2012

I agree, Megan. There is a difference between those that smoke and those that get drunk all the time (partiers). A partier has a different mind set and are tough to want to hang out with. That is so not my cup of tea, either (once upon a time, it was. Like 15+ years ago...lol). However, a person that smokes is no different than if they didn't smoke. Except that they take breaks for fresh air (pun there) a wee bit more often, than a non-smoker.



I was actually going to ask Laura, if a smoker quit would she then be willing to be their colse friend? If so, what changed? Just that they no longer smoke? How is that not being judgemental? Since it is the person you are close with, not their smoking. Unless, you are planning on climbing in bed with them, or something. ;)

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

Smoking doesn't change someone's personality like being a partier or being into drugs does. True some smokers resort to extreme measures to smoke (my brother is a smoker and after foot surgery made it hard for him to go up and down the stairs easily for a few weeks he would stick his head out the window to smoke- never mind that his bedroom is on the second floor) but I haven't noticed anything different in my friends who smoke from my friends who don't smoke. Except of course they run outside every 5 or 10 minutes. DH's friend (our neighbour) excuses himself from conversations and takes a smoke break. He's thankfully polite enough to find a place to stash his butts too (we have ass hat neighbours above us who toss their butts off their balcony) so they don't end up in our daughter's mouth.

I know you probably didn't mean it, but your post comes off as though you consider yourself above people who smoke. It sure came off that way when you told me the idea of someone smoking at home was ridiculous because you were under the assumption that everyone smoking at home has children and does it in front of them.

I understand you can't be close with everyone. I can't be close with people who party, or do drugs (I've seen enough of what happens when people get addicted to OTC drugs thank you) or people who drink just for the sake of getting drunk (with the exception of one of my friends who gets drunk then IMs me to call her so I can hear her being drunk and laugh at her) That's not my personality. But smoking isn't really what I'd call a personality alternater. And I am the kind of person to ask you not to smoke around my kids. I'm also the kind of person to loan you toilet paper, hold the door open for you and watch your kids. I say what I think.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/24/2012

True Laura. Since I would never be close friends with someone that was uptight and judged how others lived their lives. If it isn't hurting them, in anyway shape or form and they still refused to realize that some people have negative vices but are great people, than I would stick my nose in the air and walk right on by.



I simply don't have time for judgemental people. It is judgemental to refuse to be close friends with someone because they smoke or drink. You are judging them for something you don't agree with. There is a lot more to a person than if they smoke or drink, you know.



I have several friends that are non-smokers. They can come and visit me too, since we do not smoke in our home. They love me for me, the fact that I smoke doesn't phase them (of course they would be happy if I quit but only because they care for me). Since there is so much more about me, than that.



No one is going to love or even like every single thing about anyone but a friendship is based on much more, than pettiness.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

It's not judgemental, I'm not the type to say something like you can't smoke around my kids. I'll remove my kids from the area but I couldn't say that to someone. It may sound bad but it's true, if you smoke I'm not going to be good friends with you. I'll be friendly and casual acquaintances but I couldn't be close ith someone who smoked, or who partied a lot or who regularly got drunk or who did drugs etc. I have standards for who I spend a lot of time with and that's just me! Some people might say they wouldn't be close to me because of other things and that's their choice. Not every one can be close with everyone else.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

Just for correction purposes. It is $10-$15 per pack, not carton. You pay close to $100 per carton. Unless you roll them like me. I pay $50 per carton, rolled. ;)



Thanks Meme, I was typing under the influence of Pharmasave brand extra Strength sinus meds. I haven't smoked since before I moved here. I believe my last pack (I don't know why I was thinking pack and typing carton) was right before the custody hearings really started back in 2007 and my now husband told me he couldn't be with a smoker. His dad still smokes his mom used to smoke and he didn't like it. I don't know what the going rate is here in BC- I just can't believe how many students at KSS smoke- dear Lord we're going to have a lot of wrinkly 20 somethings.



Laura, I think it's rather judgemental of you to decide to be close with someone just because they smoke or not (why not just tell her you don't want her smoking around your kids? That's what most people do, And yes I did tell my husband that he was being picky) Smoking doesn't make someone a bad person, it just makes them a person I will not lend my clothes to or be over at their house. My ex MIL smokes (enough to where I was tempted to dump a bucket of water on her head) I'd make sure she didn't smoke when I had my monthly visit with her.



Besides the same chemicals in cigarettes are used to make your bathtubs and showers- someone would still find a way to make cigarettes if they weren't made and pubicly available.



Krista stole the rest of what I was going to say- especially about adult programs (For some reason the themes on Grey's Anatomy struck me as more adult than adolencent myself) showing people drinking in a bar after working in a hospital. Desperate Housewives also had their share of drinking and they even addressed someone going into rehab as a result. I'm calling 9-1-1 after I post this- hey I warned ya Krista :)

Krista - posted on 06/24/2012

Even young adult shows like Grey's anatomy I'm shocked at just how much alcohol is displayed as the fix for a bad day or the sympathy drink for when things go wrong.

Well, it IS part of our culture. And frankly, Grey's Anatomy is targeted towards adults, not teenagers. And frankly, if a person, by the age of 20 or so, does not already have a good handle on their attitude towards alcohol, I highly doubt that a badly written melodrama will affect them one way or another.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/24/2012

Megan--It doesn't matter that there is no safe way to have a cigarette- in Canada it doesn't matter that they're 15$ a carton and have pictures of what happens to your body when you smoke.



Just for correction purposes. It is $10-$15 per pack, not carton. You pay close to $100 per carton. Unless you roll them like me. I pay $50 per carton, rolled. ;)



btw - I LOVE smoking but I do not protray it onto others and never ever kids. ;)

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

(because I won't let my kids around smokers so if I meet a new mom and think we could be friends and then find out she smokes it really destroys the possibility of being close with her) (especially when she smokes around our kids and thinks its fine just because we are outside)

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

The alcohol in tv comment isn't about the shows that display alcohol to young kids, it's more the teen aged shows. Even young adult shows like Grey's anatomy I'm shocked at just how much alcohol is displayed as the fix for a bad day or the sympathy drink for when things go wrong. It's a bad coping mechanism IMO to drink when you're upset or sad cuz it just masks the problem and then can easily get out of hand.

As for cigarettes maybe just increasing the price more and more every year will slowly eliminate it. Make people have to decide for themselves when enoughs enough.

Oh and krista, sometimes I think distracted driving is even worse then drunk driving. :-/ I know I've had to do a self check a few times when I'm driving and realize I'm not paying enough attention to the road.

I think if there's no safe way to consume a product then it shouldn't be legal or available. The people who will break the law to continue may not be benefitted by the law, but the ones who haven't started yet or who just need a good reason to quit might be helped by it being illegal to smoke! Or, idk a lot about cigarettes but isn't there a way to make it with nicotine but not with the other dangerous ingredients? So they still get their addiction fix but it's not as bad for their body and the people around them?
There's plenty of possibilities but I'm just sick of every other person I meet being a smoker

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/24/2012

Laura, I see that too. My neighbour started smoking again and does it around her 3 year old. I have another neighbour who smokes outside on his balcony, or out on our porch away from our kids when he visits. But does that mean that EVERYONE should have their rights restricted because of a few people. I know it's your opinion and you've a right to your opinion, but so does everyone else. It doesn't matter that there is no safe way to have a cigarette- in Canada it doesn't matter that they're 15$ a carton and have pictures of what happens to your body when you smoke. People are going to smoke despite everything you'd do and making it illegal would just encourage it IMO.

Taking alcohol out of TV and movies wouldn't help either, most movies (including ones geared towards children) show people drinking and acting responsibly. You'd just be helping to create a nanny state (hence my 1984 comment) and effectively removing a person's right to make their own choices and learn from their mistakes.

You've admitted yourself that you get hung up on things people do needlessly and you have said you'd focus more on education. Why not do that instead of imposing on someone's personal life? We've already seen how well that's gone over in the US.

Krista - posted on 06/24/2012

Oh, it's frustrating. I won't argue with you there. A lot of people ARE dumb. But sadly, dumb people will always exist, regardless of what we do. Some people get behind the wheel while all hopped up on prescription meds. Some people get behind the wheel while sleep-deprives. Some people get behind the wheel and pay attention to everything BUT the road.

The only way to fix that problem is to outlaw driving altogether.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

Totally out my butt. :-)
You're right, I'm sure the vast majority of people who consume alcohol in their lives do it responsibly, but I just get hung up on the times people needlessly are killed because someone was dumb about their alcohol consumption.
My state has a no texting while driving law, and tone of at&t commercials airing about the dangers of texting and driving. I support that 100%

As I said, my general goal is just to prevent preventable deaths. However that could be done

Krista - posted on 06/24/2012

I'm sorry, but most of the population is not capable of always drinking responsibly, not every time.

Do you have a stat on that, or are you just hauling that out of your butt? And how do you define "drinking responsibly"? Not drinking and driving? Because I'd wager that you're very wrong, and that most of the population does NOT drink and drive. You do define it as not drinking to excess? Well, sure, every drinker has at one point or another (or more) gone over their limit and become inebriated. But as long as they don't drive or operate machinery or take on any dangerous tasks, then where's the harm. I've had a few nights when I had too many, and all I did was act silly and then wake up the next day with a headache and a yucky stomach. But really...who cares?

And Laura, NONE of us here are condoning drinking and driving, nor are we condoning teenage/underage drinking. I agree that drunk driving should have harsher penalties - absolutely!

But narrow your focus, woman. Some people also get in car accidents because they're texting. So you make harsh laws about texting and driving. You don't ban cell phones altogether.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/24/2012

Sorry Megan but I know tons of smokers in our apartment building and the ones surrounding it and they all have kids and they all smoke in places that would cause damage to their kids, they smoke outside right next to their kids ALL the time, and even though they don't smoke inside their apartments the apartments still reek of smoke.
I watched my neighbor drive her sons home from school drunk a few weeks ago. It was awful!
I'm sorry, but most of the population is not capable of always drinking responsibly, not every time. And there's no, IMO, responsible way to smoke. No matter how you do it you're still purposefully injuring your children's parent.

I'd be keen on simply more education about the topics. Maybe taking alcohol out of tv and movies might help, it didn't seem to help with cigarettes but who knows.

I really don't care about people having the occasional alcoholic drink, I've tried many types but haven't found any I like and same with my husband but that doesn't mean we are opposed to trying it. Now we've never been drunk and won't be doing that anytime in the foreseeable future but have you never heard about teenagers getting alcohol poising and dying? Is that ok in your mind? No sympathy cuz its their own body their own choice even though they're a child dying of an illegal substance?


Do you agree with the law for only adults to drink? Or should we be letting kids drink too?


I think the laws on drunk driving should be more extreme. It only takes one offense to cause someone's death ya know so idk, I'd rather crack down on offenders harshly then risk them doing more damage later

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/23/2012

Go home and smoke? Really? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard! Ok so you're fine with kids getting lung cancer at age 6 because good old ma and pa like their cigarettes and are good folk and smoke at home! Ffs

Yes Laura because all smokers are extremely irresponsible, think of no one but themselves and smoke in front of their kids so no one should smoke because you have it in your head that everyone who participates in unhealthy activities does so irresponsibly without a thought of how their actions harm others.

If going home to smoke when the person either smokes outside or shockingly DON'T HAVE CHILDREN is the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard, then I want to live in your world because it has to be more interesting than mine. My FIL smokes at home and he has kids, but they've kinda all grown up and don't live with him. Imagine that!

As everyone else has said policing people's unhealthy habits is extreme behaivour and costly at that. If you'd want to waste time and resources imposing your thoughts and beliefs on everyone else, go ahead. But it would be a sad waste of time and money better well spent on helping people and you'd go down as yet another Bush.

Anna - posted on 06/23/2012

It is impossible to police an entire population of people and their behavior. The countries that have tried, like North Korea and the Soviet Republic and China, haven't fared terribly well socially (never mind China's economic status, when you have that many people working that cheaply, of course you'd be an economic powerhouse). Yes, it's horrible that people do stupid things to get each other, and themselves, killed. But the world isn't a kind place, and horrible things happen every day all over the place. People are being massacred in Syria. North Korea is starving its citizens to death. Women in India are aborting their female fetuses to fulfill a draconic social ideology, or simply abandoning/killing their female offspring all together. A man took drugs and ate another man's face in the US. It may sound callous, but death is a fact of life, and though we as human beings have made leaps and bounds to prevent our inevitable demise, we cannot run from it forever.

I completely understand your desire to protect your fellow man, Laura, it's why I want to be a doctor. But putting people in a padded room and telling them that they aren't allowed to do dangerous things at all ever would fail, and for two reasons: firstly, people have free will. They will do what they damn well please, regardless of how you feel about it, and they will go to whatever lengths necessary to fulfill their desires; history has illustrated this time and again. Secondly, people like their free will. Laws that strictly enforce or ban human behaviors are often, eventually, met with enough resistance to overturn them. Just look at any civil movement or revolution that has been fought.

The solution I like best to the problem of copious and dangerous behavior is education. I do believe that if government, all governments, put more emphasis of making sure its populations are well educated, those populations will have the resources to make more intelligent, informed, socially responsible decisions. I also believe that such education can't come from the top, from the federal or national level. It has to start at the bottom, with towns and cities and counties and states/districts. People naturally resist what big government tells them to do; having their friends and neighbors be the ones to encourage and educate would be met with far more acceptance and enthusiasm.

Actually, this has inspired me to amend my previous post: I would put forth as much effort as possible into educating people to be responsible, kind, conscientious citizens, and I would help them get the resources they need to succeed.

Krista - posted on 06/23/2012

I agree with Jenny. We ALREADY legislate against violent acts and against drunk driving.

FFS, some people get in a car when they're tired, drive home, fall asleep at the wheel, and kill a family of four.

Shit happens, and it's horrible, but clamping down so much on everybody's behaviour in order to try to keep that shit from happening is bordering on the ridiculous. Heart disease is a major killer. Will you also mandate an hour of exercise per day, and outlaw any foods that may contribute to heart disease?

The government already protects people from their own stupidity...to a point. But there is a reasonable line that must be drawn, and in my opinion, your proposals cross that line.

I mean, seriously...get rid of bars? Screw that! I like going to a pub with my husband and hearing a good band, or hanging out with friends. Often, I'll only wind up having one drink the entire night. So if I am not harming anybody (which I'm not), then why the hell should I have to give that up simply because you have a bee in your bonnet about drinking?

And yes, they do expect people to take a cab, have a D.D., take the bus or walk. They promote that quite heavily. It's not an unreasonable expectation. Even out here in the sticks, where we don't have cabs or buses, and the pub is a 20-minute drive away, my husband and my friends and I still somehow manage to never drink and drive. It's called "being an adult", and I don't particularly appreciate being lumped in with the VERY few idiots who don't do that.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 06/23/2012

Laura---It has literally nothing to do with what I like or don't like.

NOTHING

it is ALL about life and death. People drink at a bar, drive home, kill a mom and her children in a car crash.

Go home and smoke? Really? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard! Ok so you're fine with kids getting lung cancer at age 6 because good old ma and pa like their cigarettes and are good folk and smoke at home! Ffs

Think that through Megan. Every single thing I'm trying to do has to do with literally saving innocent peoples lives.

IF YOU WANT TO GO DRINK AND SMOKE ON A DESERTED ISLAND ID NOT CARE.

It has nothing to do with what I like. It's all about people needlessly dying due to these stupid things.



Seriously? Come on, you can't be serious.



First of all I DO smoke, yep, I have two children. However, I am not some low brained twit that smokes around my children. We smoke either in our garage OR on OUR deck. We do NOT smoke while driving with our children, one because it is illegal and two because I would never ever put my kids in the line of smoke. I know many parents that have the exact same rules around their smoking habits.



My husband drinks. He is not harming anybody and he does not drive after a couple. We have a .05 tolerance here in NS. That is very low. Most people are social drinkers and are not looking to go driving thereafter. If they drink too much, yes, they call a damn cab or walk or have a designated driver. We are responsible adults and I expect to be treated as such.



Sure, there are some that are ass hats but they will always be there, regardless. Just as Krista said, they will get drunk another way or get illegal cigarettes. I don't think you have thought that through.



Do you have any clue how much the governments spend on catching and stopping illegal tobacco and boot leggers? A LOT! If you were to criminalize alcohol and cigarettes, the countries debt would sky rocket, due to fighting the illegal grow ops and sale of these items. If people want them, they WILL get them. You would have people doing more harm to themselves, since they would be smoking anything (making their own tobacco) and drinking anything (making moon shine - that shit can make you go blind).



So, really, do you think it is best for the government to stop regulating and criminalize, only to push the buyer to other more dangerous and harmful means? OR does it make sense for the government to regulate and ensure the majority of people are safe with what they consume? Ensuring there are proper laws protecting all citizens. Since, this would be near impossible if they illegalized either of these things.

Johnny - posted on 06/23/2012

Like I said earlier Laura, and Jenny & Megan have reiterated, the dangerous things about drinking are already illegal. Where I live, you can not drink and drive. If I had one drink and got behind the wheel, I would blow over the legal limit and have my car impounded and pay a significant fine. Second time I'd be looking at losing my car and my license for a long time. Third time, it could be jail. And that's not even driving drunk, for my tolerance, it would be driving after one beer. I know people who drove drunk in the past, when the laws were weak, but never nowadays. Stronger legislation has resulted in a 50 percent reduction in accidents caused by alcohol.

I am fine with that. It doesn't bother me in the least I have zero right to put other people at risk through my own choices. However, if I wanted to walk up the street to the pub and have a couple of beers and watch the game, I would not be putting anyone else at risk and I can not see one single logical reason to outlaw that sort of action. If I have a couple friends over for a bbq and some mojitos, they all arrive having either a designated driver, a plan to taxi home, to use the driving service, or to spend the night. I'm not sure why their choice to drink should be anything to anyone else.

Just to be clear, I also do not agree with laws that stop people from taking illegal drugs (from trafficking certain ones yes, but not for consuming them), I don't think we should ban smoking (just regulate where it can be done), and I am deeply opposed to laws against suicide and I was also happy, like Megan, that our assisted suicide laws were struck down.

I want the government to stop other people from harming me. I want the government to work to prevent anyone from hurting anyone else. But what I do to myself is my business and not anyone else's. There are a lot of better ways to prevent people from self-harming than making things illegal.

♥♪Megan♫♥ - posted on 06/23/2012

Cuz god forbid the gov do anything to stop people from hurting themselves right?

Why not let the gov protect people from their own stupidity.

I need to check my calandar, I didn't know it was 1984 already. *eye roll*

Laura, did you not read the part where my family and I were in a car accident thanks to a drunk driver? You're the one talking about restricting things and banning them simply because a few people act stupidly and because smoking is a nasty habit.

Since you asked yes, I am fine with consenting adults commiting suicide- I felt it was wonderful this past week when BC legislation decided that the anti euthanasia law was unconstitutional. I'm fine with consenting adults wanting to do dumb shit. You want to smoke, fine, just don't do it around me. You want to drink, please be smart and have someone take your keys.

Prohibiting people from doing stuff to harm themselves isn't the answer. Hell even taxing them more isn't the answer because people will find a way to get what they want. Educating people is the best way to go about getting positive results. And I don't mean scare tactics.

Laura Zoey - posted on 06/23/2012

So you're fine with people committing suicide? Or taking illegal drugs? You think illegal drugs should be legal? Cuz god forbid the gov do anything to stop people from hurting themselves right?

I'm sorry, the gov shouldn't be in charge of a lot but one of the most important things we need it to do is to protect the citizens. It sounds all nice to say the gov can't control my body etc etc but it already does!
Why not let the gov protect people from their own stupidity.