Cigarette Ban

User avatar
neilsimon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 852
Joined: Aug 13th, 2015, 7:35 am

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by neilsimon »

Fancy wrote:Small comfort to those that have lost loved ones, having to go through rehab, and never mind the loss of wildlife and livestock. Doesn't seem to me all tax money goes straight into health care nor rebuilding.

Fair enough. Where the tax money goes is up to the government. Maybe ask them why more isn't going to the victims.

While we are talking about all the people killed, lets talk about people killed in road traffic accidents. Around 300 each and every year, almost 40 times the number killed from fires started by smokers. I'm sure the benefits of motoring is scant comfort for those who have lost loved ones to road traffic accidents. Maybe we should ban driving on their behalf.

Obviously not, but it is naive to pretend that society doesn't place a value of human life, even if we wish it did not.
User avatar
Fancy
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 62903
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Fancy »

If people wanted to talk about everything and anything else we'd have one thread. Why does everyone forget the animals?
neilsimon wrote:Fair enough. Where the tax money goes is up to the government. Maybe ask them why more isn't going to the victims.
You go ahead - my concern is elsewhere.
Truths can be backed up by facts - do you have any?
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
Because_They_Lie
Banned
Posts: 1050
Joined: Jun 27th, 2017, 3:42 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Because_They_Lie »

you people are accusing all smokers of starting our current wildfire epidemic, you all need to reassess your intelligence.

You are actively seeking ways to punish smokers with this thread.

You are singling out 1 group of human beings and trying to have their way of life banned.

Making wild assumption, accusing without proof - very ignorant, unintelligent and unkind.

I consider your ideas 100% racist.

What have the first peoples of Canada done to you?

What have the first people's of Canada used for their sacred ceremonies throughout their history?

Tobacco

Are you people not happy that the residential schools are closed down today?

We didn't get rid of ALL the first people's customs hey?

So blame ALL those who use tobacco for being arsonists ..... this thread is evil.

Whatever you people enjoy doing with your down time, be it having a nice summer evening drink, taking a long hike, swimming etc...I think we should ban it.

Drinking kills people - why no call for a ban? hiking destroys habitat - why no call for a ban? oh yeah... you breathe and there is your carbon foot print, why no call to ban breathing?

GIVE ME A BREAK!
Farmmaa
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2993
Joined: Sep 24th, 2013, 6:46 am

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Farmmaa »

Silverstarqueen wrote:
I don't know if you saw the video, where the burn pattern clearly started by the side of the road, and spread out from there (very early in the life of the fire). Now fires don't start themselves. If there was no lightning in the area, or other wildfires nearby, what do you suppose would cause a small spot fire by the side of the road, no vehicle in sight, except traffic passing by?


Take a drive out to Carrs Landing Rd - exactly the same burn pattern, started at the side of the road - NOT determined to be from a cigarette.
Okanagan Centre fire...first thing out of people's mouths....started near the road, it was a smoker.
Knox Mountain fire...first thing people start screaming - a cigarette !! Again...NOT the cause.

I am well aware that there are idiots who carelessly discard burning cigarette butts - but the vast majority of smokers do NOT.
( I also don't know anyone who uses matches any more )

I'm just really sick to death of smokers getting slammed and blamed for every flippin fire.
The forest is dry...ban cigarettes !!!!!!!!
There are hundreds of ways that a fire can ignite in these dry conditions.
Broken glass, a hot tailpipe, a camp fire...hell, hit a rock with your lawn mower blade and it can spark a fire.

Yes, we ALL know that smoking is bad....but let's just cut out the dramatics of blaming smokers for forest fires and killing innocent people for crying out loud.
User avatar
Fancy
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 62903
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Fancy »

Farmmaa wrote:I'm just really sick to death of smokers getting slammed and blamed for every flippin fire.

They are not. You are overreacting.

Because_They_Lie wrote:you people are accusing all smokers of starting our current wildfire epidemic, you all need to reassess your intelligence.

I'll repeat - no one is accusing all smokers of starting current wildfires - you are overreacting. Check intelligence.

Because_They_Lie wrote:I consider your ideas 100% racist.

What have the first peoples of Canada done to you?


Maybe reread the whole thread again. That was quite the rant. Starting fires with cigarettes isn't a
first peoples of Canada
issue fyi.
Truths can be backed up by facts - do you have any?
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
Silverstarqueen
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20483
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2012, 8:02 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Silverstarqueen »

Because_They_Lie wrote:you people are accusing all smokers of starting our current wildfire epidemic, you all need to reassess your intelligence.
You are actively seeking ways to punish smokers with this thread.
You are singling out 1 group of human beings and trying to have their way of life banned.
Making wild assumption, accusing without proof - very ignorant, unintelligent and unkind.
I consider your ideas 100% racist.
What have the first peoples of Canada done to you?
What have the first people's of Canada used for their sacred ceremonies throughout their history?
Tobacco
Are you people not happy that the residential schools are closed down today?
We didn't get rid of ALL the first people's customs hey?
So blame ALL those who use tobacco for being arsonists ..... this thread is evil.
Whatever you people enjoy doing with your down time, be it having a nice summer evening drink, taking a long hike, swimming etc...I think we should ban it.

Drinking kills people - why no call for a ban? hiking destroys habitat - why no call for a ban? oh yeah... you breathe and there is your carbon foot print, why no call to ban breathing?

GIVE ME A BREAK!

I don't accuse all smokers of starting our fires, we all agree it is a few (too many though) who do, but we can't run around behind each one making sure they never deliberately or accidentally create great havoc.
My intelligence is fairly intact, how is yours?
I do not want to punish smokers, I want them to stop smoking, a risk and burden to our health care system, and a danger to life and property. Smoking a way of life? I think people can do all the other same things without having to smoke.
We could talk about drinking, but that isn't what this thread is about, and you can't walk around town freely drinking, like you do smoking.
Not sure what this has to do with the residential schools, at all.
IF the first nations have a need for tobacco in some ceremony, I think something like that could be allowed. I would say 99% of the smoking is neither ceremonial, nor necessary, people can get nicotine by many other means without setting the place on fire, if that's what they need or want.
And first you say we are accusing all smokers, then you say we are racist. So which is it? "All smokers" would not refer to any particular race would it?
Last edited by Silverstarqueen on Aug 3rd, 2017, 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Woodenhead
Guru
Posts: 5188
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Woodenhead »

Goalposts moving all over the place, oh my.
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
mjc0483
Posts: 75
Joined: Jan 29th, 2017, 7:27 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by mjc0483 »

Because_They_Lie wrote:you people are accusing all smokers of starting our current wildfire epidemic, you all need to reassess your intelligence.

You are actively seeking ways to punish smokers with this thread.

You are singling out 1 group of human beings and trying to have their way of life banned.


Lmao! Way of life? Funniest thing I've read all day!
Whyme2
Übergod
Posts: 1308
Joined: Dec 13th, 2011, 4:37 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Whyme2 »

Because_They_Lie wrote:you people are accusing all smokers of starting our current wildfire epidemic, you all need to reassess your intelligence.

You are actively seeking ways to punish smokers with this thread.

You are singling out 1 group of human beings and trying to have their way of life banned.

Making wild assumption, accusing without proof - very ignorant, unintelligent and unkind.

I consider your ideas 100% racist.

What have the first peoples of Canada done to you?

What have the first people's of Canada used for their sacred ceremonies throughout their history?

Tobacco

Are you people not happy that the residential schools are closed down today?

We didn't get rid of ALL the first people's customs hey?

So blame ALL those who use tobacco for being arsonists ..... this thread is evil.

Whatever you people enjoy doing with your down time, be it having a nice summer evening drink, taking a long hike, swimming etc...I think we should ban it.

Drinking kills people - why no call for a ban? hiking destroys habitat - why no call for a ban? oh yeah... you breathe and there is your carbon foot print, why no call to ban breathing?

GIVE ME A BREAK!


I need a break after reading all this gibberish!!
youjustcomplain
Übergod
Posts: 1408
Joined: Jun 14th, 2016, 12:56 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by youjustcomplain »

neilsimon wrote:So, that's like 8 deaths/year, 40 injuries/year, and $5,000,000/year in property damage in BC. Assuming $10,000,000 for each death (at the high end of what US agencies assign) and $1,000,000 for each injury (generous considering that many will have relatively minor injuries), that works out to $125,000,000/year. That leaves a net contribution of $485,000,000/year from smokers after paying for harm done to third parties (and this assumes all of the deaths and injuries are of non-smokers). That goes a long way to paying for healthcare, etc.


Forget adding $10,000,000 per human life lost. There is no way to put a price on that. So leave that at zero dollars. If the number is $5,000,000 in property damage per year, fine. (It's not). 8 houses in Lake Country went up. Having been through the neighborhood a few times, I can say that the cheapest house was worth roughly $800,000 and the most expensive was was well over a million. That's one fire, and that's 8 houses in a small town. What about all of the other property damage around the province? But fine, if the average is $5,000,000, I'm ok with that.

If the tax income from smokers in BC is $600,000,000 per year, then I'll work with that number.

Property damage is not what the tax income goes towards. It is earmarked for health care costs.
What about the cost to everyone who sucks back the smoke all over the province from the forest fire started by the cigarette butt? What about the closing of hospitals and evacuations of entire towns. Think of the economic costs involved in just not having any stores open in a town. All of the food on the shelves of the stores that goes bad, there's a cost there. All of the staff not earning an income because the stores are closed, that has a cost. Firefighting costs are huge, and so are the effects of inhaling smoke while fire fighting. How about insurance premiums that go up when insurance companies have a lot of claims. That costs us all.

I don't think I need to go on. $600,000,000 doesn't come anywhere close to covering all of the costs, medical or otherwise, for the smoker, let alone all other losses.
youjustcomplain
Übergod
Posts: 1408
Joined: Jun 14th, 2016, 12:56 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by youjustcomplain »

Farmmaa wrote:Take a drive out to Carrs Landing Rd - exactly the same burn pattern, started at the side of the road - NOT determined to be from a cigarette.
Okanagan Centre fire...first thing out of people's mouths....started near the road, it was a smoker.
Knox Mountain fire...first thing people start screaming - a cigarette !! Again...NOT the cause.


Are you trying to say that because a few fires are arson, that cigarettes are not a problem in terms of road side fires?

You can choose to leave your head in the sand. Cigarettes do cause fires. Smokers are the cause of the cigarettes. We aren't talking about a 1 in 100 year event. This is very common place for many smokers. I'll give you the point that it's not all smokers. Nobody is trying to say that all smokers are the problem though. The suggestion of the Ban is due to the lowest common denominator, which in this case is a pretty big group of smokers who continue to toss flaming material out of their car window.
mjc0483
Posts: 75
Joined: Jan 29th, 2017, 7:27 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by mjc0483 »

youjustcomplain wrote:
Farmmaa wrote:Take a drive out to Carrs Landing Rd - exactly the same burn pattern, started at the side of the road - NOT determined to be from a cigarette.
Okanagan Centre fire...first thing out of people's mouths....started near the road, it was a smoker.
Knox Mountain fire...first thing people start screaming - a cigarette !! Again...NOT the cause.


Are you trying to say that because a few fires are arson, that cigarettes are not a problem in terms of road side fires?

You can choose to leave your head in the sand. Cigarettes do cause fires. Smokers are the cause of the cigarettes. We aren't talking about a 1 in 100 year event. This is very common place for many smokers. I'll give you the point that it's not all smokers. Nobody is trying to say that all smokers are the problem though. The suggestion of the Ban is due to the lowest common denominator, which in this case is a pretty big group of smokers who continue to toss flaming material out of their car window.


It still boggles my mind how smokers seem to think throwing their butts on the ground is magically not the same as littering other trash. As if their butts are exempt from say throwing a pop bottle or wrapper on the ground. Somehow they have it twisted up in their minds that butts are okay to just toss.
User avatar
neilsimon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 852
Joined: Aug 13th, 2015, 7:35 am

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by neilsimon »

youjustcomplain wrote:...
If the tax income from smokers in BC is $600,000,000 per year, then I'll work with that number.

Property damage is not what the tax income goes towards. It is earmarked for health care costs.
What about the cost to everyone who sucks back the smoke all over the province from the forest fire started by the cigarette butt? What about the closing of hospitals and evacuations of entire towns. Think of the economic costs involved in just not having any stores open in a town. All of the food on the shelves of the stores that goes bad, there's a cost there. All of the staff not earning an income because the stores are closed, that has a cost. Firefighting costs are huge, and so are the effects of inhaling smoke while fire fighting. How about insurance premiums that go up when insurance companies have a lot of claims. That costs us all.

I don't think I need to go on. $600,000,000 doesn't come anywhere close to covering all of the costs, medical or otherwise, for the smoker, let alone all other losses.

Can you give numbers to show that the extra taxes paid by smokers do not cover the lifetime difference in healthcare and pension costs and then some?
The fact that the government earmarks smoking taxes for purposes which do not include all damage done by smoking, is not really the fault of the smokers.
User avatar
Fancy
Insanely Prolific
Posts: 62903
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by Fancy »

neilsimon wrote:The fact that the government earmarks smoking taxes for purposes which do not include all damage done by smoking, is not really the fault of the smokers.
I find this kind of ironic. If the damage wasn't done by the smokers, there wouldn't be the need to find fault with the government not covering all costs.
Truths can be backed up by facts - do you have any?
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
User avatar
neilsimon
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 852
Joined: Aug 13th, 2015, 7:35 am

Re: Cigarette Ban

Post by neilsimon »

Fancy wrote:
neilsimon wrote:The fact that the government earmarks smoking taxes for purposes which do not include all damage done by smoking, is not really the fault of the smokers.
I find this kind of ironic. If the damage wasn't done by the smokers, there wouldn't be the need to find fault with the government not covering all costs.

What is ironic is that people are arguing for a ban on something because of the costs/harm associated with it, despite the fact that it almost certainly contributes more in taxes than it causes in lifetime costs/harm done when reasonable monetary values are assigned.

Return to “Fire Watch 2017”