Nicholas Simon: Vancouver smoking ban in parks and on beaches is unfair to us all
Last week, I sat at Third Beach with five friends and lazed in the sun. We joked around, discreetly sipped beers, and discussed random topics. At some point, I noticed our laughter and banter occurred between a good many cigarettes. One after the other, my friends would puff and chuckle the smoke out of their noses or speak while it escaped their lips. The smoke didn’t bother me, but a thought did: this is the last summer we will legally be allowed to do this.
On September 1, Vancouver imposed a no-smoking bylaw in all its parks and beaches. That scares me. Ironically, I am not a smoker; I do not approve of smoking. However, I do stand by the belief that Canadians should have the opportunity to choose the lifestyle that they prefer—as long as that lifestyle doesn’t harm the innocent. I believe this choice, and the protection of it, makes us Canadian.
A bylaw like this is not to be taken lightly. Many share a welcoming attitude to the new ban. I understand why, and I am not writing this in an attempt to argue the safety of public smoking. We all know that smoking kills, it is bad, shame on you. But smoking or any legal activity should not be discriminated against because it is unhealthy or simply because we do not like it.
The government collects massively high taxes from smokers yet continues to restrict the places people can enjoy a cancer stick. Smokers are not doing anything wrong. Why are they being punished?
In 2008, a smoking ban took effect on Vancouver restaurant and nightclub patios. In 2000, an earlier ban was imposed on indoor smoking, eliminating smoking sections and detoxifying indoor areas in businesses. This is a growing trend—one that may eventually see smokers reduced to smoking huddled in an open-air glass box erected high in the sky, neither indoor nor outdoor.
Now this in itself does not disturb me. The part that does bother me is the assault on civic liberties, the government declaring what we are allowed to do. What aspects of our life can be snatched away because someone deems them to be inappropriate or unsafe? Where do we draw the line?
I am not sure if I am more afraid of what Canada is becoming or of what it is. Perhaps the ideas of choice and freedom are simply illusions. It is starting to feel like we are only free to choose from the menu of what we are allowed to do. Now what if the things I like are not offered on that menu? Like hanging with my chain-smoking friends at the beach? I fear one day they will tell me that I cannot listen to hip-hop music in public, and then that I cannot play it loudly from my car, until a total ban on playing hip-hop music in Canada is imposed and I am confined to my iPod. We should be able to decide the way that we live and respect the choices of fellow Canadians despite our personal views.
In 2003, U.S. “shock jock” Tom Leykis was booted from Vancouver-based MOJO radio. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council accused the show of containing material discriminatory against women and of being inappropriate for Canadian listeners. The show was edgy but Leykis’s message was good: respect yourself or why should anyone else? The cancellation stemmed from a complaint reviewed by the CBSC, and eventually led to the death of MOJO.
At the time, I was a 20-something student eager to hear the insights and perspectives of Leykis and his callers. Before it was snatched away, the program encouraged me to form opinions on dating, the portrayal of women and their role in society, and premarital sex.
This listener may have spoken for some Vancouverites, but my views in no way speak for all Vancouverites. It is disturbing how people cannot simply turn to another station if something bothers them. It surprises me these people do not feel there should be a place for other people that do enjoy this—to enjoy it. I fear we live in a system where people want growing amounts of control on things they do not agree with.
That is a scary thought. A thought I was reminded of that day on the beach.
This may seem like an exaggeration based on one smoking bylaw in Vancouver, but it’s a slippery slope. There should be a place for Canadians to enjoy the things that they choose to enjoy. Any individual, bylaw, or group that stands in the way of this stands in the way of being Canadian.
There are alternative solutions to issuing a full-out ban: designated smoking areas in beaches and parks, and an increased amount of ashtrays for butts would be a start. We can achieve desired public-safety goals without infringing on the civic rights of our Canadian brethren. Those rights matter. Smokers in Vancouver are being treated unfairly, and as Canadians we need to stand up for them. My beach party depends on it.
Nicholas Simon writes about music for Beyond Robson.
Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Google
Comments
Which is to say society restricts all sorts of legal activities.
Hear hear!
I frequent the parks and beaches and look forward to the times that I can walk down the beach without walking through discarded cigarette butts, or walking the seawall behind a smoker puffing out smoke behind them in my direction.
I say hooray for the Vancouver Parks Board. Great decision.
The pretext for which this by-law was passed, the reasoning of it, doesn't line up.
Too many butts on the beaches and parks... Then why not enforce the littering laws?
Butts arn't an issue if it's self-rolled and without a filter though...
Oh but it's about 2nd hand smoke being cancerous and a leading cause of death / cancer... then why are "other weeds" included when many other smokable substances DON'T cause cancer (first hand or second hand)?
The reasoning is flawed and doesn't stand up to simplistic and straightforward scrutiny.
It's clearly about city image and garnering votes. If it's about something else, please clarify and explain the rational. Otherwise, the law should be amended.
Heat10
et
But seriously I am sick of breathing other people's poisons when I am at a park or beach. It's disgustingly stinky and ruins the experience.
I feel for smokers -- they lack the self control to end a bad habit.
But they should not punish those around them with nasty fumes.
There is a small piece of me that likes the ban. Small. But wait until someone rallies to ban something you are into and we will see how you look forward to that treatment. It is easy to pick on smokers because smoking is gross.
Since the people who smoke cannot be made to care about themselves, we should make damn sure they are forced to care about public property and keep it from becoming littered with their filth or burnt down by their careless and reckless attitudes.
Freedom of speech not represented? I call BS! A quote from the article:
In 2003, U.S. “shock jock” Tom Leykis was booted from Vancouver-based MOJO radio. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council accused the show of containing material discriminatory against women and of being inappropriate for Canadian listeners. The show was edgy but Leykis’s message was good: respect yourself or why should anyone else? The cancellation stemmed from a complaint reviewed by the CBSC, and eventually led to the death of MOJO.
@Migzy!
I loved Tom Lykis!!
There is no freedom of speech in Canada. Bottom line.
Also, you start your article admitting you drink in public parks even though that's not allowed, so why the uproar about a smoking ban? I foresee the people who really want to smoke will (just like drinking) but hopefully they'll try to be discreet.
Playing hip-hop on a stereo in public is not the same as smoking on the beach. If an elected official were ever to suggest this, I hope that we would all laugh at his idiocy. Unfortunately, in making this point, you have made yourself the fool.
While I have no strong feelings either way regarding banning smoking in public parks (but would love it if smokers showed more responsibility with thier butts), I think you are going a little overboard with your suppositions. Glad that someone is bringing this issue to light, I wish you had just taken a more realistic and less victimized approach to your article.
And "the government declaring what we are allowed to do"? You can't be serious. The government declares what we can and can't do all the time. It's called civilization.
That's just for a start, never mind the cliches and the silly image at the top of cheerful smokers having fun, just like in a cigarette commercial.
So while I agree you shouldn't be banned from listening to your music of choice in public I don't think you should be allowed to blast it from your car or anywhere else as that interferes with my right to enjoy relative peace and quiet (try living near any busy street like Robson or Water on a Saturday night and you'll come to appreciate this more) I think I should be able to enjoy a glass of beer or wine at the beach/park provided I don't get pissed and disturb others or leave a mess. Been to Germany many times where drinking in public places is allowed and never seen any problems, why because the law really cracks down on those who do abuse their rights and misbehave. I've even had a beer while passenger in a car there as long as the driver doesn't drink it's allowed but believe me the punishment drinking and driving is stiff there.
In Canada when a minority of people abuse their rights whether it's drunken loogans who ruin everyone elses fun by starting fights or puking/pissing on the beach or smokers who leave their butts or people who leave their garbage everywhere we stop everyone from doing it.
I like you am partially in favour of restricting where people are allowed to smoke, for example I agree on banning smoking inside buildings where non-smokers cannot avoid the unpleasant smell and the health effects of 2nd hand smoke. I think you should be able to smoke in your home or car provided the other occupants don't mind although don't think it should be allowed when children are impacted by it, sorry dad but you shouldn't have smoked in the car when us kids were in there. I mostly agree with banning smoking in restaurants however think if the restaurant or bar wants to have a smoking area and they can absolutely ensure through ventilation or isolation that no-one who doesn't want to smell the foul weed, employees included, has to then let them do it.
In Canada if some people can't behave like grown adults our governments treat us all like children. This is not reflective of a modern, just or tolerant society. When people live in close proximity to other people we must have laws that protect everyones rights peace, enjoyment and personal fulfillment. But that is where the law should stop.
His ratings were very high in Vancouver and that is why he got kicked off.
"Choose the lifestyle that 'they' prefer - as long as that lifestyle doesn't harm the innocent" (suggests that in this case - smokers are guilty).
I doubt the right to choose to smoke on a public beach - defines us as Canadians - the right to smoke as an individual - may be an element of Canadian freedom to choose.
There is unlikely any correlation between the legal right to smoke and any right to smoke around other people who may not like smoke - the latter in the majority.
Choices and freedoms - may well be "illusions" but not being allowed to smoke in public is probably not a stellar example of this.
Mr. Leykis has it right - a person should respect themself - however they should also respect (or in the case of the shock jock - disrespect) ALL others with equal vigour---men and women - black, chinese, white, brown etc.
Just because it doesn't bother you Nicholas Simon doesn't mean it isn't bothering others around you. I believe there should smoking cafes where those who want to smoke can gather at for enjoyment and work at for employment if one so chooses. It must be made clear that just because you are outside doesn't mean that all of a sudden there is no second hand smoke often clouds of smoke linger along sidewalks or paths for a few minutes after a smoker passes it is quite disgusting.
And also to be clear cannabis smoke is not the same as cigarette smoke cannabis smoke has been shown over and over again to be not only safe but protective against lung cancer it is nowhere near the same thing as cigarettes.
I am an asthmatic, not a criminal. I don't deserve to be bullied out of my spot every 5-15 minutes by self-absorbed, selfish, and wilfully ignorant morons who believe it is their prerogative to decide what is good enough for me and what I owe it to them to put up with from them. If having to get up and move if I don't like it is good enough for me, then it is definitely good enough for the smokers creating the problem.
This supposed to be a free country for everyone, not just smokers. Smokers who don't like nanny laws are free to do two things:
1. behave like the adults they claim to be instead of spoiled toddlers who believe they should be able to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences to others, thus making the nanny laws unnecessary; and
2. attend and voice their opinions when given the opportunity, as I and over a dozen other people did at the Parks Board meeting several months ago, when we urged, begged, and pleaded with the Parks Board to please please please pass this law so that we can just sit on a beach or in a park and enjoy ourselves without being repeatedly driven away by inconsiderate smokers.
Glen P robbins yes smokers are guilty they are smoking, second hand smoke harms the innocent. Say what you want I disapprove of smoking. Come try to smoke near me I will tell you "that will kill you, please do not blow the smoke at me" Come here and try it. Choosing to smoke doesn't make us Canadian BUT saving a crevice of earth for smokers to go to smoke does. They are Canadians too.
Think of it this way. If you do not like living in loud areas like Robson or Water -- why would you move there, there are quiet neighborhoods in North Delta. Move there. Don't post noise complaints, that is the area zoned for noise TOUGH BEANS! I can't swim so I do not live on a house boat.
Comparatively, If the bylaw was instead to give smokers a smoking area at the beach --don't go near it. Avoid it! Stay away from it. Keep your distance. How else can I put it to get you all to understand that once you are not there it doesn't affect you!!!! SO WHY DO YOU CARE? Why impose your values on someone else? What is wrong with us that we want to control it all?
The article's message was simple, why can we not find a way to live together and get along? Why in Vancouver is our answer to ban, eliminate, be rid of? Why no compromise? Why can you not allow smokers to slowly kill themselves if they feel like it -- once they do it without bothering you? Why couldn't that guy who shut down Tom Leykis simply STOP LISTENING?
We should provide solutions that are fair to all. If there was a smoking area at beaches 80% of the smokers (that would have continued to smoke regardless) will go there. Most people have respect MANY do not but come on we are Canadian. We polite.
Us versus them will never win. Working together works. We need to live together and we need to tolerate each others bad habits. Once we can set some strict ground rules not restrictive absolutes (and provide plenty of ashtrays) we can all be happy. We are all married to each other, like it or not -- and marriage is COMPROMISE! Try telling your wife she CANT do something...I dare you.
Yes but most of those activities can not be done without disturbing others. If we can set up a way to allow smokers to smoke without disturbing others we should do it. Even though I am happy about the bylaw, I think he has a point.
It is not a fair comparison to say that people drive so they can smoke, what is the difference they are both dangerous. The difference is that cars are a useful tool while cigarettes are just population control for the foolish.
They clearly are not being taxed enough. Impose higher taxes which contribute directly to health care funding. Feel free to pick up the butts in the sand.
Having said that, this bylaw is good. It moves society into the direction to quit smoking. It makes it inconvenient to smoke. That is a good thing. Take the good with the bad Nicholas. Sometimes the few have to lose in order for us all to win. After all it is in their best interest to quit and we shouldn't make it easy or convenient to new smokers.
Nice Article
Really, you know exactly where the smoke is going to blow?
No in their wisdom they are banning cigarette smoking most likely for the health reason for second hand smoke. However this reasoning do not stand up. Surely, having the exhaust of 1000's of car passing through or beside parks is not good for the health of park goers. Or even the damaging effects of the Sun with respect to skin cancer. Or better yet the wonderful artery clogging suturated fat loaded fish and chips or burgers served at the concession stands. How about the fumes from a barbeque.
Overall, there is a litinary of things which are not beneficial to us at the beach. However, I think it is our right to take the risks.
All studies of second hand smoke relate to closed environments. Inside a car or house, restaurant etc. There is little evidence that someone smoking sitting 100 feet from you at a beach could possibly damage your lungs.
What is common sense is if you are sitting at the beach with your childern and a group of people sit next to you chain smoking, that they should cease smoking or move. It should be a common curtesy and respect. We have lost all respect for one another in our society. We have lost the ability to communicate with one another. We rely more and more on big brother/government to manage every single minute details in our lives. I don't like it.
We should be able to eat, drink, smoke both cigarettes and pot on the beach. However at the same time we should respect those around us.
I believe in the initiatives and think that less smoking in the city would be a plus but banning smoking is only a piece of the solution. We will never get people out to the beach if clean air is the lure when a raining miserable day is the deterrent.
Covered beach shelters is the only some-what desirable solution. Lets start talking about that.
I wasn't suggesting that smokers are guilty of anything - I was suggesting that by inference you see them as guilty (and this is admitted by you more than once) - not a solid lily pad from which to advance your libertarian thesis - perhaps not quite as good as the radio example in my view.
How would you approach the smoking area compromise to satisfy all stakeholders? My peeve were cigarette butts - I hate them - its like garbage - shitty's up the beach - makes it seem dirty and uncool - when the beach in the summer is the best place to be.
I admit (until I quit recently) that the smell of chronic used to have me like Wimpy (Popeye); or (Randy - Trailer Park Boys) on a burger - at the beach so I admit to my own hypocricies vis-a-vis smell - in that context making me a smoker supporter.
I really have difficulty quashing freedom of speech as in your radio argument -- people should be able to say what they want to say -- but some people act on - or could act on direct statements about hatred -where is the line? We do have good ground on the freedom of speech matter.
Your point about telling one's wife "she can't do something" - really hit home with me -- I don't dare - work needs to be done by me on that account to ensure better freedom of speech all round.
Personally, I don't care if someone smokes. But stop being pigs.
Canada and American are the only two countries i have been to, and i am well traveled, that does not allow people to have a drink in a park, or on the beach!
I am limited in the fun i want to have based on what is deemed acceptable by my government. I must go an pay an inflated price to some bar if i want to enjoy drinks with my friends, this is ridiculous! I live in Canada, a country where we are supposed to have the right to choose our lifestyle and how we want to live. Now they are taking smoking away from us?
Honestly i will ignore the law, and if approached by a park ranger or police officer, will refuse to give them my name or ID. I would rather be arrested than recognize their right to tell me what to do. I did not grow up in a police state, and when I have children I don't want them to grow up in one either.
Enforce the litter laws you useless bunch of politicians, and either find the cojones to ban tobacco once and for all or back off the infringement on personal freedoms.
Note that I chose examples that would affect other people.
Polluting Corporations that are doing incredible damage to our earth are
not really being disturbed too much at all. They contribute BIG bucks to
the wealthy elite members of our society. It's easy to beat up the little guy - he has no power.
that is as good as it is going to get.