Federal New Democrats won't say how they intend to vote on a bill that aims to keep minors from accessing sexually explicit material online, while the Conservatives say they're prepared to work on amending the controversial legislation.
Meanwhile the LPC oppose the bill while the CPC would work to amend it.
What a joke politics has become. Since the 1990s “protect the children” has become a perennial excuse for absurd legislation that does nothing of the sort, and not one party has learned how to stand firm against the calumnious deceit of the people who habitually abuse it. The Liberals feel confident enough to oppose this bill only because they have their own which is almost as bad.
Strange to think that only a few generations ago Canada was known for “good government.”
Flavored tobacco was literally marketed to children, to get them addicted to cigarettes from an early age. The “protect the children” arguments are often used to ban things that made no impact or even positive impact in children’s lives (DnD, sexual equality). Or it’s used to justify surveillance and overreach (porn bans and she verification laws)
If anyone’s claiming that any of these things is equivalent to another it isn’t me, but marketing campaigns aimed at children (for tobacco and in general) are also something we’d be better off without.
Isn’t that already illegal? As far as I remember, ad breaks during my morning cartoons were either for other shows on the network or Swiffer and laundry detergent.
It is illegal, but kids get most content online now. So, although many countries have laws on the books against ads targeting children, it doesn’t mean that they don’t.
Juul got in trouble for doing this, using ads that were definitely not specifically targeting tweens/teens on websites for Seventeen magazine, cartoon network, and Nick jr.
Flavoured tobacco (and nicotine pens/juice) is more appealing to young people, especially those who aren’t educated on the risks and haven’t developed self control.
It’s more appealing to everyone, irrespective of age. Wikipedia suggests that it’s been popular since the 19th century at latest. It was flavoured cigarillos that were the first tobacco products that tempted me, at a young age but not a child. Later, when I was much old, if pleasingly-flavoured vapes had been unavailable I would’ve had a much more difficult time quitting the nicotine.
But anyway, it’s the misguided notion that enjoying things which taste good is childish that I find offensive. Advocate for banning all tobacco and I can’t really say you’re wrong to suggest it, but don’t fall for that nonsense.
That’s the thing that people who want flavour bans don’t get, it helps people quit cigarettes cause it tastes good and gives you your nicotine. Yes it’s more appealing to kids as well but if flavours get banned then more kids will just start picking up cigarettes again cause they’re dumb kids(I was one too, no shade) and want to look and feel cool, and if their friends are doing it then there’s a good chance they will too.
Idk what the solution is but banning flavours is just gonna push people back to actual tobacco which is absolutely worse than vapes. Kids are gonna use nicotine no matter how much or a fuss people make or how hard you regulate it, a flavour ban isn’t gonna make things any better and will piss off a lot of people that aren’t kids, including me.
Fuck off and let me poison my lungs with fruity vapour if I want, that’s basically my retirement plan at this point anyways is lung cancer or liver failure.
The legislation doesn’t specify how websites should verify a user’s age, but options include establishing a digital ID system or services that can estimate an individual’s age based on a visual scan of their face.
Yeah, that’s a greeeeat idea. People will obviously be totally on board with their computer taking their picture while they’re gearing up to do that.
Regardless, all laws like this do are sell VPN subscriptions or push people to the real shady sites. As a consistent NDP voter (not that my vote matters in my Conservative riding) I sincerely hope they’re making a show of reviewing this bill before dismissing it. We saw what happens when the NDP tries to move right of the Liberals under Mulcair - it’s a bad move.
Yup, but politicians are always trying to play the game. They probably have some internal metric causing them to believe that making a show of looking into this might win them a few voters while retaining their base. Maybe they’re right, but I still don’t like it. Either way they’ll have my vote as they’re the only non-Conservative party with even a remote possibility of winning my riding. (Plus I’ve sworn off the Liberals for a good while after their broken promise on electoral reform.)
Where is the bill to make child marriage illegal if we want to speak about “protecting the children”? How about proper funding, staffing, and over site of Child protection services?
It is disgusting looking at how many lengths politicians go to ignore, and prevent changes to, those laws while making nothing issues the “solution”.
I am going to keep saying this. Anyone down to form a party?
There are NO parties in Canada that represent non-corporate interests.
When your government commits crimes against its country wholesale, there is nothing you can do that even compares. Abuse self-checkouts, cook your taxes, split your internet connection across 3 houses. You will never do a thousandth of the damage they do to you.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Drop all support for the bill already
What a joke politics has become. Since the 1990s “protect the children” has become a perennial excuse for absurd legislation that does nothing of the sort, and not one party has learned how to stand firm against the calumnious deceit of the people who habitually abuse it. The Liberals feel confident enough to oppose this bill only because they have their own which is almost as bad.
Strange to think that only a few generations ago Canada was known for “good government.”
If you really want to protect children, start by going after fossil fuel companies
Protect the children, they cry, while permitting flavoured tobacco or something else as terrible
Tobacco is the health hazard to children and adults alike, not the flavours added to it. But that’s another moral panic.
Flavored tobacco was literally marketed to children, to get them addicted to cigarettes from an early age. The “protect the children” arguments are often used to ban things that made no impact or even positive impact in children’s lives (DnD, sexual equality). Or it’s used to justify surveillance and overreach (porn bans and she verification laws)
These aren’t equivalent.
If anyone’s claiming that any of these things is equivalent to another it isn’t me, but marketing campaigns aimed at children (for tobacco and in general) are also something we’d be better off without.
Isn’t that already illegal? As far as I remember, ad breaks during my morning cartoons were either for other shows on the network or Swiffer and laundry detergent.
It is illegal, but kids get most content online now. So, although many countries have laws on the books against ads targeting children, it doesn’t mean that they don’t.
Juul got in trouble for doing this, using ads that were definitely not specifically targeting tweens/teens on websites for Seventeen magazine, cartoon network, and Nick jr.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/health/juul-vaping-lawsuit.html
Edit: correction on the websites
Flavoured tobacco (and nicotine pens/juice) is more appealing to young people, especially those who aren’t educated on the risks and haven’t developed self control.
It’s more appealing to everyone, irrespective of age. Wikipedia suggests that it’s been popular since the 19th century at latest. It was flavoured cigarillos that were the first tobacco products that tempted me, at a young age but not a child. Later, when I was much old, if pleasingly-flavoured vapes had been unavailable I would’ve had a much more difficult time quitting the nicotine.
But anyway, it’s the misguided notion that enjoying things which taste good is childish that I find offensive. Advocate for banning all tobacco and I can’t really say you’re wrong to suggest it, but don’t fall for that nonsense.
That’s the thing that people who want flavour bans don’t get, it helps people quit cigarettes cause it tastes good and gives you your nicotine. Yes it’s more appealing to kids as well but if flavours get banned then more kids will just start picking up cigarettes again cause they’re dumb kids(I was one too, no shade) and want to look and feel cool, and if their friends are doing it then there’s a good chance they will too.
Idk what the solution is but banning flavours is just gonna push people back to actual tobacco which is absolutely worse than vapes. Kids are gonna use nicotine no matter how much or a fuss people make or how hard you regulate it, a flavour ban isn’t gonna make things any better and will piss off a lot of people that aren’t kids, including me.
Fuck off and let me poison my lungs with fruity vapour if I want, that’s basically my retirement plan at this point anyways is lung cancer or liver failure.
Yeah, that’s a greeeeat idea. People will obviously be totally on board with their computer taking their picture while they’re gearing up to do that.
Regardless, all laws like this do are sell VPN subscriptions or push people to the real shady sites. As a consistent NDP voter (not that my vote matters in my Conservative riding) I sincerely hope they’re making a show of reviewing this bill before dismissing it. We saw what happens when the NDP tries to move right of the Liberals under Mulcair - it’s a bad move.
I swear historically they (the NDP) would have been vehemently against this as I recall them being very pro privacy in the past.
Yup, but politicians are always trying to play the game. They probably have some internal metric causing them to believe that making a show of looking into this might win them a few voters while retaining their base. Maybe they’re right, but I still don’t like it. Either way they’ll have my vote as they’re the only non-Conservative party with even a remote possibility of winning my riding. (Plus I’ve sworn off the Liberals for a good while after their broken promise on electoral reform.)
Where is the bill to make child marriage illegal if we want to speak about “protecting the children”? How about proper funding, staffing, and over site of Child protection services?
It is disgusting looking at how many lengths politicians go to ignore, and prevent changes to, those laws while making nothing issues the “solution”.
I am going to keep saying this. Anyone down to form a party?
There are NO parties in Canada that represent non-corporate interests.
When your government commits crimes against its country wholesale, there is nothing you can do that even compares. Abuse self-checkouts, cook your taxes, split your internet connection across 3 houses. You will never do a thousandth of the damage they do to you.
That’s what I get for using autocorrect.
If they do this I can see an uptick in teen pregnancies and rape