Skip to content

Seeking the line for reasonable restrictions

I t seems every time we turn around someone is trying to limit where and when we as individuals can do certain things. Certainly civilization requires some over-arching rules to avoid complete anarchy.

It seems every time we turn around someone is trying to limit where and when we as individuals can do certain things.

Certainly civilization requires some over-arching rules to avoid complete anarchy. While most of us are generally law-abiding citizens, there is an element among us who would go completely rogue without rules, regulations and laws, and of course the associated enforcement required.

But increasingly we see more and more rules and regulations which seem to have extended beyond the realm of common sense.

The problem of course is establishing just where the line is which is reasonable in terms of regulating our lives. It is a line which varies by who is being asked about what they see as reasonable.

We see schools which ask parents not to send peanut butter sandwiches to school because some students can be severely allergic to nuts. For some that seems reasonable. Others see it as going too far especially since peanut butter has long been a reasonably priced sandwich for many youngsters.

Others rally behind a call by some Muslims to ban pork in school cafeterias based on an interpretation of certain passages in the Qur’an. From a religious perspective that may have merit, but others vehemently oppose the suggestion as going too far.

Hospitals post signs suggesting visitors not wear perfumed products because of the impact they might have for those with certain medical conditions. Is that reasonable? Or does it impose an unreasonable expectation of people?

In Saskatoon a city council committee in May wanted to explore some restrictions on backyard fire pits in Saskatoon.

A spokeswoman for the Lung Association of Saskatchewan wanted more than restrictions. Jennifer May appeared before a planning, development and community services committee meeting to ask for a complete ban on backyard wood burning.

May, the lung association’s vice-president of health promotion, said restrictions on when people can burn wood does not help people with respiratory illnesses, suggest a ban on burning wood would still allow people to enjoy fires fuelled by propane, natural gas and fuel gel.

That is one that many will balk at as too extreme.

In Ontario the ideas of a backyard skating rink has come under consideration of being banned because of neighbour concerns.

And Regina’s new smoking bylaw comes into force banning smoking or vaping on any outdoor seating area at a bar or restaurant. In addition, under the new rules, people will also not be permitted to smoke within 10 metres of public buildings. Lighting up or vaping will also not be allowed on municipal-owned spaces -- such as parks, playgrounds, and golf courses -- or during outdoor festival and events.

Imagine heading to Deer Park Golf Course and being on course with friends and not being allowed a cigar.

We appreciate smoking is not good for you, and that second hand smoke is bad for those around the smoker, but if the health risk requires such a confined bylaw as Regina has implemented perhaps it’s time to simply ban the sale of smoking materials.

Readers will applaud some of the restrictions noted here and see others as ridiculous, but the list does show just how restricted we are becoming and the bigger question we need to ask is if that is good for society?