Phasing out smoking

[ybbor]

Okay, I think we can all agree that smoking is addictive, and causes health problems. And no one is exactly advocating for marketing cigarettes to minors. And I hope I'm not going out on a limb here, but smoking is not essential to a happy life. So what if we phase out cigarette smoking/tobacco chewing? Say that anyone born before, say, Jan 1st 1990 (or any arbitrary date that would allow anyone currently legally able to smoke still able to) can purchase cigarettes and smoke, but anyone born after that date cannot? It would allow all people who can currently smoke to continue to do so, while ensuring that we don't have such serious health problems in the future?

I'm pretty sure this would never work, but can someone explain why?

 

[Truronian]

If people want to cause themselves health problems, what business our ours is it to stop them?

 

[Mirc]

There is just one reason for it not to work, but it's enough to stop this idea: people do more what they are forbidden.

 

[ori]

I'm pretty sure this would never work, but can someone explain why?

The same reason why the Prohibition did not work and today's ban of drugs like heroin is not working: ban something and it becomes sexy - people want to have/use/try it, other people will sell it. The only people who would profit from this will be the drugtobacco dealers...

 

[emzie]

Sounds excellent. I have a boat and access to lax Quebec laws. I will be the next Kennedy.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

No. However, I'd be interested in seeing laws that will, as of 20XX, make it an offense to smoke too near other people. (The health effects make this comparable to throwing salt into your neighbor's garden, a teenager playing 120dB rock music in a flat where other people live, etc.)

 

[warpus]

Okay, I think we can all agree that smoking is addictive, and causes health problems. And no one is exactly advocating for marketing cigarettes to minors. And I hope I'm not going out on a limb here, but smoking is not essential to a happy life. So what if we phase out cigarette smoking/tobacco chewing? Say that anyone born before, say, Jan 1st 1990 (or any arbitrary date that would allow anyone currently legally able to smoke still able to) can purchase cigarettes and smoke, but anyone born after that date cannot? It would allow all people who can currently smoke to continue to do so, while ensuring that we don't have such serious health problems in the future?

I'm pretty sure this would never work, but can someone explain why?

I all for personal responsibility, so we should let anyone who wants to, smoke.. provided they're over 18... and as long as they do it at home.

 

[LucyDuke]

Prohibitions never work, they just promote black markets and misinformation. The USA tobacco model we've got now is probably the best we'll get with any psychoactive: it's perfectly legal for adults to do as they please, and it's perfectly obvious that it's a poor health decision.

 

[thenooblet22]

What about second-hand smoke? I'm all for personal freedoms, but doesn't it risk others?

 

[Bozo Erectus]

No need to to make it illegal just tax it and ridicule it till it dies.

 

[warpus]

What about second-hand smoke? I'm all for personal freedoms, but doesn't it risk others?

Yeh, that's why you make it illegal to smoke in public.

 

[Red Door]

Why don't we ban free choice too?

Or chocolate, or sugar?



The argument to ban smoking is stupid. You can't ban someone's choices, it's their personal freedom. If you don't like what they're doing, then leave the area. It's not that hard.

 

[warpus]

Why don't we ban free choice too?

Or chocolate, or sugar?



The argument to ban smoking is stupid. You can't ban someone's choices, it's their personal freedom. If you don't like what they're doing, then leave the area. It's not that hard.

I don't buy that argument.

Cocaine is illegal.

 

[Red Door]

I don't buy that argument.

Cocaine is illegal.

I don't buy the argument that "it harms people." It's their personal choice to do so.

Where do I mention cocaine? I said chocolate, as in candy. It makes people fat.

 

[emzie]

I don't buy the argument that "it harms people." It's their personal choice to do so.

Where do I mention cocaine? I said chocolate, as in candy. It makes people fat.

Cocaine doesn't harm anyone around you. However, if you're black, apparently it makes you unable to control your lust for white women.

 

[Bill3000]

I don't buy the argument that "it harms people." It's their personal choice to do so.

Where do I mention cocaine? I said chocolate, as in candy. It makes people fat.

Chocolate doesn't make the people around you fat as well. And unlike smoking, there are some health benefits for eating dark chocolate in moderation.

 

[Red Door]

Cocaine doesn't harm anyone around you. However, if you're black, apparently it makes you unable to control your lust for white women.

It can though. You could kill someone while on a coke high.

Chocolate doesn't make the people around you fat as well. And unlike smoking, there are some health benefits for eating dark chocolate in moderation.

As I said, if you don't like someone smoking, go somewhere else. It doesn't matter anymore anyways, smoking is banned everywhere but outside, which is quite ********.

 

[emzie]

It can though. You could kill someone while on a coke high.

And you can kill someone while sober too. I would say that coke is a far less harmful drug to society than alcohol.

 

[Bill3000]

As I said, if you don't like someone smoking, go somewhere else. It doesn't matter anymore anyways, smoking is banned everywhere but outside, which is quite ********.

You really can't go somewhere else if you're a child and your parent is smoking.

Besides, it would be better to tell the smoker to go somewhere else - the smoker is the one who is causing the offense, so the smoker is the one that needs to accomodate other peoples' right to be healthy.

 

[emzie]

You really can't go somewhere else if you're a child and your parent is smoking.

It's hard to ban bad parenting.