[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by TheSownRose)
But I'd far rather be standing next to someone smoking than someone who is drunk.

As a non-smoker and someone who only ever drinks on special occasions (and even then its 2 glasses of wine, tops), I'd rather be stood next to a drunk person than someone smoking. I still wouldn't be thrilled about it, but I'd rather be not thrilled and healthy than not thrilled and at risk of lung cancer...

[Tolth]

(Original post by IlliteratePedant)
Misleading thread title, they're banning the display of cigarettes, not cigarettes themselves. Which seems pretty stupid to me because cigarettes are not an impulse buy.

They absolutely are an impulse buy if you're trying to quit.

[Annie72]

I do wish that people would not liken tobacco use with alcohol use, its not the same at all.I mean after consuming 10 pints someone might be more likely to fall over in the street or cause a punch up however if someone smokes 10 fags then what's going to happen?.Will they fall over or cause a fight??.


I dont smoke but would prefer to stand next to a smoker than a drunk!!.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Annie72)
If someone smokes 10 fags then what's going to happen?.Will they fall over.

Well... they might fall over and die? you never know

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by Annie72)
I do wish that people would not liken tobacco use with alcohol use, its not the same at all.I mean after consuming 10 pints someone might be more likely to fall over in the street or cause a punch up however if someone smokes 10 fags then what's going to happen?.Will they fall over or cause a fight??.


I dont smoke but would prefer to stand next to a smoker than a drunk!!.

If someone smokes 10 fags in a public place they put everyone else around them at risk of lung cancer etc. even if those people don't smoke themselves. And a person who drinks doesn't necessarily have to have 10 pints and get wasted and hurt someone, they could just have one drink and be fine (drinking low levels is actually correlated with longer life); but someone who smokes 1 fag in public puts themselves and other people at risk of cancer and other smoking/second hand smoke related illnesses.
So yes, we shouldn't compare alcohol and cigarettes, but not because cigarettes are less harmful.

[IlliteratePedant]

(Original post by Tolth)
They absolutely are an impulse buy if you're trying to quit.

Fair point, I didn't think of that. But even still, someone trying to quit smoking will still crave tobacco even if they can't see a packet of cigarettes.

(Original post by Annie72)
I dont smoke but would prefer to stand next to a smoker than a drunk!!.

I wouldn't. Smokers smell a lot worse than drinkers!

[CLS94]

For a start, if this is about young people then why on Earth is the ban only in larger shops?If your under 18, you either get it off older friends/family, or try a dodgy corner shop in need of the money and where the bloke behind the counter will probably be effected much more by how much he can sell. Secondly, in case they haven't reaslised yet, the best way to make young people want something is to tell them they can't have it - if you didn't hide it or make it seem dangerous or bad, and took away the age restrictions, the amount of young smokers would decrease. The government is completely out of touch with life outside mansions and millionaire families, and this is yet another policy showing that.

[TattyBoJangles]

I think it's just a bit irritating. It's faff when they don't have the brand in stock, and everyone knows what's behind the screen. In the local Tesco there's a white board, and directly above it - "TOBACCO".
Wonder what's behind there..

I also find the notion that young people are starting smoking because of pack design rather amusing. Yes, most smokers start before 18, but I'd say most are either pressured or curious as they've seen parents etc. smoke.

I don't understand why bright blue / red / generally coloured alcoholic drinks are allowed to be on display. Surely WKDs and their semi-luminous appearance is far more likely to encourage underage drinking than a blue pack of fags with a dead smoker on the front is likely to encourage people to start smoking?

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by TattyBoJangles)
I don't understand why bright blue / red / generally coloured alcoholic drinks are allowed to be on display. Surely WKDs and their semi-luminous appearance is far more likely to encourage underage drinking than a blue pack of fags with a dead smoker on the front is likely to encourage people to start smoking?

The thing there is that it is possible to drink 1 WKD without it causing damage to you (there is a correlation between low level drinking and longer life), but you can't have a cigarette without it causing harm to you.

[original_username]

A sliding door infront of fags to deter young smokers? What about the 18 age limit for smoking.
I think they've done enough to deter the idea of smoking from people. We just have to accept that there are people that want to smoke and that is their choice. Putting a screen infront of them will have zero effect on anything.

[calumsteele1]

the people who dreamed up this ludicrous idea should be strung up and shot.
hiding displays isnt going to effect people starting smoking in the slightest ... it just makes it a nuisance for the customer as he now has no idea what cigarettes are on sale and a bigger nuisance for the store staff as they now need to spend an age searching behind the blinds ... combined with this plain packaging idea theyve got going on in bit its soon going to be a bloody lucky dip what you end up smoking... and why are they doing this? for some misguided illogical reasoning that it will curb the rates of smoking and people taking it up.. complete **** i have not once met someone who started smoking because it was in a shop with pretty packaging its litle more than some anally retentive uptight minister pandering to the mothers brigade.

[LavenderBlueSky88]

I'm pretty sure this has already happened in my local Morrisons, at the little counter where they sell ciggarettes etc there is now just a blank wall instead of the display :/

[Elipsis]

For weeks I just presumed that they were closing the tobacco area down, so I kept going round to the newsagents to get my kingsize silvers. Then one day I asked, and they opened up the screens for me to see all the goodies. I don't really understand the idea, it would make much more sense to just make the tobacco manufacturers put their products in plain white packaging. I don't feel like the government are ever going to accept that some people are always going to want to smoke...

[TheSownRose]

(Original post by Chloe xxx)
If you smoke yourself, obviously you would rather be next to a smoker, if you despise drunk people. You atleast wouldnt mind, not going to be further damaging your health really is it?

I also dislike being in close proximity to drunk people if I am not myself drunk, which is the vast majority of the time. No one forces you to be around these people. A person behaving inappropriately in a public place whilst drunk can and likely will be arrested.

The person puffing their fag in the street or in a house and infecting others, including childrens lungs with their foulness isnt going to be arrested, or even told to stop.

I absolutely would mind; like I say, I really hate being around drunk people. I don't drink at all so no one ever has to put up with me being drunk, so I have absolutely no reason to tolerate people unable to speak or stand, being far too touchy-feely, being ill, doing ridiculous things... I kick people off of my property when they drink, I wouldn't kick someone off of my property if they wanted to smoke.

They'll only be arrested if they're behaving illegally. You can be legal and still inappropriate and antisocial. Same reason why someone smoking won't or shouldn't be arrested - as long as they're not smoking indoors or in a workplace, they aren't breaking the law.

I'm not defending smoking as a wonderful, clean habit whereas alcohol is the mother of all evils. My point is that, IMO, alcoholic products should be subject to the same regulations or it should be accepted that both are unhealthy in excess but perfectly legal and therefore there is nothing wrong with having the products on display.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by TheSownRose)
I absolutely would mind; like I say, I really hate being around drunk people. I don't drink at all so no one ever has to put up with me being drunk, so I have absolutely no reason to tolerate people unable to speak or stand, being far too touchy-feely, being ill, doing ridiculous things... I kick people off of my property when they drink, I wouldn't kick someone off of my property if they wanted to smoke.

They'll only be arrested if they're behaving illegally. You can be legal and still inappropriate and antisocial. Same reason why someone smoking won't or shouldn't be arrested - as long as they're not smoking indoors or in a workplace, they aren't breaking the law.

I'm not defending smoking as a wonderful, clean habit whereas alcohol is the mother of all evils. My point is that, IMO, alcoholic products should be subject to the same regulations or it should be accepted that both are unhealthy in excess but perfectly legal and therefore there is nothing wrong with having the products on display.

Smoking is not 'unhealthy in excess' it is unhealthy full stop. Alcohol is good in small amounts, and unhealthy in large, but tobacco is unhealthy in any amount. While I don't think that covering up fags is going to do anything, you can't compare it to alcohol in this way!

[Bukhatir]

(Original post by 01jtiong)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17626133

what do u think

WOW, we finally have a ''bbc wanna be'' how wonderful, but only if he knew the right place for it

[SubAtomic]

(Original post by Besakt)
Imagine if there was a full aisle of tobacco products.

I know, I would definitely be unable to resist the urge to smoke and drink myself to death

[L i b]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
Smoking is not 'unhealthy in excess' it is unhealthy full stop. Alcohol is good in small amounts, and unhealthy in large, but tobacco is unhealthy in any amount. While I don't think that covering up fags is going to do anything, you can't compare it to alcohol in this way!

Alcohol is not 'good in small amounts'. Alcoholic drinks have within them some things that can be beneficial to health - often hyped up by the newspapers looking for a funny "health" story. In reality, there are none of these things that can't be better extracted from another, easily available source.

Anyone who pretends to drink alcohol for health reasons, if such a person even exists, would be an utter idiot.

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
I remember being told in school that tobacco is the only legally available substance that when used correctly, harms the user.

Which is rubbish.

[Rational Paradox]

Completely pointless; Everyone knows they're there anyway and the fact they're banning it because people might be induced by the packaging is beyond patronising.

[keyboard-warrior]

Do these idiots really think that banning away the display of cigarettes would really help?