Why is smoking at 16 legal in the UK?

It's illegal to buy/sell cigarettes until the age of 18. It's illegal to buy/sell cigarettes to another person under the age of 18.

But LOL LEGAL AT 16 TO SMOKE IN PUBLIC XXDDD

Pretty much everyone at my school and sixthform smokes and it's really frustrating and depressing to look at.

The government spends so much money on making public announcements and graphic adverts about it. So the fact that it's legal to smoke in public at 16 just defeats their effort and wastes taxpayers' money. And of course it puts a huge strain on the NHS with smokers, so such a loose law is ridiculous.

1) Why the hell is it legal to smoke at only 16?

2) Why can't they realise that telling kids of the horrific diseases smoking causes is NOT an effective deterrent? People don't care about the long term effects, and literally say "eh it won't affect me until I'm way older" ..... why is there no other approach? Can't they consult a friggin psychologist?

Reply 1

jordan12341

Do you really really think a ban would stop them smoking, Its already illegal to buy them until you're eighteen so if theyve found a way around that its not exactly a great leap

Reply 2

serculis

Original post by jordan12341

Do you really really think a ban would stop them smoking, Its already illegal to buy them until you're eighteen so if theyve found a way around that its not exactly a great leap

I'm focusing more on government rather than the kids themselves. They're spending (OUR) money to try and prevent it, yet deciding not to keep the limit at 18. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Reply 3

jordan12341

And it would take money and policing time to enforce a further ban, I don't know which college you go to but in reality the amount of young people who smoke is very low, it isn't worth a ban

Reply 4

serculis

Original post by jordan12341

And it would take money and policing time to enforce a further ban, I don't know which college you go to but in reality the amount of young people who smoke is very low, it isn't worth a ban

Well, when you think about it, it's putting money and effort into something that brings benefits, ooooor "saving money and effort", and then still wasting a lot of money until the end of time if the ban stays at 16 forever. When you think about it, the latter seems more logical.

And I don't know what college you go to, because the story of how every smoker became one IS when they were underage. most of them.

Reply 5

jordan12341

It certainly doesn't bring benefits to non smokers, really it only benefits the health of the tiny number of people between 16 and 18 who smoke and of them the even smaller percentage who will actually take any notice of the ban. How can you justify the money and effort for such a marginal benefit to people whose choice it is to damage their own health

Reply 6

serculis

Original post by jordan12341

Focusing on the teenage non-smokers, it has big benefits. Teenagers are susceptible to peer pressure to start smoking. If there's less teenage smokers because of the ban, there will be less peer pressure spreading around. I don't think the issue should be seen in a black and white version i.e. "it's their choice if they want to damage their own health". It's teenagers and they're typically vulnerable like that.

I don't see "saving money and effort" as any more justification compared to my proposal.

Reply 7

jordan12341

I'm sorry but you're wrong, there's three major points to this
- the proportion of teenagers who smoke is tiny
-just because there is a ban doesn't mean people won't smoke (look at alcohol for instance)
-the money and effort cost is disproportionate to the benefit

There are not enough smokers to make this ban worthwhile and even if there was a ban, if you are determined enough to smoke now (while it's illegal to buy) would the ban really stop you, probably not.