Smoking: if it's so bad, why don't they make it illegal?

Scroll to see replies

simple_things

nope there isnt but there are alot of people who do not understand how to or want to drink in moderation. similar with smoking really.

You can't smoke 'in moderation' though. You can have a drink without getting drunk, but you can't have a cigarette without it somehow damaging your lungs.

Reply 81

simple_things

Angelil

You can't smoke 'in moderation' though. You can have a drink without getting drunk, but you can't have a cigarette without it somehow damaging your lungs.

if you've got a pack of 10 and no money for the next 4 days or you are trying to give up you moderate to 2 a day or less regardless of how many you normally smoke. you still damage your lungs, you just damage them more slowly. in the same way with alcohol you still poison your body if you drink slowly. you just poison it more slowly.

Reply 82

UniOfLife

simple_things

Difference is that the liver will filter out the toxins from alcohol and there will be no damage if you drink in moderation. Smoking leaves deposits in the lungs that will not go away.

Reply 83

Agamemnon

simple_things

nope there isnt but there are alot of people who do not understand how to or want to drink in moderation. similar with smoking really.

It isn't similar to smoking because the majority of those who drink, do drink a sensible amount and research shows that even light smokers still do develop serious health problems from smoking.

Reply 84

The Bishman

Why cant people just let us smokers be? If I want to smoke, I will. I know about the dangers etc. I know about how it kills children and will eventually bring back nazis riding dinosaurs while volcanoes expload over earth.

But I dont care. Stop persecuting me for a life choice I've made. If you want to make it illegal, I will damn well still smoke, nothing will stop that.

Reply 85

Agamemnon

bishman

I don't see how any reasonable person can say smoking is worth the health risks. It only reduces you below normal with the craving and then brings you back up to normal once that craving is satisfied. It is not like other drugs which enhance your mood above normal. If you understand what I'm saying.

bishman

But I dont care. Stop persecuting me for a life choice I've made. If you want to make it illegal, I will damn well still smoke, nothing will stop that.

I think if it was made illegal you would stop.

Reply 86

Top_Gear

Do you as a taxpayer want to pay more?

Reply 87

Top_Gear

Agamemnon

They made drink driving and using your phone whilst driving illegal, thousands of people still do it though!

Reply 88

The Bishman

Agamemnon

Just like making drugs illegal has stopped people using them. Good logic.

Reply 89

Agamemnon

bishman

Just like making drugs illegal has stopped people using them. Good logic.

I said that I thought there was a good chance that it would make you stop. I found it doubtful you're going to go to the trouble of acquiring them on the black market etc. and just have the good sense to stop smoking.

Reply 90

The Bishman

Agamemnon

Why would I want to stop smoking? I enjoy it, I enjoy the taste and smell (hence why I only smoke unfiltered roll-ups). Its a vice I know is bad for me in the long-term, like coffee, alcohol or fast-food. The dangers mean little to me, I dont want to give up smoking, and for people to assume its best for me by banning it takes away my power of choice.

Reply 91

Angelil

Another reason they shouldn't criminalise it is that there are more important things for the police/justice system to be spending their time on.

I'd rather the policeman was chasing the guy who's just robbed the bank down the street rather than berating some randomer for smoking in a doorway.

Reply 92

Agamemnon

Angelil

It could be given low priority. The smoking in public ban has been quite effective and the police haven't needed to hand out an enormous amount of fines or devote a massive amount of manpower to policing it.

Reply 93

sugar_cane

Angelil

I'd rather the police were out saving lives of those who don't voluntarily put their life in danger rather than locking up those who wish to harm their health by smoking.
Smokers know that smoking can kill, it says so over all the packets, but they continue because they want to/they're addicted. Therefore they're putting their own lives at risk...

Reply 94

Agamemnon

sugar_cane

I'd rather the police were out saving lives of those who don't voluntarily put their life in danger rather than locking up those who wish to harm their health by smoking.

It isn't a choice between the two. As I said, I doubt it will take that much manpower to police, just as the smoking in public ban has not. According to the surveys the majority of smokers want to give up smoking.

sugar_cane

Smokers know that smoking can kill, it says so over all the packets, but they continue because they want to/they're addicted. Therefore they're putting their own lives at risk...

True but society does have some responsiblity to stop people harming themselves.

Reply 95

sugar_cane

Agamemnon

People want to give up smoking but they can't/don't...and making it illegal won't stop them. The nature of addiction will just mean that they'll do anything to get a cigarette...that's just the way it is. How many black markets is a smoking ban going to cause? I'm not even going to able to answer that question, and with that will increase crime etc. We've already got a big problem with gang culture and recent shootings, does it need to be made worse? The police already have enough to do.
Yep, I understand, society should help/stop those who harm themselves...but smokers voluntarily smoke. It's their choice. The help from the NHS is there for those who want to quit...a smoker can take that if he/she wants...

Reply 96

Agamemnon

sugar_cane

People want to give up smoking but they can't/don't...and making it illegal won't stop them.

I don't know about that. I think the public smoking ban, which inconveniences smokers, is helping to encourage more people to give up smoking. Smoking is extremely addictive, as addictive as heroine, but there is a lot of help there. I think criminalisation shouldn't be introduced yet, but when the number of smokers is very small - it has to be done gradually. The justification for criminalising it in my view is that smoking is so harmful that if it were invented tomorrow it would probably quickly be banned.

Reply 97

The Bishman

Agamemnon

To be fair, as a smoker I respect that arguement that if it was attempted to be released today I could not have been. This is very true. However this is not the case and so is a moot point.

The case is smoking has been around for decades in many different forms. They will never phase out smoking, due to the practice being that ingrained into society. They can ban it in all places apart from private homes, however it is unlikely to ever happen, even though in Japan they ban smoking on the public streets in certain areas, they set up smoking lounges so people can smoke legally (a good idea here if it was legal?)

Also, dont council officials police the ban? not police usually?

Reply 98

Agamemnon

bishman

Also, dont council officials police the ban? not police usually?

I'm not sure, but the ban has been largely obeyed with little resistance, I was just mentioning it in order to dispute the idea that criminalising it would require huge police resources.

Reply 99

burningnun

Agamemnon

True but society does have some responsiblity to stop people harming themselves.

No it doesn't.

UniOfLife

Difference is that the liver will filter out the toxins from alcohol and there will be no damage if you drink in moderation. Smoking leaves deposits in the lungs that will not go away.

Alcohol will decrease short term test. production in men, put excess stress on the liver and contains more energy per gram than fat. If you smoke for a short time then give up, the lungs will clear themselves out, AFIAK. Which is worse depends on your priorities - something the gov't has no right to regulate.

IMO the right to control what goes in and out of your own body is fundamental. Smoking should be banned where it infringes that right (public transport and buildings), and business owners should make the business decision to or to not ban smoking in their pub/restaurant.