The Student Room Group

Should the sale of packs of 10 cigarettes be stopped?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Joanna May
Yes. Your point? Clearly, the cigarette companies would know whether it works or not.


Perhaps, but they are clearly biased and their analysis cannot be take at face value. Later on in the article, a spokesman for the Department of Health's Office of Tobacco Control defends the move, suggesting with good reason that it will deter the much younger kids i.e. the 10-14 age band.
Ascient
Department of Health's Office of Tobacco Control
What were you saying about bias and not taking things at face value?
Ascient
Perhaps, but they are clearly biased and their analysis cannot be take at face value. Later on in the article, a spokesman for the Department of Health's Office of Tobacco Control defends the move, suggesting with good reason that it will deter the much younger kids i.e. the 10-14 age band.


So we extort more money from people who are buying these products perfectly legally, just because some pikey ten year olds are breaking the law and purchasing them illegally?

Do you really think, with a name like "The Office Of Tobacco Control" is any less biased than the cigarette companies?
There are no American tanks in Baghdad!

Reply 44
Bagration
What were you saying about bias and not taking things at face value?


I'd think they were slightly less biased than the cigarette companies, albeit in the other direction, but yes, on the whole cannot be taken at FV either. I was just balancing out what Joanna May said.

JM- I don't agree with the ban, so no is the answer to your question. My point was the word of the cigarette companies cannot be taken at gospel in this instance. That article is over a year old anyway, it'd be more interesting to see what effect the ban has had since then, rather than looking at what cigarette companies predicted what would happen.
Reply 45
Hmm, good point I suppose...I guess people will be more reluctant to buy a bigger, more expensive pack if they're just starting out and aren't addicted yet. I wish they were bloody illegal altogether, I just cannot understand why anybody with a brain would even contemplate smoking those little sticks of poison.
abc101
Hmm, good point I suppose...I guess people will be more reluctant to buy a bigger, more expensive pack if they're just starting out and aren't addicted yet. I wish they were bloody illegal altogether, I just cannot understand why anybody with a brain would even contemplate smoking those little sticks of poison.
So... because you can't understand why people would do it, you want it banned :s-smilie:
Reply 47
Bagration
So... because you can't understand why people would do it, you want it banned :s-smilie:


No, it should be banned because we should stop stupid people from harming themselves, not encourage them.
abc101
No, it should be banned because we should stop stupid people from harming themselves, not encourage them.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. - Thomas Jefferson

Under the current laws you aren't being harmed or losing at all if people smoke, and even if you did - it wouldn't be any of your business what X decides to do with X's body.

If you think your legislative power as a voter extends to telling other people what to do with their lives you are nothing short of a megalomaniac.
Reply 49
burninginme
Britian is the only country I know that actually still sells packs of 10, most other countries only sell 20s. I think if they stopped the sale of packs of 10 then underage smokers and casual smoking would end, simply because of the cost involved. A pack of 10 costs about £2.30-£2.50, while a pack of 20 can cost £5-6. For a younger person without a job (ie under 16), the pack of 10 doesn't cost too much as most people have £2-3 lying about, yet £5-6 is starting to get into quite significant money to hand over for a pack of cigarettes.

I feel that only selling packs of 20 would act as a deterant for the people who are only either curious about smoking or casual smokers.

Opinions?

I think you should check your figures, I can't see how you have 10s being cheaper than 20s.

And no, it would make no difference at all.
abc101
I just cannot understand why anybody with a brain would even contemplate smoking those little sticks of poison.


You could say the same for drinkers though and if everyone had to buy 20 packs, people would actually be smoking more, and it is still cheaper to buy 20 than two 10's so most people I know just buy 20 in the first place.
abc101
No, it should be banned because we should stop stupid people from harming themselves, not encourage them.


I dont think allowing ciggerettes to be sold in packs of 10 is in any way encouraging people to "harm themselves".

I would rather we allowed stupid people to harm themselves if they are breaking no laws and they want to, than to prevent them from doing so.
Reply 52
Packs of 10 is absurd, there's nothing in them! <-- sale sld be stopped
People might be deterred <-- sale sld be stopped

therefore I guess I agree
Juggy123
should the sale of cigarettes be stopped all together? but thats not going to happen due to the tax moniessssssss :smile:


The government doesn't actually gain money from people smoking. The tax money probably doesn't even cover the cost of people using the NHS from smoking related illnesses.
ArtGoblin
The government doesn't actually gain money from people smoking. The tax money probably doesn't even cover the cost of people using the NHS from smoking related illnesses.

It does, and it provides more. The government very much profits from tobacco taxation.
Reply 55
ArtGoblin
The government doesn't actually gain money from people smoking. The tax money probably doesn't even cover the cost of people using the NHS from smoking related illnesses.


what about the other taxes they collect, they cross subsidised maybe you are right, but generally in the start it was intended to gain taxes :smile: and now its backfired!
numb3rb0y
It does, and it provides more. The government very much profits from tobacco taxation.


Then WHY would they spend so much money on anti-smoking campaigns? And even if they do gain from tobacco sales, I don't see why it's a problem. It'll only come back as something worthwhile, like education or healthcare.
ArtGoblin
Then WHY would they spend so much money on anti-smoking campaigns?

Some small sense of decency?

ArtGoblin
And even if they do gain from tobacco sales, I don't see why it's a problem. It'll only come back as something worthwhile, like education or healthcare.

It's a problem because it involves artificially hiking the price of something to pay for something completely unrelated. If you're going to say it's okay to shift wealth around to pay for good causes then why can't I mug people in the street to give money to charities? Smokers haven't done anything wrong, so how can you justify punishing them?
Reply 58
abc101
No, it should be banned because we should stop stupid people from harming themselves, not encourage them.


It's astoundingly stupid to believe that no pleasure can be gained from what may harm someone. It's stupid to believe that adults should not be granted the right to make a rational, consensual decision that does not harm others without an absurd level of government intervention. Lastly, it's really, really ******* stupid to state that smokers are lacking in intelligence - all that does is proves that you lack the ability to reason and empathise.
numb3rb0y
Some small sense of decency?


It's a problem because it involves artificially hiking the price of something to pay for something completely unrelated. If you're going to say it's okay to shift wealth around to pay for good causes then why can't I mug people in the street to give money to charities? Smokers haven't done anything wrong, so how can you justify punishing them?



I'm not saying smokers have done anything wrong, it's just that if they can afford to pay for something they don't NEED, then I don't see any problem in using that money to pay for something they use anyway. And it is a cost to the government, even if it doesn't exceed what is taken in taxes. (which it may well do) It's different from mugging because people know when they buy cigarettes most of the money is going to the government. Smoking IS a choice, you know...

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending