The Student Room Group

If Tobacco was newly discovered today, would it be illegal to use?

If Tobacco was a newly discovered discovered drug, would it be made illegal by the government?

Scroll to see replies

Almost certainly if lots of people started using it. It's more dangerous than other previously legal highs.
Reply 2
Avatar for Boromir
Boromir
The left wing control freaks would certainly ban it.
Reply 3
Avatar for KingGoonIan
KingGoonIan
OP
19
Original post by Boromir
The left wing control freaks would certainly ban it.


And that would be wrong in your opinion?
Reply 4
Avatar for Boromir
Boromir
Original post by KingGoonIan
And that would be wrong in your opinion?


Of course. I don't need or want faceless bureaucrats nannying me. I believe in a little thing called freedom.
Reply 5
Avatar for Gjaykay
Gjaykay
11
People probably wouldn't buy it tbh.
Original post by Boromir
Of course. I don't need or want faceless bureaucrats nannying me. I believe in a little thing called freedom.


Is an addict truly free?
Reply 7
Avatar for KingGoonIan
KingGoonIan
OP
19
Original post by Gjaykay
People probably wouldn't buy it tbh.


But would the government allow it to be sold?
If they knew the effects it could have on people, almost certainly. They'll never do it now though, makes them too much money...


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by furryface12
If they knew the effects it could have on people, almost certainly. They'll never do it now though, makes them too much money...


Posted from TSR Mobile

Unless something else became legal.
Reply 10
Avatar for Boromir
Boromir
Original post by jonnymorrison
Is an addict truly free?


Yes, he's free to be an addict. Whether that's good for him or not is immaterial as it's his choice. Do you want the state to control what you eat? Drink? Say? Think? If you want that sort of treatment go to prison or the socialist utopia of North Korea.

Freedom doesn't mean security. You're liable for your own actions. That is a good thing. I'm sure most people would hate your dreamworld where burgers, fags, fizzy drinks, salt, cheese, alcohol, chocolate etc are all banned and there are quotas for how much you can consume. There has been a hell like that and it was called the Soviet Union. It didn't end well.
Interesting thought. It probably would be, tbh.
Original post by Boromir
Yes, he's free to be an addict. Whether that's good for him or not is immaterial as it's his choice. Do you want the state to control what you eat? Drink? Say? Think? If you want that sort of treatment go to prison or the socialist utopia of North Korea.

Freedom doesn't mean security. You're liable for your own actions. That is a good thing. I'm sure most people would hate your dreamworld where burgers, fags, fizzy drinks, salt, cheese, alcohol, chocolate etc are all banned and there are quotas for how much you can consume. There has been a hell like that and it was called the Soviet Union. It didn't end well.


Glad to see there's some intelligence on this forum after all.
Reply 13
Avatar for Gjaykay
Gjaykay
11
Original post by KingGoonIan
But would the government allow it to be sold?


Yes, because it wouldn't be smoked by as nearly as many people that smoke now. Only very few people would do it I think, but less people would be anti smoking because it would be such a minority of people who smoke.
I think it would be legal, because it doesn't affect a person's mental condition, making them potentially dangerous to others

I think alcohol, if newly discovered, would be banned though. Personally I think it should be illegal to be wasted anyway
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Architecture-er
I think it would be legal, because it doesn't affect a person's mental condition, making them potentially dangerous to others

I think alcohol, if newly discovered, would be banned though. Personally I think it should be illegal to be wasted anyway


'Better England free than England sober'.
Original post by Birkenhead
'Better England free than England sober'.


Funny how the England pictured is always merrily drunk and rosy-cheeked, rather than aggressive, yobbish and stinking of piss :lol:
Original post by Architecture-er
Funny how the England pictured is always merrily drunk and rosy-cheeked, rather than aggressive, yobbish and stinking of piss :lol:


My point stands. I would rather this nation at liberty to make its own decisions and 'aggressive, yobbish and stinking of piss' than pure and lovely and fascist. But then, I think we both know it's a steaming exaggeration that things are so bad as you make out.
Original post by Birkenhead
My point stands. I would rather this nation at liberty to make its own decisions and 'aggressive, yobbish and stinking of piss' than pure and lovely and fascist. But then, I think we both know it's a steaming exaggeration that things are so bad as you make out.


But I'm not advocating a ban of alcohol, merely making it illegal to be so excessively drunk that a burden is placed on our hospital and policing services, not to mention making our towns far less relaxing to be in at night.

If you ever went out at night in Dubai, for example, you'd realise just what we're missing out on. Kids freely run around, people can promenade in peace and enjoy the evening
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by keromedic
Unless something else became legal.


True, but then the points for keeping both legal would most likely be the same... And still the government gets the money!


Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you