Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Should cigarettes be made illegal? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Should cigarettes be made illegal?
    Yes - ban them!
    1,313
    64.17%
    No - keep on puffing...
    733
    35.83%

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    yaas yaaas ban everything
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why stop at alcohol?

    You can ban sugary drinks, you can put limits on the amount of caffeine a person is allowed to buy, you can have state-sponsored diet plans, enforce exercise to maintain a healthy population if that's what concerns you so much..

    Invariably, whenever a group of people have a choice, a number of them will make a choice that YOU think is bad. That doesn't mean you get to take away their choice.

    What if the total happiness they gained from smoking is greater (to THEM) than the total suffering?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Arbolus)
    For the indirect effects, the drug is merely a contributing factor. The user is still responsible for their own actions. Someone might get in a rage when drunk and start beating his/her partner, but they would still be a s***** person prone to violent outbursts even if it wasn't for the alcohol. The crime then should be in the abuse, not in the drinking.
    And a drunk driver?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Zargabaath)
    I agree with your post 100%, the damaging the environment thing seems like a really wishy washy argument. Most people who oppose it decide they oppose it and then find reasons to oppose it. Instead of the other way around.
    My point had nothing to do with the environment. The point was that people oppose smoking because of second hand smoke, so surely they should also oppose cars and the likes for the fumes, and then also all our non-renewable power plants, and therefore almost everything that is electrically powered. Go even further, we should not be allowed to live at all, we breathe out CO2, which is potentially dangerous to people, not to mention all the things we do to each other that cause harm, whether intentionally or not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King Leonidas)
    Nah, let smokers increase the risk of getting cancer.

    Cigs act as a natural cleanser of the gene pool.

    Nomsayian.
    ayyy lmao

    nomursayin
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    My point had nothing to do with the environment. The point was that people oppose smoking because of second hand smoke, so surely they should also oppose cars and the likes for the fumes, and then also all our non-renewable power plants, and therefore almost everything that is electrically powered. Go even further, we should not be allowed to live at all, we breathe out CO2, which is potentially dangerous to people, not to mention all the things we do to each other that cause harm, whether intentionally or not.
    The post you were replying to mentioned the environment being damaged by cigarettes. I thought your post was saying how ridiculous that logic is as we'd also ban everything else that's potentially harmful to the environment. I misinterpreted your post, my bad.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Why should we limit people's autonomy so unnecessarily? I have never smoked in my life, and hope I never do, but that doesn't mean I think others shouldn't be able to. J.S. Mill's harm principle, guys: do as you wish so long as you do not infringe upon others. In other words, smoke at your own risk, but don't smoke over those who cannot help themselves - e.g. children.

    Smoking brings our economy billions every year anyway. Why would we put an end to that when it's clear that even if smoking was outlawed, it would still go on in the same way the smoking of weed does: through the black market. No one wins.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Seems to be working out great with drugs huh?

    Only got to look at cannabis use in the UK as compared to places like Portugal and of course the Netherlands.

    As the OP mentioned,

    Cigarettes are currently heavily taxed (supposedly to compensate for what smokers cost the NHS), you have to be 18 to buy them, with all this challenge 25 malarkey besides, they're covered in government health warnings (those horrible graphic pictures) and they're even hidden behind shutters out of sight like 1950's softcore pornmags in case children see them and get corrupted by they're bright colored packaging and stylish fonts...

    Now imagine if they were banned.

    The government would lose all that tax money and be lumbered with the huge cost of enforcing the ban.

    Criminal gangs who already bring in millions of illegal **** a year would ramp up smuggling to meet demand, making huge profits. (Some of which apparently get reinvested in much more horrendous crimes like sex trafficking and even terrorism).

    Obviously the only people selling them would be criminals be definition so what do they care if their customers are only 12 or 13?

    Equally there would be absolutely no quality control...normal cigarettes are harmful enough, but many of those already been smuggled in from Eastern Europe and China contain up to 160% more tar, 80% more nicotine and 133% more carbon monoxide than genuine cigarettes.

    In short, terrible idea!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    No, that will only make smokers angry. I think they should do the following though:

    1. Reduce the number of cigarettes in a packet.
    2. Increase the price further.
    3. BAN smokers from smoking outside beside DOOR ENTRY'S
    4. Build designated shelters in university campuses - ban people from smoking outside these shelters. I'm sick of people blowing smoke in my face or smoking when i'm walking behind them.
    5. Ban smoking in cars.
    6. Reduce the amount of nicotine in cigarettes.
    7. Reduce the amount of poisonous substances in cigarettes.
    8. Attempt to alter cigarettes so that they do not produce the same terrible smell.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shooks)
    We're already a fair way along this road. Smoking is banned in public spaces, cigarettes are hidden behind screens in the shops... So what should the next step be - should cigarettes be outright banned?
    Stop them from smoking at door entryways.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tinkerbell_xxx)
    I wish they were. I hate when people smoke in busy places like outside of a train station or shopping areas. I can't even remember the amount of times I've been walking behind someone and all of their smoke is blowing in my face :mad:
    I don't understand why some smokers can be so inconsiderate. IMO if you are walking in a crowd or infront of lots of people, don't smoke. Go smoke somewhere else
    At my university there are a lot of students who blow smoke everywhere i.e in you're face or when you are walking past. They don't seem to care that we don't like the smell.

    I don't understand why they can't go to a shelter. If i'm honest, they're a big pain in the arse, I always make it obvious that I don't like the smell by covering my nose or walking to the other side of the footpath.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King Leonidas)
    Nah, let smokers increase the risk of getting cancer.

    Cigs act as a natural cleanser of the gene pool.

    Nomsayian.
    stfu fagget misc low
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TajwarC)
    Smoking is banned in many public places but not all - I still see copious amounts of people smoking at bustops and train stations. Cannot stand it. Needs to be banned from anywhere public in my opinion
    Exactly. Plus they always smoke when you are walking down the street which is even worse as it gets blown into you're face.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Aye, along with RFR (microwaves) e.g. from mobile phone/Wifi signals > 50 mV/m in populated areas (a much bigger public health problem)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, but also alcohol. Why are some drugs illegal and some are not? I think they either all should be or they all shouldnt be.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    People also don't consider the large violent black market this is going to create. Cigarettes are said to be the most addictive drug available, the market is going to be huge, and probably would probably trump cocaine or heroine sales. Imagine the amount of people jailed, if it comes to that, for smoking a cigarette.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a noble chance)
    Essentially then you want to stop people from doing something by force of the law because you find it irritating. What a moronic position.
    To be honest, I don't care if they smoke or not. I just wish they would be more considerate to those around them. I know its not just me who doesn't want smoke blown in their face on a daily basis.

    (Original post by Frostyjoe)
    At my university there are a lot of students who blow smoke everywhere i.e in you're face or when you are walking past. They don't seem to care that we don't like the smell.

    I don't understand why they can't go to a shelter. If i'm honest, they're a big pain in the arse, I always make it obvious that I don't like the smell by covering my nose or walking to the other side of the footpath.
    That seems to happen daily for me They walk and smoke when they walk on one of the busiest ways to get into uni, so unless you speed up/slow down or go a different way, you're stuck with it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tinkerbell_xxx)
    To be honest, I don't care if they smoke or not. I just wish they would be more considerate to those around them. I know its not just me who doesn't want smoke blown in their face on a daily basis.
    The health effects of passive smoking in an open space are basically equal to the effects of urban pollution. Essentially nil. Are you therefore seriously supporting banning smoking because you occasionally find yourself inhaling a passing wisp?

    That seems to happen daily for me They walk and smoke when they walk on one of the busiest ways to get into uni, so unless you speed up/slow down or go a different way, you're stuck with it
    Perhaps you could try speeding up, slowing down or going a different way then.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I was about to say yes. Because of the obvious killing of themselves and others around them.

    But the same could be said about cars :dontknow:
    Just saying
    Spoiler:
    Show
    But I love cars so don't ban them plz
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Zargabaath)
    The post you were replying to mentioned the environment being damaged by cigarettes. I thought your post was saying how ridiculous that logic is as we'd also ban everything else that's potentially harmful to the environment. I misinterpreted your post, my bad.
    I didn't even read that far, was more about the "should be classed as assault" bit, but I suppose the environmental side is just as ridiculous.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.