Smoking - Should it be banned?

Should smoking be banned in public places?

  • Total voters
    27
Look, living in the middle of America, I see people eat junk food and more than a few people that are rather large becase of their diet.

Again, there is no quantitive emperical evidence that second-hand smoke from x number of cigarettes directly causes certain health problems overnight. Over time with repeated exposure, yes, there's evidence. The occasional wiff of smoke is generally NOT going to kill you (if you're allergic, this could go into an entirely new argument itself) But isn't this the case with junk foods and fatty foods? I mean, the way you're going after smoke you'd think you're talking about someone getting a very leathal dose of radiation inside Chernobyl.

The second thing that I'd like to reiterate is the role of the government. It is NOT, and should NOT be the role of the government to regulate everything that can be harmful. The fact is that the government wants to come in and dictate how business will be done without a compromise on businesses.
If the government can do this in public places all over, the next logical step could be them saying you can't do it at home either.

Another point is, where's the line drawn between public and private? If you're in your car with the windows rolled up, does that classify as smoking in public?
If you sit on the front porch your property to smoke, does that count as public or private?

You say you had no choice but to eat, so you had to eat those burgers only? You're holding a different standard between yourself and smokers. It's no choice but for you to eat those burgers, but smokers are evil and should stop cold turkey?
 
I agree with everyone who said that the gov't shouldn't control everything in our lives. But the whole argument that the non smokers are being selfish is just bullshit- in this argument EVERYONE is being selfish. As soon as it gets into a business talk of money its selfish, everyone is out to look after themselves. Smokers are thinking on their behalf and non smokers are thinking on their behalf- so the notion of altruism should be left alone.

edit-
Big B, you're on target with the point of the government shutting the fuck up and not banning everything left and right. However, when you say things like "cocaine is illegal but has that stopped people from using it?" it sort of sends the message that you think all things should be legal and let the people choose which way to destroy themselves. See i don't think cocaine or anything that is a vice should be illegal to stop people from using it. They will find a way to use it. I think certain things should be illegal in order to send a message that says , "Hey, we have standards and we don't condone this item" Such as the US does with child pornography, cocaine, marijuana, prostitution etc.. Just because people find a way to do it doesn't mean it should be legal. People find a way to kill others, allll the time, should murder now be legal? fuck it, everyone's killing eachother off anyway right? No, that would be obsurd, yeah the analogy sucks, don't bother refuting it lol- but you get what i mean dude you're intelligent. I would HAAAAAATE it if the government decided that tomorrow all M rated games were banned. I'd shit my pants and i would be the FIRST pirate to get his hands on overseas M rated games. I'd be one of the "cocaine" addicts lol.

See Big B, i think people are still arguing with you b/c through your arguments you make it seem as if there's not much wrong with cigarettes, when, you know, as well as most people do- that all tobacco related stuff has various harmful effects. Yeah just ONE won't kill you, but who wants just one??? One thing i must say is that your business related argument(s) are solid, I think this economy would crumble if cigarettes were banned. I can't speak for the UK, but here, the medical industry thrives on pain. We need impotence, cancer, and the common cold. If there was a cure the pharmaceutical industry would have a titty tantrum heard 'round the world. Anyway, in case you missed it, which i doubt you did, i'm sayin you're right about the gov't and why a ban would be detrimental, but don't make it sound like cigarettes aren't "that bad" cuz dude, they are.*

*These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This post is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease!
 
beretta9m2f said:
I agree with everyone who said that the gov't shouldn't control everything in our lives. But the whole argument that the non smokers are being selfish is just bullshit- in this argument EVERYONE is being selfish. As soon as it gets into a business talk of money its selfish, everyone is out to look after themselves. Smokers are thinking on their behalf and non smokers are thinking on their behalf- so the notion of altruism should be left alone.

edit-
Big B, you're on target with the point of the government shutting the fuck up and not banning everything left and right. However, when you say things like "cocaine is illegal but has that stopped people from using it?" it sort of sends the message that you think all things should be legal and let the people choose which way to destroy themselves. See i don't think cocaine or anything that is a vice should be illegal to stop people from using it. They will find a way to use it. I think certain things should be illegal in order to send a message that says , "Hey, we have standards and we don't condone this item" Such as the US does with child pornography, cocaine, marijuana, prostitution etc.. Just because people find a way to do it doesn't mean it should be legal. People find a way to kill others, allll the time, should murder now be legal? fuck it, everyone's killing eachother off anyway right? No, that would be obsurd, yeah the analogy sucks, don't bother refuting it lol- but you get what i mean dude you're intelligent. I would HAAAAAATE it if the government decided that tomorrow all M rated games were banned. I'd shit my pants and i would be the FIRST pirate to get his hands on overseas M rated games. I'd be one of the "cocaine" addicts lol.

See Big B, i think people are still arguing with you b/c through your arguments you make it seem as if there's not much wrong with cigarettes, when, you know, as well as most people do- that all tobacco related stuff has various harmful effects. Yeah just ONE won't kill you, but who wants just one??? One thing i must say is that your business related argument(s) are solid, I think this economy would crumble if cigarettes were banned. I can't speak for the UK, but here, the medical industry thrives on pain. We need impotence, cancer, and the common cold. If there was a cure the pharmaceutical industry would have a titty tantrum heard 'round the world. Anyway, in case you missed it, which i doubt you did, i'm sayin you're right about the gov't and why a ban would be detrimental, but don't make it sound like cigarettes aren't "that bad" cuz dude, they are.*

*These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. This post is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease!
Click to expand...
Exactly!
What I believe instead of banning ciggrette, companies should start putting something good in it instead of tobacco..........will save everbody~!hehe
 
If you guys love this argument, i suggest you watch the move V for Vendetta it is sort of on topic of what we're talking about in terms of government. If you hate movies, read the graphic novels.:cool:
 
Karanislove said:
Exactly!
What I believe instead of banning ciggrette, companies should start putting something good in it instead of tobacco..........will save everbody~!hehe
Click to expand...

Probably not. Banning smoking will not stop people from smoking in public. Reduce? Of course, but it could easily end up like the Prohibition which was ultimately repealed.

I'm not denying that tobacco is unhealthy, but I want to put it in perspective that it's not the only thing that's very unhealthy. If you don't understand the health risks involved, then you really are ignorant of the facts. I don't see a point in reiterating a very common knowledge about the hazards of smoking. Where I take issue is with people saying that being in a smoky room for a certain period of time is like smoking x number of cigarettes. Has anyone done the math on this? What figures are they using for this? Where's the research into this? I'm intrested to know, because I've simply not seen data that makes this assertion any more than a vauge one.

I've heard some parents who smoke that were in some of my college classes mention how tobacco was thrown in alongside harder drugs like heroin and cocaine. Yes, none of these are healthy, but let's keep things in perspective.
12oz of whiskey does not have the same amount of alcohol as 12oz of a Budwiser, and this is what's being done with the demonization of tobacco.

Obese people tend to have more health issues than those who have a reasonable weight. As a result, health care costs go up to pay for this. True, the offenders do pay more, but across the board, health care costs go up.
 
I go to the same school that Roy Castle used to go to... and now he's dead, although he never smoked a cigarette in his life, but because of passive smoking. But if you ban something it becomes more tempting (I remember when Pokemon Cards were banned... more people than ever bought them!).

Nice Idea... But it won't work.
 
Big B said:
Much like the Prohibition era in America during the early 1900's...
Click to expand...

America banned the sale of alcohol and this prompted the rise of gangsters! The gangsters would import the alcohol and sell it on in America. There were a lot of dry mouths to replenish! Alcohol was served under the counter and the phrase 'speak easys' was coined. The gansters were growing in power and the only way to combat the problem was to allow the sale of alcohol again.

So what if cigarettes are banned altogether? Organised crime will increase and the drug lords will get richer.
I often see gangs around London selling cheap cigarettes on the street. It's not 100% tobacco they are selling though. They mix it up with other bits and the outcome is a cigarette thats very bad for you. Worse then a normal packet for sale down at a local supermarket! The money that these gangs make goes towards unearthly means.
 
The best way to eliminate smoking is not through banning, but education and let people deal with the outcome. Outright banning something with the idea that it will make the problem go away is a fairy tale utopian view. Good or bad, banning something is unlikely to make it go away. Anyone under 18 (at least in my state) aren't allowed to buy tobacco products. I've worked with a few kids (at a private Christian school who attended the high school there) that smoked...and I know they were both under 18. I'm not advocating that you go ahead and break laws. I am saying that it needs to be understood that banning something doesn't make it go away.
 
As the only person here who has smoked longer than 98% of you have been alive...
I started smoking when I was nine...so...that makes 35 years...
when I started you could smoke virtually anywhere...they had ashtrays on the buses, on planes, you saw doctors/dentists walking around their clinics and the hospital with a cig hanging from their mouths...
the only place you couldn't smoke was in a church and at grade school...because of fire ordinance...churches couldn't get fire insurance...they were all considered fire hazards...and grade schools wouldn't allow it because of the age requirements...the teachers smoked, but the law was you had to be 16 to smoke...
there was no penalty if you got caught smoking under-age...the cops would just confiscate your smokes...
now...given that I come from the generation that it was OK to smoke...and I presently smoke two and a half packs a day...

I think it's a good idea that the new generation is taught not to smoke, and high taxes on smokes ( $10 a pack here...costs me $25 a day to smoke ), and fewer places to do it, etc...

but it has to be done slowly...a little at a time...or else you will create that backlash you don't want.

Eg ;)
 
Actually...I usually buy by the carton and buy the cheap cigs...so...it normally costs me $56 a carton...and I go through about 1 every three days...so...really about $560 a month :D

Eg ;)
 
Yes, smoking can cost a lot of money! Depending on how many get smoked every day.

I choose to smoke rollups because they are a lot cheaper. They are quite messy though :D
 
Karanislove said:
You forgot the time consumption and skill required..:)
Click to expand...

LOL, it does take awhile to master the perfect cigarette!

I've been smoking for about 4 years, so i've had more then enough time to master the art of rollies!
 
mega said:
I've been smoking for about 4 years, so i've had more then enough time to master the art of rollies!
Click to expand...
I think, it all depends on how often you roll and smoke the cigrette.
Let me guess, how much you spend on smoking. It is between 35-40 dollars. right?
 
I was vary close......you are spending US45$/m on smoking. I think thats alright.
Just a general question, what makes you feel like you have to smoke now?
 
Well I appear to be a bit late in the thread but I will post regardless. I do think smoking should be banned in public places. Here is why: smoking harms people other than the smoker. A parallel cannot be drawn between self-abuse from eating fast food and smoking. Fast food harms the user and only the user. Smoking inconveniences others. There is no excuse for a group of people to be able to inconvenience another. Also, this appears to have becom conversation about an outright ban. That wouldn't work and everybody knows it, but public places aren't a complete ban. I don't care if a person lights up in their house but the minute they do in a non smoking area (happens all the time), or any other public place for that matter, I lose all respect for them. I look at cigarette addicts the same as alcoholics. They are detrimental to society. And here is another thing, in the U.S. there is a law against being drunk in public. Why not smoking? Both are be harmful to others. And, to say that the harmful effects of sidestream smoke are unconfirmed is simply denial. the smoke from the end of a cigarette is the same the smoker gets minus a filter. Sounds worse to me. I say ban it. If I want to determine the course of my life then I can but nobody else has the right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top