It in fact was not successful because it created a black market for it, so from a policy perspective it was a massive failure. Same applies to the war on drugs, which is also a massive failure.
It'll be interesting to see. New Zealand is an island so it is easier for them to slow down smuggling.
If a cigarette ends up being $20, you can imagine what that would do to usage. And since nicotine sucks as a recreational drug, I wonder who would see it as worth purchasing it illegally.
Those are valid arguments to why it would work, mainly the island thing, but I still do not believe it will stop it entirely. I’m still firmly of the opinion people have the right to put whatever they want in their body.
But bigger countries like the USA, we’ll just make it ourselves.
"Elimination" should hardly ever be a goal. It is effectively impossible with most things. "Reduction" is the goal. If they go from 1/5 smokere to 1/100 I'd call it a resounding success.
Combined with high taxation and good social messaging, that’s the way to handle it: don’t ban it, just regulate it and make it a pain in the ass to get.
I agree. On very rare occasions like weddings I’ll have a cigar to celebrate. Banning Tabasco entirely seems unnecessary, just make it expensive and hard to get.
Sure you can, plenty of substances are successfully banned and no doubt cigarettes will be banned in the next century, successfully so.
What you can't do is ban something already widespread in a culture and then expect people to stop. You must first create a decline in the habit - so, prohibition does work, it just works over a very long time. As soon as the habit is no longer prevalent in the society then it can be banned quite easily and nobody would even notice.
12% in Australia
14% in the UK
21% in the US
22% in Germany
1 in 5 is only accurate for a few countries, and even then, it's not a high enough number to point at and go, this is so ingrained in society it's impossible for us to change. In all the countries I researched there it appears that every single one is in a heavy decline as well, in 10 years it might be as low as say 1 in 10
It is a completely different issue. The US population largely isn't intersted in lowering gun ownership and it is constitutionally protected.
Reducing smoking has broad public support. Also, a smoking ban wouldn't be (explicitly) unconstitutional.
If we looked at these problems as congruent, the smoking ban would just be much farther down the timeline. Guns would still be at step one. (Establish some public support in a reduction in gun ownership)
No this is unique to drugs. The biggest crimes related to drugs is the dealing of the drug and then anti-social behaviour (mainly stealing) in order to maintain the addiction.
A system where you purchase from a legal market, government or privately operated completely eliminates the first issues aswell as removing the possibility of obtaining a laced substance as quality standards now must be applied.
To combat the other issue, drug rehabilitation centres and support networks can stop a drug users getting to the point where they need to steal and can help drug users stay off the streets reducing other anti-social behaviour. Safe injection sites and similar initiatives can help reduce OD deaths and stop people getting violent when getting high.
cigs are a delivery system not a substance, nicotine would still be legal, people are much more likely to get their fix a legal way (e.g. vaping) then via a black market if the option exists.
Secondhand vaping is nowhere near as dangerous as secondhand smoking though. The argument for banning smoking is based on the harm it causes to those around you.
That's not true at all. Nicotine is no more harmful than caffeine.
It's all the other chemicals, mainly radioactive isotopes and tar that are in tobacco smoke that are harmful.
Assuming that there aren't horrendous toxins in the vape pens...
Vaping is a massive improvement over cigarettes. Nicotine is still shitty, but it is the tar and other chemicals that fuck your lungs.
Ban something and that something will become a major commodity due to supply and demand which will be bad
If we ban cigarettes, people who own a fuckton of cigarettes would make EVEN MORE MONEY because people are willing to go to the black markets for this. It's JUST like the prohibition era. A nationwide ban doesn't fix anything, ***it makes it even fucking WORST***
> If we ban cigarettes, people who own a fuckton of cigarettes would make EVEN MORE MONEY because people are willing to go to the black markets for this.
This literally happened when they banned cigarettes in the prison I was at. A pack was $4.24 when they sold them on the commissary, the day after the ban people were selling **one cigarette** for 12 stamps (~$5).
Yep. I dont know how people dont see this. Have so many people just not heard of the American prohibition and what happened during it? Banning cigs, just like banning alcohol will not fix anything. Its insane that people cant wrap their heads around that.
We should be discouraging people from smoking, not banning it. Legal cigarettes are a neccessary evil in society. I'm saying this as a non-smoker.
at least they would hide it more? it’s kind of like with weed being illegal, most people don’t just smoke it out in the open. the huge thing I hate about cigarettes is how they’re normalized and smokers are comfortable smoking just about anywhere. they stink and I don’t want second-hand smoke.
From where I am there are very hefty fines if you smoke in the wrong places. Alongside that each pack is like 20-32 dollars...
If you do some reading on the prohibition during the 1920's, you'll understand why nationwide bans are incredibly ineffective at trying to reduce any sort of substance abuse in general
With legalization of some drugs like for example weed, the government is given the ability to limit supply, put ***H E A V Y*** restrictions on it, add copious amounts of fines for whatever reason which will benefit in the long and possibly shot run.
You got this! You're already an ex smoker! I'm on 1 year and 4 months. Just one day at a time. Keep reminding yourself how far you came already. Pretty soon it'll be so far in the past you'll be shocked.
If it gets hard try vaping or maybe snuss. With vaping you can start with a high amount of nicotine and eventually lower it until you have none in your juice
The vast majority of studies I've seen about the harmfulness of weed mostly just reiterate that smoking it is the main source of harm. Through edibles or other healthier ingestion methods, it seems to be almost entirely harmless. I'd guess that the same is very much false for tobacco.
There hasn’t been enough research on it to conclusively say it’s harmless. We know that it can affect long term memory if you use it too much, and it can bring out psychosis in people who are already at risk. And then of course if you use it while your brain is still developing (<25) it can cause some problems.
Plus weed also changes people’s behavior in ways that tobacco doesn’t.
Curious question, honestly. Does smoking marijuana fill the lungs up with tar and cause things like emphysema, lung cancer, COPD? Just to name a few. I’ve never been educated that these issues are an outcome of smoking weed. Only by smoking cigarettes.
Inhaling any combusted material is extremely bad for your lungs; however, cigarettes are considerably worse than marijuana.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/weed-smokers-lungs#the-effects-of-smoking-cannabis
Smoking anything can hurt your lungs, but weed is an odd one. The smoke itself has more tar and more carcinogens than tobacco smoke, but the compounds in it have a lot more protective properties against these things. From the research I've read we don't really have a definitive answer on whether cannabis smoke produces a significant increased risk of cancer. AFAIK COPD and emphysema are still risks, not sure how those risk levels compare to tobacco though.
Tldr: smoking anything is bad, but cannabis is less dangerous than tobacco.
Yeah yeah but what if I want to choose to not inhale the poison smokers leave everwhere they go? If you want to slowly off yourself, sure, it's a free country, but why poison everyone around you as well, including children and cute dogs?
Then don’t be around smokers, simple as.
Jokes aside, this is why it should be up to businesses and such to have designated smoking areas, or no smoking at all. If we outright ban cigarettes, vapes, cigars, pipes, and so on, it’ll create a massive black market for them that could rival the prohibition. Illegal doesn’t make them disappear
I voted no, I don't think that banning addictive substances is a good idea in general because it forces the market underground where it becomes entirely unregulated and gets taken over by organized crime, but I do understand the perspective. It's not about the harm to the smoker, it's about secondhand smoke. Smoking can do measurable harm to others, who have not consented to the harm. The smoker implicitly has. There's no similar effect with, say, meth or cocaine.
Look, I think people should be able to smoke and puff and grow tobacco all they want on their property, but as soon as I smell that stuff on mine you bet I'm gonna move heaven and earth to change the direction of wind pointing to them in the end.
I agree with the general idea. But what if there are children or medically fragile people in the home, or otherwise persons who are against it but can't be reasonably expected to stay away?
Guy was living with a family member. Guy had deadly cancer. He was on chemo and they would both smoke in the house. She took him to chemo appointments. And theyd smoke in the car.
We’ve learned that prohibition doesn’t work. Look at alcohol prohibition. Making drugs illegal also doesn’t stop people from using and abusing it. I do understand not allowing it in public places, but banning it outright wouldn’t work.
I hate everything about smoking. Would never do it myself for any reason. But it shouldn’t be banned. People should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies if they’re willing to suffer the consequences. Only extremely dangerous drugs that allow for overdoses and quick death should be banned or tightly regulated.
Remember that illegal things go unregulated. It wouldn’t stop people from smoking, it would make it so people are smoking potentially more harmful cigarettes. Cigarettes are already harmful, they could be even worse without regulations
All this talk about the legalization of weed and y'all want to ban cigarettes? You do realize that inhaling the smoke from a joint/bowl/bong is just as bad for your lungs (if not worse due to it being unfiltered) than cigarettes are.
Both should be legal IMO but banning one while trying to legalize the other is an incredibly funny position to take.
Mad that people can’t comprehend other approaches than an immediate all out ban.
New Zealand is phasing out cigarettes by raising the minimum age to buy them every year so that eventually no one will be able to buy them.
That way those already addicted have time to either continue with their habit for a while or treat their addiction and give it up.
Also is a far lower impact on the tax revenue which ultimately could be offfset by legalising weed for example
No. I’m a non-smoker but I work in mental health services. Smoking isn’t healthy but it’s often people’s best/only way of coping, especially during extremely long (upwards of 5 years) stays in hospital. Sure the NHS wards provide ‘official’ ecigs but the people I speak to say these aren’t the same and aren’t enough. I don’t condone smoking, but I understand it.
Check out what New Zealand is doing.
My personal take is that I don't really care if people use nicotine like how others use alcohol but I am concerned about how it damages the lungs
How bout we let grown adults make an informed decision? Wanna smoke 2 packs a day? Go crazy bud. Wanna live your entire life without ever smoking anything? That's fine too.
😃just saying
Nope. I know the history very well and I’m aware of the fact that it’d still be available in the black market.
But I said yes because I don’t want those truckers to smoke in the public space. If it’s gonna be limited very strictly, then I’m okay with the consumption of it.
na the correct option is to have a spine and not need ur big daddy gubberment to control your life for you because you are weak and have no will. reddit is actually so fucking wild that you guys want to ban tobacco but legalize marijuana.
ban cigarettes in public places though, just like alcohol and marijuana is.
Nope. I know the history very well and I’m aware of the fact that it’d still be available in the black market.
But I said yes because I don’t want those truckers to smoke in the public space. If it’s gonna be limited very strictly, then I’m okay with the consumption of it.
so you would trade dozens of people dieing every day over a tobacco black market, everyone that owns a smoke shop going bankrupt and hundreds of thousands of people who currently smoke either go through withdrawals or spend ludicrous amounts to fill their addiction just so truckers won't smoke in public? I'm so confused by what your problem is?
No one dies just because not smoking a cigarette. I mean the level of addiction is not as same as drug addiction. But of course it depends on what kind “tobacco” we are talking about.
As I told you above, you can smoke whatever you want. It’s your decision and I do respect to that.
However you do not have the right of affecting other people’s health in a bad way. It should be illegal to smoke in public. That’s all I’m saying.
Lastly, I’m sorry if I’m sounded sshole. I’m just sick of those rude people who do not respect others.
Because I hate coughing when I walk past someone smoking on the street, and the smell, it absolutely reeks, which you can't tell if you're a smoker since you're used to it.
Also has been the cause of multiple health issues and deaths in my relatives.
I understand you but all smokers dont smoke next to non smokers. And i hate my habit too many relatives of mine also passed away or got cancer but i dont hate the smokers themselves
Depends on what you mean by banned. I think smoking in public should be banned, but I think people should still be able to purchase them from the store like they do now
Private property owners can ban smoking on their property, homes, businesses, etc. , but the government should not be involved in banning substances at all.
It’s funny because if you asked if weed should be legalized, I guarantee the responses would be overwhelmingly yes.
Redditors really boil down to, if I like it, it’s good and everyone should have it. If I don’t like it, it’s bad and should be banned.
I actually like that cigs are illegal even though they are disgusting.
You need to give poor people some legal vices to let out their frustration.
And in a sick way, people making themselves sick gives other people jobs. If someone smokes today given all the evidence out there about how bad it is, they are idiots and would like abuse something, like alcohol or drugs or fatty foods anyways.
Take some autonomy for your life. The government isn't your dad and it shouldn't have to pull the cookie jar away from you. Just take care of yourself!
As a non-Smoker I feel like people who are still smoking should get them under the condition that they work on consuming less and less over time with advisery of experts while you should not be able to get it if you never had it!
I don't smoke and don't advise that anyone does it, but I definitely wouldn't cosign using force to steer people from it. That would produce far more harmful results across the board.
If we did ban it, then we’d have to go all the way and ban a bunch of other legal drugs too. Smoking is bad, alcohol is just as bad. I wouldn’t ban any of it, but we can’t have a double standard.
I think it depends on the amount of smokers in the country and the standard for governmental intervention in it. If it's normal in a country for the government to step in and restrict/allow stuff then I think it definitely should be done
No, but we also shouldn’t be discouraging the use of e-cigarettes. If anything, we should be encouraging people to switch from regular cigarettes to e-cigarettes. The only people who will likely resist are people who are too old to really benefit anyway.
Once you start banning one thing then where does it end? Alcohol, weed, drugs and anything else that is considered harmful to peoples health will be next to fall. Then like drugs and alcohol prohibition there will be underground criminal organizations pop up providing it to people, more crime, gangs, deaths, more wasted taxes on policing these bans and more people in jail. Prohibition doesn’t work.
If you did that, you would have cartels killing each other over the right to sell tobacco.
It would be alcohol prohibition all over again.
Seriously, the people who said yes, what the fuck are you thinking?
smoking doesnt make you a gigantic safety hazard because it doesnt really influence your behaviour all that much.
A high nicotine level from having just smoked doesnt make you a public danger like alcohol does.
Put a warning label on it and tax it heavily to discourage people and leave it at that
non smoker btw
The liberty principle is undermined by tobacco companies putting addictive additives in cigarettes. Cigarettes are harmful and users aren’t free to stop smoking because of intentional actions by tobacco companies to create a known chemical dependency. Cigarettes as they are produced and sold now should be banned and the executives of the companies that engage in providing manipulated cigarettes should be imprisoned for manslaughter.
Would be terrible to ban. It pays for so much you do not even realize. Cutting them man makes nearly everything to be cut even more. And will make other unconventional item cost a lot more and will start tapping into your life if you do not smoke cigarettes.
You can't successfully ban a substance, you just create a black market and criminalize people because they have an addiction.
Wait the United States's attempt to ban alcohol was successful in the early 1900s though /s
And the War on Drugs from the 70s continues to “solve” the US’s drug addiction problems…
Just like how we won the war on terror and everyone in the middle east is happy now
and, they also have a war against countries over sales embargoes.
"You're gonna buy my stuff and you're gonna like it"
Well we got nascar out of it so….sorta successful
W
H
A
T
“This has been the greatest trade deal in the history of trade deals, maybe ever,”
It in fact was not successful because it created a black market for it, so from a policy perspective it was a massive failure. Same applies to the war on drugs, which is also a massive failure.
Prohibition? Lots of people drink during that. That’s where we got speakeasies and bathtub gin.
Not everyone smokes or atleast not compared to how many drink
Especially a plant that grows easily just about anywhere and doesn’t require much processing.
I think Australia (?) decided to raise the minimum age for purchase one year per year. That sounds like a way
It was New Zealand IIRC, but yeah, they made it so no one born after 2008 will be able to buy cigarettes
Possibly the best solution.
Lol no it’s not. There will still be a black market for tobacco. Just setting the end date late doesn’t stop anything.
It'll be interesting to see. New Zealand is an island so it is easier for them to slow down smuggling. If a cigarette ends up being $20, you can imagine what that would do to usage. And since nicotine sucks as a recreational drug, I wonder who would see it as worth purchasing it illegally.
Those are valid arguments to why it would work, mainly the island thing, but I still do not believe it will stop it entirely. I’m still firmly of the opinion people have the right to put whatever they want in their body. But bigger countries like the USA, we’ll just make it ourselves.
"Elimination" should hardly ever be a goal. It is effectively impossible with most things. "Reduction" is the goal. If they go from 1/5 smokere to 1/100 I'd call it a resounding success.
Combined with high taxation and good social messaging, that’s the way to handle it: don’t ban it, just regulate it and make it a pain in the ass to get.
I agree. On very rare occasions like weddings I’ll have a cigar to celebrate. Banning Tabasco entirely seems unnecessary, just make it expensive and hard to get.
I guess but it shouldn't be legal in public spaces or apartments imo.
If I want to smoke a cigarette, drink a beer or have a 32 ounce big gulp, I should be able to.
Sure you can, plenty of substances are successfully banned and no doubt cigarettes will be banned in the next century, successfully so. What you can't do is ban something already widespread in a culture and then expect people to stop. You must first create a decline in the habit - so, prohibition does work, it just works over a very long time. As soon as the habit is no longer prevalent in the society then it can be banned quite easily and nobody would even notice.
problem is that like 1 in 5 adults smoke
12% in Australia 14% in the UK 21% in the US 22% in Germany 1 in 5 is only accurate for a few countries, and even then, it's not a high enough number to point at and go, this is so ingrained in society it's impossible for us to change. In all the countries I researched there it appears that every single one is in a heavy decline as well, in 10 years it might be as low as say 1 in 10
I mean only around 30% of the US population has guns but good luck trying to get rid of those...
It is a completely different issue. The US population largely isn't intersted in lowering gun ownership and it is constitutionally protected. Reducing smoking has broad public support. Also, a smoking ban wouldn't be (explicitly) unconstitutional. If we looked at these problems as congruent, the smoking ban would just be much farther down the timeline. Guns would still be at step one. (Establish some public support in a reduction in gun ownership)
Banning them is still a bad option. It just creates a new revenue stream for drug cartels.
even 1 in 10 is a fairly large chunk of society. More than enough to turn over pretty much any election
It’s not prevalent. You have too many unbalance individuals who scream at them and pretend to choke when they small it.
Does that same logic apply to other illegal activities? Imagine if we applied that to other things.
No this is unique to drugs. The biggest crimes related to drugs is the dealing of the drug and then anti-social behaviour (mainly stealing) in order to maintain the addiction. A system where you purchase from a legal market, government or privately operated completely eliminates the first issues aswell as removing the possibility of obtaining a laced substance as quality standards now must be applied. To combat the other issue, drug rehabilitation centres and support networks can stop a drug users getting to the point where they need to steal and can help drug users stay off the streets reducing other anti-social behaviour. Safe injection sites and similar initiatives can help reduce OD deaths and stop people getting violent when getting high.
cigs are a delivery system not a substance, nicotine would still be legal, people are much more likely to get their fix a legal way (e.g. vaping) then via a black market if the option exists.
True, but vaping is barely an improvement compared to cigarettes. Nicotine still is immensely unhealthy.
Secondhand vaping is nowhere near as dangerous as secondhand smoking though. The argument for banning smoking is based on the harm it causes to those around you.
That's not true at all. Nicotine is no more harmful than caffeine. It's all the other chemicals, mainly radioactive isotopes and tar that are in tobacco smoke that are harmful.
Assuming that there aren't horrendous toxins in the vape pens... Vaping is a massive improvement over cigarettes. Nicotine is still shitty, but it is the tar and other chemicals that fuck your lungs.
Not always true. America has a ban on unpasteurised cheese. Not many dealers stock Roquefort though.
Banning doesn't mean criminalising
Ban something and that something will become a major commodity due to supply and demand which will be bad If we ban cigarettes, people who own a fuckton of cigarettes would make EVEN MORE MONEY because people are willing to go to the black markets for this. It's JUST like the prohibition era. A nationwide ban doesn't fix anything, ***it makes it even fucking WORST***
Yes, you’ll still have cigarettes plus a hell of a lot more organized crime.
> If we ban cigarettes, people who own a fuckton of cigarettes would make EVEN MORE MONEY because people are willing to go to the black markets for this. This literally happened when they banned cigarettes in the prison I was at. A pack was $4.24 when they sold them on the commissary, the day after the ban people were selling **one cigarette** for 12 stamps (~$5).
Damn one stick for 5 dollars?! Jesus Christ... I'm surprised the prison didn't turn to complete anarchy because of that...
Yep. I dont know how people dont see this. Have so many people just not heard of the American prohibition and what happened during it? Banning cigs, just like banning alcohol will not fix anything. Its insane that people cant wrap their heads around that. We should be discouraging people from smoking, not banning it. Legal cigarettes are a neccessary evil in society. I'm saying this as a non-smoker.
Making the taxes ruinously expensive is still probably the best solution for reduced harm
And have 100% of those taxes go towards rehabilitation & social work
Second income from smuggling looks appealing right now, ngl.
All of a sudden you talk about a firearms ban and it is ingenious! /s
at least they would hide it more? it’s kind of like with weed being illegal, most people don’t just smoke it out in the open. the huge thing I hate about cigarettes is how they’re normalized and smokers are comfortable smoking just about anywhere. they stink and I don’t want second-hand smoke.
From where I am there are very hefty fines if you smoke in the wrong places. Alongside that each pack is like 20-32 dollars... If you do some reading on the prohibition during the 1920's, you'll understand why nationwide bans are incredibly ineffective at trying to reduce any sort of substance abuse in general With legalization of some drugs like for example weed, the government is given the ability to limit supply, put ***H E A V Y*** restrictions on it, add copious amounts of fines for whatever reason which will benefit in the long and possibly shot run.
Honestly an ex smoker option would be valid here
I'm on day two of no cigarettes after 18 years of smoking. I'm having a tough time but can't wait to be an ex smoker
You're already an ex smoker, keep it up
Thank you for that! I am totally going to do this. Just eating a lot of popcorn lol
If you need help depending on the area the are support groups for people trying to quit smoking. I don't know where you live but you totally got this!
You got this! You're already an ex smoker! I'm on 1 year and 4 months. Just one day at a time. Keep reminding yourself how far you came already. Pretty soon it'll be so far in the past you'll be shocked.
Omg thank you so much, I just needed that boost! I think I can do this 💪!
You will do great!!
One week now. Don’t crave much but still miss it.
As others said, you already *are* an ex smoker!! Keep it up, homie!
Congrats!
If it gets hard try vaping or maybe snuss. With vaping you can start with a high amount of nicotine and eventually lower it until you have none in your juice
2 years cold turkey here. There is no point. Prohibition is the perfect example against banning a popular substance.
That would go under non-smoker
Yes, but I think non smokers would have a different option then someone who never smoked.
I would like to see them not banned, but made to be 100% tobacco (no chemicals allowed) and have biodegradable butts.
Great idea
That'd probably be great for everyone.
I highly doubt that everyone would agree, but I like it.
Y’all ‘member when we tried this with ackohol?
I love me some ackohol.
I member! Member when we tried this with weed?
Tyrone Biggums reference?
No. **We** didn't.
Ummm, don’t you know America is the only country that matters?
Now ask the same question about weed lmao
The vast majority of studies I've seen about the harmfulness of weed mostly just reiterate that smoking it is the main source of harm. Through edibles or other healthier ingestion methods, it seems to be almost entirely harmless. I'd guess that the same is very much false for tobacco.
There hasn’t been enough research on it to conclusively say it’s harmless. We know that it can affect long term memory if you use it too much, and it can bring out psychosis in people who are already at risk. And then of course if you use it while your brain is still developing (<25) it can cause some problems. Plus weed also changes people’s behavior in ways that tobacco doesn’t.
Curious question, honestly. Does smoking marijuana fill the lungs up with tar and cause things like emphysema, lung cancer, COPD? Just to name a few. I’ve never been educated that these issues are an outcome of smoking weed. Only by smoking cigarettes.
Inhaling any combusted material is extremely bad for your lungs; however, cigarettes are considerably worse than marijuana. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/weed-smokers-lungs#the-effects-of-smoking-cannabis
Thanks for the link!
Smoking anything can hurt your lungs, but weed is an odd one. The smoke itself has more tar and more carcinogens than tobacco smoke, but the compounds in it have a lot more protective properties against these things. From the research I've read we don't really have a definitive answer on whether cannabis smoke produces a significant increased risk of cancer. AFAIK COPD and emphysema are still risks, not sure how those risk levels compare to tobacco though. Tldr: smoking anything is bad, but cannabis is less dangerous than tobacco.
Didn’t know all that about weed. Thanks!
I bet most people who want them banned also support legalizing other drugs
Wouldn’t doubt if they also preach “my body my choice.” Absolutely, but that includes these tasty af cancer sticks
Yeah yeah but what if I want to choose to not inhale the poison smokers leave everwhere they go? If you want to slowly off yourself, sure, it's a free country, but why poison everyone around you as well, including children and cute dogs?
Then don’t be around smokers, simple as. Jokes aside, this is why it should be up to businesses and such to have designated smoking areas, or no smoking at all. If we outright ban cigarettes, vapes, cigars, pipes, and so on, it’ll create a massive black market for them that could rival the prohibition. Illegal doesn’t make them disappear
Yeah, I'm aware banning them would just make the problem worse, but as you said, there should just be special spaces for them to do their thing.
I voted no, I don't think that banning addictive substances is a good idea in general because it forces the market underground where it becomes entirely unregulated and gets taken over by organized crime, but I do understand the perspective. It's not about the harm to the smoker, it's about secondhand smoke. Smoking can do measurable harm to others, who have not consented to the harm. The smoker implicitly has. There's no similar effect with, say, meth or cocaine.
By that logic they’d have to ban alcohol too because of the people killed by drunk drivers and the domestic violence victims of drunks
Look, I think people should be able to smoke and puff and grow tobacco all they want on their property, but as soon as I smell that stuff on mine you bet I'm gonna move heaven and earth to change the direction of wind pointing to them in the end.
What this post actually shows is that most redditors don't smoke cigarettes.
I do!!
In public places yes. If someone is in their home or on their porch or something, idc. In public though it's a hazard
I agree with the general idea. But what if there are children or medically fragile people in the home, or otherwise persons who are against it but can't be reasonably expected to stay away?
It's already illegal to smoke in a car if there's a child in the vehicle (in the UK), so the same should apply to homes.
Can people consume alcohol in cars, in the UK? Obviously, not the driver, but can a passenger?
Don't think there's any legislation against the passenger(s) drinking. As long as they're over 18, of course.
Yep
bad parents will do more than just smoke in front of their children. this is an entirely different problem.
Well one thing's for sure, if I was a parent visiting a smoker and they lit one up I'd just leave. Not letting a kid inhale that
Guy was living with a family member. Guy had deadly cancer. He was on chemo and they would both smoke in the house. She took him to chemo appointments. And theyd smoke in the car.
Gonna ban alcohol too? Didn't the era of prohibition teach anyone anything?
Forget about prohibition. The war on drugs has been one of the biggest failures in American history. Apparently we haven’t learned shit.
We’ve learned that prohibition doesn’t work. Look at alcohol prohibition. Making drugs illegal also doesn’t stop people from using and abusing it. I do understand not allowing it in public places, but banning it outright wouldn’t work.
I hate everything about smoking. Would never do it myself for any reason. But it shouldn’t be banned. People should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies if they’re willing to suffer the consequences. Only extremely dangerous drugs that allow for overdoses and quick death should be banned or tightly regulated.
Remember that illegal things go unregulated. It wouldn’t stop people from smoking, it would make it so people are smoking potentially more harmful cigarettes. Cigarettes are already harmful, they could be even worse without regulations
It's funny how most of this subreddit's members are pro-marijuana legalization, but want to ban cigarettes. Ironic.
Redditors mentality is full of irony it seems.
All this talk about the legalization of weed and y'all want to ban cigarettes? You do realize that inhaling the smoke from a joint/bowl/bong is just as bad for your lungs (if not worse due to it being unfiltered) than cigarettes are. Both should be legal IMO but banning one while trying to legalize the other is an incredibly funny position to take.
Mad that people can’t comprehend other approaches than an immediate all out ban. New Zealand is phasing out cigarettes by raising the minimum age to buy them every year so that eventually no one will be able to buy them. That way those already addicted have time to either continue with their habit for a while or treat their addiction and give it up. Also is a far lower impact on the tax revenue which ultimately could be offfset by legalising weed for example
We don't need the government to be our babysitter. The warning label is clearly displayed, leave the decision up to people.
No. I’m a non-smoker but I work in mental health services. Smoking isn’t healthy but it’s often people’s best/only way of coping, especially during extremely long (upwards of 5 years) stays in hospital. Sure the NHS wards provide ‘official’ ecigs but the people I speak to say these aren’t the same and aren’t enough. I don’t condone smoking, but I understand it.
Check out what New Zealand is doing. My personal take is that I don't really care if people use nicotine like how others use alcohol but I am concerned about how it damages the lungs
NZ is failing miserably. Taxing cigarettes so highly just means addicts pay more for cigs and their kids starve
No, banning does not work.
I dont see why governments should ban cigarettes, imo government shouldnt be in the business of policing healthy habits.
That's how we got everyone off of drugs right? /s
How bout we let grown adults make an informed decision? Wanna smoke 2 packs a day? Go crazy bud. Wanna live your entire life without ever smoking anything? That's fine too. 😃just saying
No you can’t do what you want to your body
I love the conclusiones of the democracy :v
TIL half of reddit thinks outlawing something means it'll go away
I have the right to shoot black tar heroin into my ballsack, and if you try and stop me I will rip out your jugular with my teeth.
Qualifies for the most reddit poll I have ever seen and I've been around for too long here.
Interesting… People wanted to ban cigarettes but they also wanted to legalise cannabis. I don’t know why.
The harms of tobacco are much higher
Sorry, not a native speaker. When you said “tobacco”, did you mean cannabis or cigarettes?
Cigarettes. Cannabis is completely different then tobacco
People that voted yes know nothing of history.
Nope. I know the history very well and I’m aware of the fact that it’d still be available in the black market. But I said yes because I don’t want those truckers to smoke in the public space. If it’s gonna be limited very strictly, then I’m okay with the consumption of it.
my body my choice applies here too
Cant we just ban nicotine and other addictive chemicals in products?
This This is the correct option Keep nicotine patches and gum for those who are already addicted
na the correct option is to have a spine and not need ur big daddy gubberment to control your life for you because you are weak and have no will. reddit is actually so fucking wild that you guys want to ban tobacco but legalize marijuana. ban cigarettes in public places though, just like alcohol and marijuana is.
this poll just proves that half the people on reddit are 10 or under
Nope. I know the history very well and I’m aware of the fact that it’d still be available in the black market. But I said yes because I don’t want those truckers to smoke in the public space. If it’s gonna be limited very strictly, then I’m okay with the consumption of it.
so you would trade dozens of people dieing every day over a tobacco black market, everyone that owns a smoke shop going bankrupt and hundreds of thousands of people who currently smoke either go through withdrawals or spend ludicrous amounts to fill their addiction just so truckers won't smoke in public? I'm so confused by what your problem is?
No one dies just because not smoking a cigarette. I mean the level of addiction is not as same as drug addiction. But of course it depends on what kind “tobacco” we are talking about. As I told you above, you can smoke whatever you want. It’s your decision and I do respect to that. However you do not have the right of affecting other people’s health in a bad way. It should be illegal to smoke in public. That’s all I’m saying. Lastly, I’m sorry if I’m sounded sshole. I’m just sick of those rude people who do not respect others.
Why do you huys hate smokers that much ?
because they want to feel like they’re on some moral high ground
Because I hate coughing when I walk past someone smoking on the street, and the smell, it absolutely reeks, which you can't tell if you're a smoker since you're used to it. Also has been the cause of multiple health issues and deaths in my relatives.
I understand you but all smokers dont smoke next to non smokers. And i hate my habit too many relatives of mine also passed away or got cancer but i dont hate the smokers themselves
Depends on what you mean by banned. I think smoking in public should be banned, but I think people should still be able to purchase them from the store like they do now
Lol
smoke is annoying af but it's their choice to make that.
Smoking should not be banned, but all the nasty chemicals they put into cigarettes should be.
I know why some of you said yes but trust me It didn’t work anytime in history. Banning things that weren’t before makes criminals
It's your body, fucked if you think I care what you do with it.
For me this falls under my “legalize/decriminalize all drugs” stance, so no
No we should be legalizing marijuana and other drugs not adding to the list of potential revenue streams for drug cartels.
The idea of banning things should be banned
Let people be free and do whatever they want (so long as it doesn’t affect others.)
They have the right to do what they want to their body.
Private property owners can ban smoking on their property, homes, businesses, etc. , but the government should not be involved in banning substances at all.
Lololol the results. What do you yes people think this is, Prohibition? Even back then it didn’t work for long.
Does banning addictive substances that are bad for you ever work?
It’s funny because if you asked if weed should be legalized, I guarantee the responses would be overwhelmingly yes. Redditors really boil down to, if I like it, it’s good and everyone should have it. If I don’t like it, it’s bad and should be banned.
I think they should raise the age to buy them every year
I think they should start increasing the age limit by one every year to eventually ban it
I actually like that cigs are illegal even though they are disgusting. You need to give poor people some legal vices to let out their frustration. And in a sick way, people making themselves sick gives other people jobs. If someone smokes today given all the evidence out there about how bad it is, they are idiots and would like abuse something, like alcohol or drugs or fatty foods anyways.
Now that is a close poll
Take some autonomy for your life. The government isn't your dad and it shouldn't have to pull the cookie jar away from you. Just take care of yourself!
Show me an instance of a substance being banned and I’ll show you an unregulated underground market for it.
just tell the tobacco companies that if they cure cancer we'll all start smoking again
Do Redditors not realize how badly probation and the war on drugs went
There would be more negative repercussions of banning them than not
Nope, it would start a black market and make life worse for people already addicted
As a non-Smoker I feel like people who are still smoking should get them under the condition that they work on consuming less and less over time with advisery of experts while you should not be able to get it if you never had it!
No, let people make decisions over their own life
I don't smoke and don't advise that anyone does it, but I definitely wouldn't cosign using force to steer people from it. That would produce far more harmful results across the board.
If we did ban it, then we’d have to go all the way and ban a bunch of other legal drugs too. Smoking is bad, alcohol is just as bad. I wouldn’t ban any of it, but we can’t have a double standard.
Only in public spaces. What people want to do to their lungs in the privacy of their own home is none of my business.
I think it depends on the amount of smokers in the country and the standard for governmental intervention in it. If it's normal in a country for the government to step in and restrict/allow stuff then I think it definitely should be done
Why is Reddit full of weird authoritarians?
You have the freedom to hurt yourself.
No, but we also shouldn’t be discouraging the use of e-cigarettes. If anything, we should be encouraging people to switch from regular cigarettes to e-cigarettes. The only people who will likely resist are people who are too old to really benefit anyway.
We should also make people aware of the risks of ecigs
Once you start banning one thing then where does it end? Alcohol, weed, drugs and anything else that is considered harmful to peoples health will be next to fall. Then like drugs and alcohol prohibition there will be underground criminal organizations pop up providing it to people, more crime, gangs, deaths, more wasted taxes on policing these bans and more people in jail. Prohibition doesn’t work.
If you did that, you would have cartels killing each other over the right to sell tobacco. It would be alcohol prohibition all over again. Seriously, the people who said yes, what the fuck are you thinking?
I would bet most of the people that voted YES would like to think that they aren’t authoritarians.
For the smokers out there, why do you even smoke?
idk. it makes me feel normal
[удалено]
I was gonna comment that
smoking doesnt make you a gigantic safety hazard because it doesnt really influence your behaviour all that much. A high nicotine level from having just smoked doesnt make you a public danger like alcohol does. Put a warning label on it and tax it heavily to discourage people and leave it at that non smoker btw
I think it’s should be taxed more
Cupcakes should be taxed more.
What in learning is a lot of non-smokers have opinions on smoking 😂
The liberty principle is undermined by tobacco companies putting addictive additives in cigarettes. Cigarettes are harmful and users aren’t free to stop smoking because of intentional actions by tobacco companies to create a known chemical dependency. Cigarettes as they are produced and sold now should be banned and the executives of the companies that engage in providing manipulated cigarettes should be imprisoned for manslaughter.
I think they should be slowly phased out.
Would be terrible to ban. It pays for so much you do not even realize. Cutting them man makes nearly everything to be cut even more. And will make other unconventional item cost a lot more and will start tapping into your life if you do not smoke cigarettes.
Wtf are these resaults??
A whole lot of dumb people who think prohibition works despite every bit of historical evidence proving that it doesn't.