Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Hasina

Should Cigarettes Be Illegal?

144 posts in this topic

Should Cigarettes Be Illegal?

A proposed bill in Oregon to make the possession of cigarettes illegal is well-intended, but from a practical standpoint, it's unlikely to happen, bioethicists and public health experts say.

The ban, sponsored by State Rep. Mitch Greenlick of Portland, would make nicotine a controlled substance, and says possessing more than 0.1 milligrams would be illegal, punishable by a year in prison or a $6,250 fine. Exceptions would be made for people who had a doctor's prescription for the drug, according to the bill.

Tobacco clearly takes a significant toll on the lives of Americans, causing 450,000 premature deaths each year, and drastic measures should be taken to eliminate the habit from our lives, including, some say, banning cigarettes. But others argue that, in today's society, such a goal is overly idealistic, and would be extremely difficult to implement.

Source: http://www.livescien...es-illegal.html

Edited by Hasina
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The healthcare situation will soon act as a natural brake on the smoking rates. When more young people begin to see their elders and even friends dying horrible, painful deaths due to this poison, they'll get the message. I lost my mom and almost lost my older sister to smoking. When people begin to be discriminated against in the health system due to their smoking, drug use, obesity..... life styles may begin to change. But trying to prohibit? Nah......

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would just create a black market for them, like it did with alcohol.

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there should be no profit to be had from selling something so clearly so harmful. Therefore its manufacture, distribution and sale should be done by government-owned entities.

This is not the case even in Vietnam, where foreign cigarettes are imported and sold privately, the government just taking a tax, so I guess I shouldn't talk.

Banning them is too much and would lead to a huge windfall for criminals, as does banning almost anything. Just find ways to take out the profit motive and the use will gradually decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything that makes people sick and we have to end up footing the bill later on should be regulated.

Let people have a choice but harmful products should be taxed heavily to recoup the cost of health care associated with them.

Hopefully if the price is too high people will just quit and regulation would effectively operate as a ban.

Yes, I want them banned but realize we can't do it outright cause the whiners will complain even if they expect us to pay for their healthcare later on down the line.

Alcohol, guns, and fast food too.

For now we are going to go after soda! It is next.

Edited by I believe you
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For now we are going to go after soda! It is next.

This seems to be somewhat new knowledge. I'm what is called "pre-diabetic" and you should have heard my doctor on this subject the last time I saw her. She went after what she calls "sugar-water" with no ifs or buts. The stuff upsets the insulin in the body because the suspended sugar enters the body directly through the stomach unlike other foods where it goes in more slowly. She had the same opinion of fruit juices -- eat the fresh fruit, not the juices. (She also insisted I switch to brown rice, no problem, and whole-grain breads and pastas (the latter are getting easier to find in Vietnam but are a bit expensive here).

Since all of these are clearly harmful, even to healthy young people, I wonder what restrictions are coming.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a smoker. I have often wished they would make it illegal. Then i would have no chiice but to quit. i have tried to quit so so many times. I do not think my willpower is strong enough to overcome the withdraw stages. It sucks! I wish they were illegal and harder to get my hands on. I hate it that they are not.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and of course people would complain... the ones addicted to them & the ones profiting from them. Which by the way... The state profits so I do not think they will make them illegal. :-( it doesn't matter how expensive they are... Addiction doesn't care about the cost.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a smoker. I have often wished they would make it illegal. Then i would have no chiice but to quit. i have tried to quit so so many times. I do not think my willpower is strong enough to overcome the withdraw stages. It sucks! I wish they were illegal and harder to get my hands on. I hate it that they are not.

Then maybe they should ban alcohol again, help all us alcoholics kick the habit faster, eh?

I agree that if a product only kills, then it should be prohibited. Cigarettes do cause cancer so that's why they should be banned. Not for the silly reasons people have for banning big sodas and alcohol, because they can't control their urges?! D: Halp me GUMENT, control me!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if we are to look at it objectively, we can see that tobacco is a drug. We can see that it is more addictive than heroin, it is also far more detrimental to health, and causes far more deaths. We can see that it is completely off the charts when compared in the same ways to cannabis.

If one is illegal - one that is far less dangerous - then why shouldn't the other be illegal? Or, more to the point: if one is legal, then why shouldn't the other, far less dangerous one be so too?

They should be legal because people should be allowed to put whatever they want into their bodies, but they should stop moving the goalposts when it comes to different substances.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and of course people would complain... the ones addicted to them & the ones profiting from them. Which by the way... The state profits so I do not think they will make them illegal. :-( it doesn't matter how expensive they are... Addiction doesn't care about the cost.

The campaign against smoking in America has largely worked putting smoking into decline. The reason of course is because it was regulated to include taxing it higher. Many simply quit when it became too expensive.

Everything I previously suggested has already been tried, we progressives know it works, and we can do it with other products that pose harm to society. We taxed Big Tobacco then used that money to pay for the programs that inform others with the knowledge that smoking kills.

Want to know what Big Tobacco did?

They went to what were previously known as Third World countries and began marketing their products. Now they poison other societies where education is weak and the people simply do not know what it will do to them long term.

Then maybe they should ban alcohol again, help all us alcoholics kick the habit faster, eh?

I agree that if a product only kills, then it should be prohibited. Cigarettes do cause cancer so that's why they should be banned. Not for the silly reasons people have for banning big sodas and alcohol, because they can't control their urges?! D: Halp me GUMENT, control me!

Any product shown to harm society should be regulated. Sodas contribute to poor lifestyles because of poorer health and it leads to early deaths robbing years of productivity from society. This is beyond the toll of higher health costs while they do live, get ill, and they might even die in the hospital. Alcohol does all this to some regarding a toll on health, it causes drunk driving incidents with others, and for even another group alcohol leads to abuse and other negative states emotionally. It kills just slower but it does kill.

Now you defend alcohol, your choice, but not cigarettes, saying they only kill. That is not exactly fair as smokers would claim the pleasure they derive just as those who drink would do the same? Or did you mean something other?

Well if we are to look at it objectively, we can see that tobacco is a drug. We can see that it is more addictive than heroin, it is also far more detrimental to health, and causes far more deaths. We can see that it is completely off the charts when compared in the same ways to cannabis.

If one is illegal - one that is far less dangerous - then why shouldn't the other be illegal? Or, more to the point: if one is legal, then why shouldn't the other, far less dangerous one be so too?

One is legal because corporations make money even if they make less money here in the US now. The other is illegal because of past xenophobia, look it up. There is also the prison and specialized drug task forces in law enforcement who all profit from keeping it illegal. Beyond that many companies provide contract services to support the war on drugs. They are all making a living, many careers and jobs we are talking about, so it is not a failure for them but a perpetual hoax where they profit. For society the war on drugs is a failure.

Edited by I believe you
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will repeat what I said: I don't think banning things does much good and helps criminal enterprises. "Make a law, make a criminal."

So I think businesses that sell seriously harmful products should be state-run, so there is no profit. I would emphasize the word "seriously," since a case can be made that practically anything in some circumstances is harmful. Let neutral bodies like the courts decide on an industry by industry basis within the framework of a regulatory law.

Some countries that have gone the taxation route have regretted it; the income is nice but then politicians become loathe to further suppress the product because of this revenue. Also, taxation encourages black markets and smuggling. Better to just have the government handle it and keep prices at a level where you don't get criminal involvement.

Take the glamor out of these products too with gray-box no-branding no-advertising policies.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I approve of nationalization.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The campaign against smoking in America has largely worked putting smoking into decline. The reason of course is because it was regulated to include taxing it higher. Many simply quit when it became too expensive.

Everything I previously suggested has already been tried, we progressives know it works, and we can do it with other products that pose harm to society. We taxed Big Tobacco then used that money to pay for the programs that inform others with the knowledge that smoking kills.

Well it worked halfass, some of us ex-smokers switched over to chewing and dip tobacco. Others went on to other kinds of drugs. Have a relative and his friends that smokes cannabis and crack now because he thinks it's cheaper. And there's more toxins in the use of those drugs than tobacco.

Bet nobody saw that happening...or did they?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it worked halfass, some of us ex-smokers switched over to chewing and dip tobacco. Others went on to other kinds of drugs. Have a relative and his friends that smokes cannabis and crack now because he thinks it's cheaper. And there's more toxins in the use of those drugs than tobacco.

Yea -- its like putting criminals in jail only works halfass -- you reduce crime some but you don't eliminate it and the jails have their own bad effects.

We do what we can. Over time the generations that got hooked will die off and hopefully new smokers, once the profit motive is removed, can be prevented. Now we have new smokers because there is profit to the tobacco companies in hooking them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smoking is my addiction. It's been for a long time. I've tried to quit but it has always been just too hard. For me, smoking is my only pleasure. I am not a big eater or drinker. Where others enjoy their good food or wine, I go for a cigarette. Our government has also been taxing us hard on alcohol and cigarettes. It is expensive, but it is not putting an end to my addiction. I am a considerate smoker - always smoke away from non-smokers, do not smoke inside and basicly just keep it to myself. I do not cause any harm to others. Yes, smoking is harmful to my health, but I feel that alcoholism and drug users should be of more concern. My smoking habit would not cause a car accident or cause me to be abusive towards my family. When it comes to violent crime, prostitution and abuse, in most cases, alcohol and drugs are involved more ofthen than not.

Should cigarettes be illegal? If cigarettes become illegal where will it end? What's next? Will all fast foods and soft drinks become illegal too as this leads to heart disease and diabetes? Should the government then make all our choices for us?

To smoke is my choice, and my choice only - As long as I do not harm those around me, and these days that is easy with the banning of smoking in public places.

Now let me get back to my coffee and cigarette..

:yes:

Edited by Catz
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any product shown to harm society should be regulated. Sodas contribute to poor lifestyles because of poorer health and it leads to early deaths robbing years of productivity from society. This is beyond the toll of higher health costs while they do live, get ill, and they might even die in the hospital. Alcohol does all this to some regarding a toll on health, it causes drunk driving incidents with others, and for even another group alcohol leads to abuse and other negative states emotionally. It kills just slower but it does kill.

Now you defend alcohol, your choice, but not cigarettes, saying they only kill. That is not exactly fair as smokers would claim the pleasure they derive just as those who drink would do the same? Or did you mean something other?

Pollocks to the 'society first ahead of the individual' ideal, I personally don't agree with it. An individual should care about themselves because they want to, not because someone's making them, which is why I dislike public healthcare. If someone wants to be unhealthy, let'em, just don't make me pay for their idiocy.

That's why alcohol's regulated usually, you have legal blood limits, etc. Very true, it doesn't help much, but there's a fine line between something that inhibits your ability to control your actions (something that should be regulated then) and something that causes cancer.

Soda and unhealthy foods? Once again, you'd have to have an unhealthy lifestyle to begin with. Are we not adult enough to know 'oh man I'm getting huge time to cut back on the pizzas!' Evidently not, but does that mean the government should tell us what to eat and drink? Well, if they want to make money with their public healthcare, darn right they will!

Alcohol has some health benefits, as does tobacco (some studies say at least) but cigarettes, especially the tar filled crud I'm smoking right now (I'm a Marlboro gal me self, I like the reds) that kills ya. I have no problem with those e-cigarettes, as long as it doesn't cause a cascade of health problems.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main difference between tobacco and things like soft drinks is the degree to which they are addictive. That something is harmful without countervailing benefits is enough to put special restrictions and taxes on it, but something that kills people and is addictive so that many are helpless to do anything about it should not be something people are allowed to profit from.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol has some health benefits, as does tobacco (some studies say at least) but cigarettes, especially the tar filled crud I'm smoking right now (I'm a Marlboro gal me self, I like the reds) that kills ya. I have no problem with those e-cigarettes, as long as it doesn't cause a cascade of health problems.

There are alternative, better ways to get the benefits alcohol can provide (statins and grapes) without the harm to your liver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are alternative, better ways to get the benefits alcohol can provide (statins and grapes) without the harm to your liver.

No doubt there. Me and my dad are proven alcoholics. He took years to get over it, while I had to buckle down and quit for a few months and go cold turkey. Nowadays, myself and my dad have a glass of wine in the evenings, nothing more, nothing less, one glass.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i have said myself about drugs,guns,and everything else banning them does nothing but make criminals rich.I dont need nanny barry and his buddies to tell me how to live.This country is becoming a nation of sheep,as voltaire said it is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea -- its like putting criminals in jail only works halfass -- you reduce crime some but you don't eliminate it and the jails have their own bad effects.

We do what we can. Over time the generations that got hooked will die off and hopefully new smokers, once the profit motive is removed, can be prevented. Now we have new smokers because there is profit to the tobacco companies in hooking them.

Where there is a will, there is a way, Frank. The question is, how do you remove the will?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread really makes me want to go out in the blizzard to buy a packet of fags.

Back in 10...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt there. Me and my dad are proven alcoholics. He took years to get over it, while I had to buckle down and quit for a few months and go cold turkey. Nowadays, myself and my dad have a glass of wine in the evenings, nothing more, nothing less, one glass.

Maybe I'm fortunate but I've never been addicted to anything except food, which is why now I have to worry about diabetes. Alcohol doesn't help there either, so I have to abstain completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank you seem like a knowledgeable guy from post i have read of yours,study up on some herbs and minerals that help regulate blood sugar levels and healthy diet.I have helped diabetics just cant give advice here lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.