Merged Smoking should be banned universally

[jiggeryqua]

Shouldn't the thread title be "Should smoking be banned yet?", given how often the antis start this discussion. Sooner or later, I fear, they'll catch a rising tide.

 

[The Fallen Serpent]

I disagree with an outright ban on smoking. I am okay with limiting the activity in public areas to a certain degree, but I believe smoke lounges and such should be allowed as well as private smoking.

 

[Dessi]

3) health issues foisted upon an already overburdened healthcare system

This is probably the only credible reason to ban smoking. I'd personally be interesting to see whether smoking increases healthcare costs for non-smokers either directly or indirectly.

Until then, I generally think smoking bans intrude on a host of people's freedoms:

- people have a right to be as healthy or sickly as they want. A person can drink themselves until they die, gamble away their life savings, contract as many venereal diseases as they please, eat fastfood everyday of their lives -- but they can't smoke? Seems like a bizarre and irrational exclusion, why shouldn't a person have a right to smoke until they die?

- cigarettes generate a huge amount of taxable revenue. Typically cigarettes are taxed at around $1.34 per pack in the US. We have 46 million smokers in the US, many are pack-a-day smokers. That's a lot of money. I'd be interested in a stat which showed the yearly cost to our healthcare system resulting from smoking, is it more or less than the revenue generated from cigarette taxes.

- smokers already pay more for private health insurance, which helps recover the cost of healthcare. This is an important point which distinguishes victimless crimes like smoking from victimless crimes like driving without a seatbelt, and provides a basis for taxing and regulating it rather than proposing a blanket ban.

- prohibition just doesn't work. EVER.

 

[Crossbow]

For the reasoning behind why it should

1) stink
2) second hand smoke
3) health issues foisted upon an already overburdened healthcare system
4) the general rudeness apathy of smokers towards everyone else.

It short, not just in public, the ban should be EVERYwhere

Nope!

If smoking is banned, then it will just be the Prohibition Days all over again, but even worse.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Maybe addicts should be able to apply for a card (Much like how foreigners can get an alcohol card in Dubai) To buy cigarettes or tobacco product you'd be required to show the card. Perhaps then this is all we need and the smoking age thing becomes superfluous.

That's the way to go. Banning smoking outright probably wouldn't work, but we could stamp it out in a generation doing it your way.

 

[tyr_13]

I'm all for banning smoking in public places (what else am I allowed to light on fire in public?) but to ban it outright would sadly create more problems than it would solve.

 

[NoahFence]

What else do you disagree with that you think should be banned?

Personally I think hair metal, Robert Pattinson and Rebecca Black should be illegal.

Uh, with no hair metal comes no Queensryche. I must object.

 

[ServiceSoon]

Smoking what?

 

[slingblade]

Thanks, Mikey, but I don't need a babysitter or want a nanny state.

 

[bottsranzee]

I don't get why the smokers get singled out, it's a choice. I don't think they should ban it.

What is a bigger problem, the health risks of smoking or the health risks of obesity? They should be taxing the chit out of a burger at McDonalds and such as well then.

 

[rustypouch]

For the reasoning behind why it should

1) stink

Since you don't like the smell of something, make it illegal? To invoke a slippery slope, how far do we take this? Do we arrest people with B.O. or wearing excessive amounts of scent? Do we ban foods with strong odours, such as durian or fish sauce? Seriously, I worked at a place where someone broke a bottle of fish sauce, and the odour was overwhelming.

2) second hand smoke

Well, around these parts you can't smoke inside, except in your own home, so I think this is a non-issue.

3) health issues foisted upon an already overburdened healthcare system

As others have said, do we ban everything which increases the load on the health care system? The list might include obesity, alcoholism, sports...

4) the general rudeness apathy of smokers towards everyone else.

Meh, I'm generally rude and apathetic towards everyone else, so it's a wash.

It short, not just in public, the ban should be EVERYwhere

The answer is no.

 

[mikeyx]

What else do you disagree with that you think should be banned?

Personally I think hair metal, Robert Pattinson and Rebecca Black should be illegal.

I have no issues with that beyond it being slightly off topic.

 

[Skepdan]

I don't see much evidence, if any, that banning smoking would be save money on healthcare, at least in the UK.

The cost of smoking related diseases to the NHS is somewhere between £1.7 and £5 billion. Tax revenue from smoking is around 10 billion.

 

[mikeyx]

Laws should not prohibit actions that do not directly harm people other than the person doing the action.

Smoking could be restricted in public areas but should not be banned outright.

Yes it should, when smoking in one unit effects the AC of an apartment building you're efefcting others. Ban it all together.

 

[mikeyx]

Yes but a workable plan to do so is the first hurdle. Addicts won't necesarily play by the rules.

Anyone not already addicted should not be able to buy cigarettes.

One way might be to keep raising the smoking age. Currently you have to be 18 to buy cigarettes. What if we let it be known that in two years time the age would be raise to 19. Then to 20 two years after that and so on for ten years when anyone under 23 could not but cigarettes. Thereafter the smoking age would be raised by each year. As such no-one currently under the age of 13 would ever legally be allowed to buy cigarettes. What to do then about addicts in later years want to move to this country?

Maybe addicts should be able to apply for a card (Much like how foreigners can get an alcohol card in Dubai) To buy cigarettes or tobacco product you'd be required to show the card. Perhaps then this is all we need and the smoking age thing becomes superfluous.

No they can be arrested and put in smoker friendly cells.

 

[ehcks]

Yes it should, when smoking in one unit effects the AC of an apartment building you're efefcting others. Ban it all together.

The lack of a HEPA filter is a problem of its own that can be fixed without banning smoking, or you could convince the building owner to ban smoking inside his building.

What does a person smoking in their own home, unconnected to your own, do to you?

 

[Joecool]

Smoking will never be banned. At least not in the US. The government makes too much money from cigarette taxes.

 

[mikeyx]

Thanks, Mikey, but I don't need a babysitter or want a nanny state.

Yes you do, because you smoke and smell it from here.

 

[bottsranzee]

If you don't care for it, take yourself away from it; out of the situation.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Then we can go on to ban alcohol, fast food, soft drinks, cars...man to list goes on.

What else can we go ahead and ban while we are here?

(I have been smoke free for a long time, and I find them rather disgusting myself.)