Smoking Ban...

[catlad]

I started smoking in the school playground because I thought it made me look older and cool! a stupid habit that took me 25 yr to quit.
Its about time it wasn't even an option, and if people want to find it on a black market then you just can't help some people.

 

[noseall]

No it isn't about children, you imbecile. It is already illegal for children to smoke. Are you not aware of this?

And yet they still have access to smoking products. Gosh, how come?

Preventing children from taking up nicotine/tobacco products will always be a good thing, no matter how they go about it.

 

[Odds]

Odds, the IEA (Institute of Economic Affairs) is a right wing lobby group masquerading as a think tank.

It’s funded by a range of libertarian groups including tobacco and fossil interests

It’s extremely powerful, you will see people working for it appear on BBC, Sky, ITV, Twitter, RW media.

Liz Truss and Kwarteng are IEA puppets

“The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is a British “free-market” think tank, set up in 1955, which has a history of close collaboration with the tobacco industry”

Institute of Economic Affairs - TobaccoTactics

The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) is a British “free-market” think tank, set up in 1955, which has a history of close collaboration with the tobacco industry. It describes its purpose as: “to improve understanding of the fundamental institutions of a free society by analysing and...

tobaccotactics.org

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/right-wing-think-tank-accused-of-promoting-tobacco-oil-indu/

Deep concerns over public health as The BMJ reveals MPs’ links to organisation backed by tobacco industry | BMJ

Tory leadership hopefuls linked to organisation backed by tobacco industry and open critic of public health measures Experts “deeply concerned” over potential threat to public health The BMJ calls for more transparency over funding sources for all think tanks No fewer than 25 serving...

www.bmj.com

Yes, but it remains pertinent to the argument that effectively making cigarettes illegal for a generation will not prevent tobacco consumption. Prohibition is the obvious comparison. Other countries, such as Portugal and Mexico, are trying the same thing and it remains to be seen how successful this will be. It all smacks of a vote-plea by Rish! to create some sort of 'legacy bill' as the Tories look set for a huge loss in this years election

 

[JohnD]

Yes, but it remains pertinent to the argument that effectively making cigarettes illegal for a generation will not prevent tobacco consumption. Prohibition is the obvious comparison.

You mean heroin and cannabis should be legalised?

 

[Notch7]

Yes, but it remains pertinent to the argument that effectively making cigarettes illegal for a generation will not prevent tobacco consumption. Prohibition is the obvious comparison. Other countries, such as Portugal and Mexico, are trying the same thing and it remains to be seen how successful this will be. It all smacks of a vote-plea by Rish! to create some sort of 'legacy bill' as the Tories look set for a huge loss in this years election

Well a lobby group funded by tobacco industry would want to make that argument.

Do you have any sources which discuss the point you are making which don’t have hidden vested interests?

Persuasive arguments supported by unchecked research aren’t very helpful.


I agree with your argument that prohibition isn’t necessarily the answer….but sometimes laws can be about messaging, not the law.


Have a look at the huge advertising and marketing tobacco industry uses to target emerging markets: South America, China, India etc etc.

 

[Odds]

You mean heroin and cannabis should be legalised?

No and Yes.
Having a monkey on your back is way more dangerous than inhaling the sweet aroma of Mary Jane.

 

[Brigadier]

Oh look: the resident lackwit can't even get the basic premise right:

It is about banning everybody, born after a certain date, from smoking - forever. They won't be allowed to smoke when they are 30, or 40, or older.

The rest is just an hysterical, Karen-esque hissy fit: probably brought on by an involuntary bladder event.

And the usual wetwipes and mouthbreathers flock to "like" and "thwank"

 

[JohnD]

No and Yes.
Having a monkey on your back is way more dangerous than inhaling the sweet aroma of Mary Jane.

So you think illegality should relate to the number of deaths a substance causes.

That's fags, then.

 

[Odds]

Well a lobby group funded by tobacco industry would want to make that argument.

Do you have any sources which discuss the point you are making which don’t have hidden vested interests?

Persuasive arguments supported by unchecked research aren’t very helpful.


I agree with your argument that prohibition isn’t necessarily the answer….but sometimes laws can be about messaging, not the law.


Have a look at the huge advertising and marketing tobacco industry uses to target emerging markets: South America, China, India etc etc.

All the research is out there to make a case For and Against the prohibition of tobacco.
I'm a die hard smoker, so the legislation doesn't really affect me but the problems inherent in banning a substance are well known from other sources. And if you're going to advocate a ban on tobacco i will put on my boots, change the sign on my sandwich board and march on a War on Booze. How many people die from alcohol related disease in a calendar year? Or how about burgers - how many deaths are related to obesity? Where will it end?

 

[Odds]

So you think illegality should relate to the number of deaths a substance causes.

That's fags, then.

Yes and no. The number of deaths related to tobacco are combined with their toxic affects on nearby non-smokers. I don't mind leaving it alone in public places where smoke can infest other folk but i draw the line at some officious bloody jobsworth effectively knocking on my door to tell me to 'put that cigarette out'.

 

[JohnD]

And yet they still have access to smoking products. Gosh, how come?

Preventing children from taking up nicotine/tobacco products will always be a good thing, no matter how they go about it.

That's when the addicts mostly get hooked.

The cigarette trade only keeps going by recruiting a constant stream of child addicts as lifelong customers, to replace the ones it sends into an early coffin.

 

[Brigadier]

prohibition of tobacco.

The proposal isn't.

banning

The proposal isn't.

a ban on tobacco

The proposal isn't.

 

[JohnD]

... i draw the line at some officious bloody jobsworth effectively knocking on my door to tell me to 'put that cigarette out'.

They aren't trying to stop you.

You're a lost cause.

You have willingly embraced your own fate.

It's your replacements they are trying to save.

You don't, seriously, wish the tobacco industry to continue recruiting more children and young people.

Do you?

 

[Brigadier]

i draw the line at some officious bloody jobsworth effectively knocking on my door to tell me to 'put that cigarette out'.

You'll be dead long before this is even likely.

 

[Brigadier]

The number of deaths related to tobacco are combined with their toxic affects on nearby non-smokers.

Approx. 75k deaths p.a. in UK, of smokers.

Approx. 10k deaths p.a. in UK, non-smokers but believed to be "passive smokers" to some degree.

c. 2/3 of lifelong smokers die because of their habit, often decades before their otherwise likely life expectancy.

Anyone who tries to deny that smoking is likely to kill you many, many years before your time is deluded, trolling, arguing for it's own sake, or any multiple of those three.