Should smoking be banned outright?

Page 5 of 9 [ 134 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

22 Mar 2012, 9:25 am

Tequila wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

Although people are welcome to poison their bodies if they want, the problem I have with cigarettes is the massive profits that the tobacco companies make from it.

Jealousy, then.

Do you feel similarly about pharmaceutical companies?

Not jealousy, morals. I think it is wrong to make a profit off of selling people poison. I am critical of pharmaceutical companies because I think they tend to make people want to over-medicate, and because of all the money they waste on wooing doctors. However, at least most of their products protect lives rather than damage them.

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

22 Mar 2012, 9:30 am

ruveyn wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

Although people are welcome to poison their bodies if they want, the problem I have with cigarettes is the massive profits that the tobacco companies make from it. I wouldn't ban smoking outright, but I would ban all tobacco advertising in all forms (commercials, ads in magazines, product placement, sponsorship, etc.), regulate packaging to that it would consist entirely of a warning label, with the brand name in a small, standardized font, regulate cigarettes so that companies can't make gimmicky ones to try to get people to smoke, and most of all I would ban smoking in all public places, outdoors or indoors. If you want to smoke in your house, apartment, yard, or balcony then fine, but I should not be obliged to inhale carcinogens when I'm waiting at the bus stop.

There are some First Amendment issues here. Free Speech includes Free Commercial Speech. People have a right to hawk their goods as long as they do not commit fraud. As long as you know what you are getting with each puff you can decline to inhale carcinogens. Also, insurance companies can charge higher premiums on health/medical care insurance for those foolish enough to smoke. I am fifty years without a cigarette. I still consider myself a smoker.

ruveyn

We will, of course, fundamentally disagree about many issues here. However, on the legal front, you might have a point for the USA. In Canada though, we can and have banned cigarette advertising and require warning labels on cigarette packs. Our freedom of speech laws, although definitely there, aren't quite as sweeping as yours. (Let's leave the debate about that to some other time.) Also, since most of the Western world has a public heath care system, charging higher premiums on health insurance is not a possibility. You disapprove of public healthcare I know (let's not go into it here), but it is a reality in Canada, Australia, and Europe and isn't likely to go away any time soon. As such, smoking costs our societies a lot of money.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

22 Mar 2012, 12:47 pm

AstroGeek wrote:

Tequila wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

Although people are welcome to poison their bodies if they want, the problem I have with cigarettes is the massive profits that the tobacco companies make from it.

Jealousy, then.

Do you feel similarly about pharmaceutical companies?

selling people poison happen in more than one way though, where do you draw the line?

as long as people dont force it onto others they can do to themselves what they want.

would it be morally wrong to grow tobacco yourself then?

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

22 Mar 2012, 12:59 pm

Sure, why not? While we're at it, we could ban everything else that can cause disease. Silly people don't know what's best for them, the government has to tell us.

*lights cig*

_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.

AdjustedSanity
Hummingbird

Joined: 30 Oct 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 21

22 Mar 2012, 1:00 pm

AstroGeek wrote:

and most of all I would ban smoking in all public places, outdoors or indoors. If you want to smoke in your house, apartment, yard, or balcony then fine, but I should not be obliged to inhale carcinogens when I'm waiting at the bus stop.

I don't see a problem with public smoking as long as there are designated smoking areas. secondhand smoke is really only 1/1000 anyway.The smell is the only real issue in my mind.

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

22 Mar 2012, 1:01 pm

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Sure, why not? While we're at it, we could ban everything else that can cause disease. Silly people don't know what's best for them, the government has to tell us.

*lights cig*

good one my thoughs exactly.

Shatbat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,791
Location: Where two great rivers meet

22 Mar 2012, 1:02 pm

Well, if people want to poison themselves, that's their choice. It's a shame when people close to you do it and harm themselves, but it isn't like they don't know the risks.

I smoke cigarrettes twice a month, when anxious or very, very bored, and it really makes a difference. Here we have stringent laws, tobacco advertising has been forbidden in any way, and all boxes come with warnings of the risks of smoking, besides very graphic and rather disturbing images. That will prevent new smokers rather than help old ones, but they are good measures.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,476
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

22 Mar 2012, 1:10 pm

Shatbat wrote:

Well, if people want to poison themselves, that's their choice. It's a shame when people close to you do it and harm themselves, but it isn't like they don't know the risks.

Unless they're regular smokers its a bit on par with alcohol IMO in that its a vice and whether it has serious damage to their health depends on whether they have it under moderation or not.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,870
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Mar 2012, 1:12 pm

AdjustedSanity wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

I don't see a problem with public smoking as long as there are designated smoking areas. secondhand smoke is really only 1/1000 anyway.The smell is the only real issue in my mind.

Not to mention all the crap in the air from cars, trains, whatever chemicals make it into the air ect....I think that might factor into some of the health problems people get but what are they to do ban cars, trains, and anything else that might put chemicals in the air.

_________________
We won't go back.

TM
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

22 Mar 2012, 1:33 pm

I'll agree with a smoking ban provided it coincides with a ban on religion and religious texts, as long as we are banning things that aren't good for people...

Oldout
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,539
Location: Reading, PA

22 Mar 2012, 1:55 pm

I'll get back to you after I light up. Let's ban democratic totalitarianism!! !

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

22 Mar 2012, 2:05 pm

If smoking got banned then they would try to ban dip and chewing tobacco that would suck for me big time.

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

22 Mar 2012, 3:10 pm

AdjustedSanity wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

I don't see a problem with public smoking as long as there are designated smoking areas. secondhand smoke is really only 1/1000 anyway.The smell is the only real issue in my mind.

The smell is quite enough reason for me to wish that it was banned in public outdoor spaces. Not necessarily enough to justify it, but enough for me to wish.

YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

22 Mar 2012, 3:15 pm

I think both tobacco smoking and pot smoking should be legal on private property.
And no, I don't smoke pot. I just support the right of people to do so.
Actually, I don't smoke cigarettes, either. :lol:

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

22 Mar 2012, 3:40 pm

AstroGeek wrote:

As such, smoking costs our societies a lot of money.

Only because you guys distribute the costs. If the costs were borne by those who behave foolishly they would perish and the rest of us would be better off for it.

ruveyn

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

22 Mar 2012, 4:04 pm

ruveyn wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

As such, smoking costs our societies a lot of money.

Only because you guys distribute the costs. If the costs were borne by those who behave foolishly they would perish and the rest of us would be better off for it.

ruveyn

As I said, no one wants to get rid of universal healthcare in Canada and Europe. Ergo it makes sense for us to discourage smoking. You don't have to agree with the underlying premises, but you must admit that there is some logic to the position. I dislike many (most) of the premises that you base your statements on, but for the most part I will admit that your conclusions are logically sound given your values.

Page 5 of 9 [ 134 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Jump to:

Should smoking be banned outright? Post Reply New Topic

Should smoking be banned outright?