Cigarettes should be illegal.

[Chemical Alia]

I'm of the opinion that potheads should be illegal.

 

[bojackx]

I don't like cigarettes either, but your argument wasn't very inspiring. Who the hell cares if what's in them isn't "natural"? Half of the stuff we put in our bodies isn't natural, and unnatural doesn't equate to bad.

I don't think cigarettes are any more harmful than alcohol, but the fact you're harming everyone around you and the fact I've never seen anyone smoke and actually gain that much pleasure from it, just to stop their craves for cigarettes makes them seem like a bad thing. I do think there should be more regulations and rules, but not illegalised, because then there'd be riots and so much disagreement.

 

[Tiger King]

Weed is less harmful than cigarettes. At least weed help people in a way. That and it's natural unlike the thousands of chemicals in the average cigarette. And in what way does a cigarette help anybody. If you know a way please tell me. But they should just ban them without hesitation.

. For example, some claim cannabis can cause fear, anxiety, distrust, increased heart rate, lower blood pressure, co-ordination issues, memory issues and perception distortion. Now, all of these are contested issues, as are the health benefits, so an outright replacing of cigarettes with cannabis is probably a bad idea as of yet.
quote]

You can add depression to that list as well. Marijuana produces more happy hormones than your brain can naturally, which means the brain can never make you as happy as the weed can. This leads to depression when people aren't routinely stoned.

EDIT: Damnit, quoted the wrong part. I meant to quote the partwhere you listed the problems it can cause.

also paranoia and mood swings

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

This sums it up.

But lets say cigarettes were banned. I don't know about other countries but in the UK quite a fair bit of tax revenue comes from cigarettes. So if they were banned expect a big rise of tax on your paycheck etc.

Don't use the "it cost the NHS millions a year" either. Said duty tax on cigarettes from the smoker will pay for there treatment four times over.

I'm glad you brought that up because I was ready for someone to make that argument. Nipped it in the bud

here is some info on it.
http://www.the-tma.org.uk/tma-publications-research/facts-figures/tax-revenue-from-tobacco/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8086142.stm

I don't think making a profit at the cost of lives is in anyway good

 

[IamQ]

It's easy to say, but then the people who make them would be out of jobs, and cigarette-related crime would probably be really high, causing a lot of people to be arrested, and causing damage to some people that is probably more long term than smoking a fag.

 

[Gilhelmi]

Weed is less harmful than cigarettes. At least weed help people in a way. That and it's natural unlike the thousands of chemicals in the average cigarette. And in what way does a cigarette help anybody. If you know a way please tell me. But they should just ban them without hesitation.

Did you know that even tobacco has health benefits. The problem we have is the big tobacco companies put additives that make their cigarettes less safe (and more addictive). Keep in mind, I am more in favor of having people grow their own tobacco then buying it from people wanting you too smoke more.

I suspect that unless we regulate the weed industry and outlaw additives. Weed will become as dangerous as cigarettes.

Also, http://www.sott.net/articles/show/221013-Health-Benefits-of-Smoking-Tobacco I tend too believe them a bit more because they have credible sources at the bottom of the page, but I have become skeptical of EVERYONE as of late so its hard to say.

So my point, Cigarettes from big tobacco are bad for you, but tobacco itself is not that bad for you.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I think you'll find that it is far easier to regulate something when it is legal than the other way around.
Maybe we should ban alcohol again, because it is far more dangerous. We all know how well that worked out.
What is with everyone lately and being ban happy? The answer to every problem isn't to ban it out of existence by the government. In fact, that is probably the worst solution to any problem.

 

[Gilhelmi]

It's easy to say, but then the people who make them would be out of jobs, and cigarette-related crime would probably be really high, causing a lot of people to be arrested, and causing damage to some people that is probably more long term than smoking a fag.

And this right here is why we need marijuana reform in America. Prohibition causes more problems then the drug.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

 

[Hazy992]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

 

[DoPo]

I find it curious that you attack cigarettes, and not alcohol, when clearly the latter is the greater evil.

EDIT: I don't disagree though... Just realized that that didn't really come through in the post.

Not trying to be offensive, honest!

How is alcohol worse? You can get lung cancer from second hand smoke, I've never heard of getting cirrhosis of the liver from second hand drinks lol. But that's why I've always considered cigs worse is you can be affected by one even if you yourself don't smoke. But if someone is drinking next to you, you aren't gunna get any side effects. (I'm not anti-cigs, drinks, or pot btw to each his own)

Erm, really? Only one person needs to be drunk to injure/cripple/kill several others. It's called a car crash. There are also the ones who get in fights. And several months back some drunk dude attacked the people in a pub with a chainsaw. That's all from someone who drinks next to you.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

 

[bernardblack]

I'm personally against them, after watching someone I loved very much die from lung cancer after smoking for their entire life. Then again, banning something like that would likely lead to more crime in the long run than just allowing people to buy them.

I do believe there needs to be regulations on smoking in public places though, especially since there are people out there who are severely allergic to cigarette smoke and the like.

 

[Hazy992]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

I didn't say that I just wanted to know how you'd actually enforce it.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

It isn't right.

How isn't it "right" to make sure that a baby isn't born with fetal alcohol syndrome? Again, if she is going to have an abortion, she can do whatever she wants.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

I didn't say that I just wanted to know how you'd actually enforce it.

I don't know how you would enforce it if I'm being honest.

 

[Hazy992]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

I didn't say that I just wanted to know how you'd actually enforce it.

I don't know how you would enforce it if I'm being honest.

Exactly because you can't enforce it. It's impossible without monitoring all pregnant women 24/7

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

I didn't say that I just wanted to know how you'd actually enforce it.

I don't know how you would enforce it if I'm being honest.

Exactly because you can't enforce it. It's impossible without monitoring all pregnant women 24/7

Again, while I realize it is hard to enforce, doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted.

 

[Hazy992]

No. You have no right to tell other people what they can and can't put in their bodies. If you don't want in public places that's one thing, but outright banning it is another.

How does alcohol actually help people? It's the same argument.

If they are pregnant, I think people have the right to tell a person what they can and can't consume. Unless they plan on getting an abortion, I see no reason why a pregnant person should be allowed to consume drugs.

Well obviously a pregnant woman shouldn't be smoking, but may I ask how you would hope to enforce such a thing? Seems pretty much impossible.

Because its difficult to enforce, it shouldn't be against the law? Sea-piracy is hard to combat, doesn't mean countries should ignore what goes on with Somali pirates.

I didn't say that I just wanted to know how you'd actually enforce it.

I don't know how you would enforce it if I'm being honest.

Exactly because you can't enforce it. It's impossible without monitoring all pregnant women 24/7

Again, while I realize it is hard to enforce, doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted.

But you don't even know how it could be done. It's so unbelievably difficult to enforce it may as well be impossible. It's not much of a step up from a thought crime in terms of enforcement