Cigarettes should be illegal.

[MysticToast]

le snip

You know most of those things you mentioned also contain dihydrogen monoxide, that stuff can kill you if you consume enough. Maybe we should ban that too.

Except, you know, that creates and sustains life, and we need it to survive. Tell me again, what benefit does cyanide or sulfuric acid have to us?

I'm just saying that just because it's found in something dangerous doesn't make it dangerous.

Ingesting those chemicals isn't dangerous?

 

[ResonanceSD]

Yeah sure let's ban cigarettes, it's worked oh so well with alcohol and weed

You think cigarettes are dangerous now, imagine them being made by gangs and maybe being cut with cocaine.

You think people would cut tobacco with cocaine? Really?

 

[sumanoskae]

Have you been online for more than an hour? well I'm afraid you're under arrest for damaging your eyes, which are the governments property and thus we have control over them.

People need to be free to make their own decisions, even if their bad ones. It's not your right, or anyone else's, to tell people how to live their lives.

 

[GlorySeeker]

I agree to a point. I detest smoking, and am a nonsmoker myself. I cant smoke, even if I wanted to (But thats really not the point) To me, its a gross habit, and yes, it is bad for you. Says so right on the box. Same with alcohol. And im sure that if they tried to ban smoking like they tried alcohol, (prohibition?) it just wouldnt work. And as many have already said, its a choice people make. No one makes you smoke. To each their own.

 

[lacktheknack]

le snip

You know most of those things you mentioned also contain dihydrogen monoxide, that stuff can kill you if you consume enough. Maybe we should ban that too.

Except, you know, that creates and sustains life, and we need it to survive. Tell me again, what benefit does cyanide or sulfuric acid have to us?

I'm just saying that just because it's found in something dangerous doesn't make it dangerous.

True.

However, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide, and arsenic ARE dangerous. You can't deny that. If you try, I invite you to inhale some straight hydrogen cyanide and tell me again. You might still be able to find some at Auschwitz.

(Godwin'd?)

 

[xshadowscreamx]

weed is banned in all Australia..only becouse the GOV wont make money cuz its easily grown.....its all about the money

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

The only reason one would put such a law into the books is because they believe the populace is too dumb to choose the 'right' thing.

No, that is not the only reason. There are also people who just don't care or are just irresponsible.

It's bullshit, it's wrong, and it paves the way for the government micromanaging even more of your life. How about being told you can only buy one TV because Washington thinks no household needs more than one? How about being told you can only have a dual core computer because quad cores use more power and therefore aren't green? How about being told that you can't own a nice car that seats seven because the government thinks you need to be in a 45MPG rotbox with room for two adults and two midgets? It's un-American to suggest such laws be put into place, let alone actually putting them into place.

How about being able to have a debate without the slippery slope fallacy?

As much as I'd like to keep this convo going, my sanity is more valuable. So I'm just going to leave it at this. It is wrong for the government to micromanage people's lives like this, you are wrong for supporting that, and that's the end of discussion. I'm not going to waste any more of my time or IQ points trying to convince you otherwise.

That's a nice cop out but all you have done is pulled the slippery slop fallacy and a no-true-scotsman about how it is "unAmerican".

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

snip

You typed it yourself, that it is a slippery slope fallacy. I understand what you mean, I just don't agree that it could happen outside of some fictional movie/book/game.

Doesn't mean it won't, and you should always be critical of the government meddling in private affairs anyways.

Although wouldn't Nazi Germany be a pretty good example of slippery slope? It's not like Hitler got elected and immediately threw the Jews (and others) into concentration camps. Had to start off slow. Not really the same sort of thing I suppose. And I probably just invoked Godwin's Law. I should probably just go to bed. Bllh.

While I'll admit that the US economy is in a bit of a dip, it isn't nearly as bad as the economy of post WW1 Germany. So I doubt such a government will be forming anytime soon.

 

[JoeThree]

I'm sorry, but not only is making smoking illegal asinine, but banning it in open, public places is too. Gee, sure sorry that your sense of smell is being bothered, shall we make farting in public illegal too? How about other things that might offend your senses, like say, use of language in public people might not like? And no, before anyone says that second-hand smoke is dangerous, someone smoking outside a store that you walk past is not going to give you lung cancer, that's not how that works at all. Prolonged exposure has been thought of to be potentially dangerous, but even then, it's not been 100% proven (admittedly, that's probably because the government has, at least until last I heard, not bothered with testing because then they might have people like the OP demanding cigarettes really are outlawed, and then you'll run into a few billion less dollars in taxes/campaign contributions. What was I saying again?).

Bottom line, you don't like it, it's not actually hurting you, so stop being so damn sensitive. The government is not your mother, and you are not mine - so all you Bloomberg inspired people seriously need to learn to live and let live... or die of cancer. Whichever.

PS: I do however think that if you own a store and don't want people smoking infront of it, that's your right, and posting signs saying "If you're smoking, you're trespassing" and the like are 100% acceptable. In short, property rights, personal responsibility, and all that jazz.

 

[MysticToast]

I'm sorry, but not only is making smoking illegal asinine, but banning it in open, public places is too. Gee, sure sorry that your sense of smell is being bothered, shall we make farting in public illegal too? How about other things that might offend your senses, like say, use of language in public people might not like? And no, before anyone says that second-hand smoke is dangerous, someone smoking outside a store that you walk past is not going to give you lung cancer, that's how how that works at all. Prolonged exposure has been thought of to be potentially dangerous, but even then, it's not been 100% proven (admittedly, that's because the government has, at least until last I heard, not bothered with testing because then they might have people like the OP demanding cigarettes really are outlawed, and then you'll run into a few billion less money in taxes/campaign contributions. What was I saying again?).

Bottom line, you don't like it, it's not actually hurting you, so stop being so damn sensitive. The government is not your mother, and you are not mine - so all you Bloomberg inspired people seriously need to learn to live and let live... or die of cancer. Whichever.

PS: I do however think that if you own a store and don't want people smoking infront of it, that's your right, and posting signs saying "If you're smoking, you're trespassing" and the like are 100% acceptable. In short, property rights, personal responsibility, and all that jazz.

Oh I see, it's bad to be bothered by people smoking around you, unless you're a business owner....

 

[Clearing the Eye]

.

So that's *a* source and that study has been criticised by the paper it was released in, the American cancer society and science, as the study didn't go about finding a control group.


Moving on, and this is actual, sourced content, which wikipedia crawled and sourced,

Enstrom's ties to the tobacco industry also drew scrutiny; in a 1997 letter to Philip Morris, Enstrom requested a "substantial research commitment... in order for me to effectively compete against the large mountain of epidemiologic data and opinions that already exist regarding the health effects of ETS and active smoking."[117] In a US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies, the Enstrom and Kabat paper was cited by the US District Court as "a prime example of how nine tobacco companies engaged in criminal racketeering and fraud to hide the dangers of tobacco smoke."[118] The Court found that the study had been funded and managed by the Center for Indoor Air Research,[119] a tobacco industry front group tasked with "offsetting" damaging studies on passive smoking, as well as by Phillip Morris[120] who stated that Enstrom's work was "clearly litigation-oriented."[121] Enstrom has defended the accuracy of his study against what he terms "illegitimate criticism by those who have attempted to suppress and discredit it."[122]


Yeah, I hear if you pay someone to study something with a goal in mind, surprisingly enough, they'll fucking say what you want them to.



That crackling sound you're hearing is your point burning up in flames. Not unlike one of the cancer sticks you keep touting as being completely harmless to others.

You didn't actually comment on half the sources I showed you, including those that discuss air pollution in an actually quite pollutant free atmosphere to be more harmful than second hand smoke, and only managed to quote Wikipedia (without giving any further sources beyond numbers) saying a study was criticized.

Now, given that it is a fact that car exhaust is much, much more harmful to one's health (a not uncommon form of suicide, even) I assume you want cars made illegal? For the sake of consistency and all.

A little less confrontation and a little more civility would do you wonders.

 

[JoeThree]

I'm sorry, but not only is making smoking illegal asinine, but banning it in open, public places is too. Gee, sure sorry that your sense of smell is being bothered, shall we make farting in public illegal too? How about other things that might offend your senses, like say, use of language in public people might not like? And no, before anyone says that second-hand smoke is dangerous, someone smoking outside a store that you walk past is not going to give you lung cancer, that's how how that works at all. Prolonged exposure has been thought of to be potentially dangerous, but even then, it's not been 100% proven (admittedly, that's because the government has, at least until last I heard, not bothered with testing because then they might have people like the OP demanding cigarettes really are outlawed, and then you'll run into a few billion less money in taxes/campaign contributions. What was I saying again?).

Bottom line, you don't like it, it's not actually hurting you, so stop being so damn sensitive. The government is not your mother, and you are not mine - so all you Bloomberg inspired people seriously need to learn to live and let live... or die of cancer. Whichever.

PS: I do however think that if you own a store and don't want people smoking infront of it, that's your right, and posting signs saying "If you're smoking, you're trespassing" and the like are 100% acceptable. In short, property rights, personal responsibility, and all that jazz.

Oh I see, it's bad to be bothered by people smoking around you, unless you're a business owner....

No, you always have the right to be bothered, you just don't have the right to tell someone what to do unless they happen to be on your property.

 

[him over there]

No they really shouldn't. People want to hurt themselves that's their business. You can't stop them just because they miss out on a few games of shuffle board at the least and maybe have a heart attack if their addiction is severe which isn't always the case at the most. I don't smoke, mostly because I'm actually not old enough but most of my friends do. I'm totally fine with it. Why? because I don't mind and don't want to ruin their good times. I think it smells fine and don't really care. Stay out of people's lives.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

What about me? I only smoke two packs a week and I don't hold your mouth open while I blow smoke down it, laughing.

OT:

 

[scorptatious]

While I don't smoke and never plan too, I have no right to tell other people how to live their lives. (Unless it's someone really close to me)

So no, I don't want cigarettes to be banned. Kept under control yes. But not banned.

 

[burningdragoon]

7 pages already? Probably not saying anything new, but here goes...

I fucking hate hate hate hate hatehatehatehatehatehatehatehate cigarettes. No I don't think they should be illegal. And definitely not on the grounds of "it's bad for you" or "it's worse than something else that is illegal".

 

[fenrizz]

I'm inclined to agree.

Most smokers start smoking at an age where the greater consequences do not even occur to them, or at least before they really understand consequences.

I don't think cigarettes should be illegal. The way I see it, it weeds out all the stupid fucking morons who don't seem to care that they're slowly killing themselves. Cigarettes are less likely to get other people killed than other drugs like alcohol or marijuana, so as long as I have some reasonable protection from getting some asshole blowing smoke in my face, let the idiots die.

See above.

 

[Kashrlyyk]

....
Doesn't mean it won't, and you should always be critical of the government meddling in private affairs anyways.....

Like the speed limits in inner cities? Or how they made extortion illegal? People should be allowed to agree to ridiculous interest rates. And omg I need to finish highschool to be allowed access to a college?
And all those regulations about what can be inside food or not. Or restrictions on child labor? How dare the government intrude into my private affairs.

Everytime with this topic we get this type of people, for which the state immediately turns into a "nanny" state. Everything black and white. And no, banning smoking is nowhere near "micromanaging" everyones life. You are a moron if you think so.

And then we have the idiots who say: "You can't tell me what I put into my body." They always think what you put in your body only affects them and nobody else. Until of course it costs you your job. Or an important work project crashes and thousands of people loose their jobs. Suddenly thousands of people can not repay their mortgages, because you fainted after you put something in your body. They completely ignore personal responsibility towards other people.