Poll: Should smoking be made illegal?

[BenzSmoke]

-Snip-

That's a good point that normal smokers outnumber marijuana users.

However, considering that the National Cancer Institute is considering the use of marijuana to help cancer patients deal with the side-effects of cancer therapies, like chemotherapy [http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/marijuana]. I think it's safe to assume cannabis is safer than tobacco. After all, you'd never see cigarettes being given to cancer patients.

By the way, I don't know why I'm defending marijuana on the internet. I guess I'm just bored.
[small](Also that was the gayest boss ever.)[/small]

 

[Soviet Steve]

Outlawing it would provide a massive boost to organized crime as these would become involved with the production, smuggling and sale of tobacco and would in no way assist society.

With massive profit margins on cigarettes (Prices have gone down despite massive tax increases here) I don't see why they could not be taxed to a sensible degree. Of course the tobacco industry shouldn't be destroyed but if the public is paying to clean up their mess then I don't see why they should be allowed to just stand in the back and count their profits.

 

[Maze1125]

However, considering that the National Cancer Institute is considering the use of marijuana to help cancer patients deal with the side-effects of cancer therapies like chemotherapy [http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/marijuana] I think it's safe to assume cannabis is safer than tobacco. After all you'd never see cigarettes being given to cancer patients.

That's an awful argument as chemotherapy and radiotherapy are both used to treat cancer while still being carcinogenic themselves.

 

[Nouw]

Just tax the shit of cigarettes and what do you know, no one buys them anymore!

 

[Maze1125]

No - Its a personal decision that shouldnt be made for people.

Exactly, which is why it should be banned in public places and around children.
Otherwise smokers are getting to force people who have decided not to, or can't decide at all, to smoke.

 

[Khada]

i voted yes only because it would help me quit xD

 

[BenzSmoke]

-Snip-

That's an awful argument as chemotherapy and radiotherapy are both used to treat cancer while still being carcinogenic themselves.

Well that's how the American medical system treats cancer.
I'll admit, I've never understood why we treat cancer with something that has the potential to cause cancer.

-Snip-

Exactly, which is why it should be banned in public places and around children.
Otherwise smokers are getting to force people who have decided not to, or can't decide at all, to smoke.

Well, they aren't exactly forcing them to smoke. But, second hand smoke exposure probably isn't good for anyone's health.

 

[StBishop]

Reading through, I've realised that in Australia, we have a lot of laws that don't exist elsewhere.
There's some laws here [http://www.health.qld.gov.au/tobaccolaws/] regarding smoking in Queensland, one of the states of Australia, the one with the Mana Bar.

It's illegal to have a "smokers" area in a food service place.
It's illegal to smoke within (I think) 3 or 5 metres (like 10 - 20 feet) of entrances to airports, shopping centres, anywhere food or drinks are served, bus stops, train station entrances (It's also illegal inside all of these locations) etc.
It's pretty fucking awesome. There's very few places you can smoke in Australia exept your own car, house, the sidewalk away from entrances to buildings, or designated smoking areas.

 

[spartan231490]

People know the dangers of smoking, and should make thier own decision. However, they should not be able to smoke in, or near the entrances of public buildings, because then they are making the choice for others.

 

[Maze1125]

-Snip-

That's an awful argument as chemotherapy and radiotherapy are both used to treat cancer while still being carcinogenic themselves.

Well that's how the American medical system treats cancer.
I'll admit, I've never understood why we treat cancer with something that has the potential to cause cancer.

Because nothing else works.
The point is that just because marijuana is given to cancer patients is no reason to think it's less of a health risk then tobacco, just that it's better for cancer patients than tobacco is.

 

[the December King]

And every time you make a smoker stand out in the rain because they want a cigarette but you don't want them in the same room you're being very inconsiderate to them too (it works both ways, you are not inherantly morally superior because you choose not to smoke, and this is coming from a non-smoker).

If you're sitting in a restaurant and someone whips out a mandolin and just starts wailing on it, singing some old song all out of tune, I think you would be very cross. If you're the assertive type you may even get up and tell the other patron to stop it or leave. Hell, the restaurant owner may insist on it himself. Is it inconsiderate to tell the guy off? Of course not; that sort of action is intrusive and irritating, and therefore he is the one who should stop. Same concept. If "moral superiority" entails not acting in such a way that pisses everyone else in the room off, then yes, the non-smoker enjoys a position of moral superiority in that situation.

the mandolin scenario is good, but I like this one better- if a woman whips out a screaming baby, we're not really allowed to say anything at all, regardless of venue. We have to put up with it because society says babies are wonderful, or something. Even though we are just as annoyed as we would be with a crazy mandolin player. The moral superiority seems to be in the mother's favour, I guess.

Actually, nevermind. I'm thinking I'd be initially too surprised and fascinated by a crazy mandolin player to care what he's doing. What song is he failing at? Are we watching a movie in a theatre?

 

[Ken Sapp]

No. If smoking is banned then drinking has to be banned as well.

There's no such thing as second-hand drinking. There are holes in your story, and I'm gonna get to the bottom of this!

No such thing as secondhand drinking but there a far, far more incidences of people killed by drunk drivers than there are provable cases of secondhand smoke causing cancer or otherwise killing non-smokers.

 

[warprincenataku]

Obviously if you are a smoker you are going to say no, or otherwise say yes to some degree. Being a non-smoker myself I think smoking should be banned in public places. If you choose to kill yourself and generally stink up the area, that should be your problem, not mine. I don't want your filth and cancer thanks, ok, bye bye.

 

[Maze1125]

if a woman whips out a screaming baby, we're not really allowed to say anything at all, regardless of venue. We have to put up with it because society says babies are wonderful, or something. Even though we are just as annoyed as we would be with a crazy mandolin player.

As a father, if a woman "whipped out" a screaming baby then I would be more likely to say something than I would to a bad mandolin player.

Because, not only is baby noise more annoying, it shows she isn't looking after the child properly. Babies never cry for no reason.

 

[theprokrastinator]

-Snip-

Hang on, did that guy just say weed is worse for you than cigarettes? and then did he just say it causes cancer and people are just lying to their doctors? I'm actually baffled.

However, considering that the National Cancer Institute is considering the use of marijuana to help cancer patients deal with the side-effects of cancer therapies like chemotherapy [http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/marijuana] I think it's safe to assume cannabis is safer than tobacco. After all you'd never see cigarettes being given to cancer patients.

That's an awful argument as chemotherapy and radiotherapy are both used to treat cancer while still being carcinogenic themselves.

We know chemo is a horrible poisonous thing to go through but its the next best thing to an effective cure, and there's another drug you can take alongside it that can at least take away the side effects, and that's Marijuana (which as Benz correctly states has never killed a single person in recorded history; the lethal dose is equal to about 1/3 of your body weight... and if you manage to eat that much weed without falling asleep after the first bite then i'd be realy impressed).

 

[BrionJames]

Smoking is an enjoyable thing. I think people who smoke inside are gross, but if they want to do it whatever. Making it illegal? Have you guys ever watched Demolition Man? That kind of 1984 meets Mr. Rogers sort of future where everything thats bad for you is made illegal? I know it's a pretty dumb movie but the social context is something that we should look at.

 

[The3rdEye]

[
Pretty sure alcohol harms you whether you drink a lot or a little, just like smoking.

No. Not even close. Drinking moderately is good for your health in fact.

Oh right I forgot, because just because drinking doesn't harm you right away(lie), its a lot worse than smoking. Keep on drinking then and end up in the same boat with cancer as a smoker. Or keep on drinking and screw up and go drive. Like smoking over time will cause issues, so will drinking.

I never said smoking should or shouldn't be banned, I just said that alcohol is healthier than smoking.

A quick bottom line: You don't need to have either in your body. Unless you habitually go around licking smokestacks or eating rotten fruit and grain there is no need for either substance to enter your body. And of course everyone has such a strong will power that "Drinking [only] moderately is good for your health in fact" is entirely plausible, regardless of any personality or genetic predisposition. It's common knowledge that every smoker started as a chain smoker however.

Either way it's toxins in your body that don't need to be there, and if you can't see the validity in someone choosing to smoke, you're a hypocrite to support drinking as a "healthier" alternative.

On a personal note, while I do understand the risks involved in smoking, I prefer a moderate stimulant to altered judgment, lowered metabolism and hangovers.

Does smoking need to be banned/made illegal? No, people do stupid crap all the time and don't get arrested for it. However, if that stupid crap endangers others, THAT should be controlled. Which is why I'm so proud of Ontario being smoke-free in public places for so long (b'.')b

 

[BenzSmoke]

Because nothing else works.
The point is that just because marijuana is given to cancer patients is no reason to think it's less of a health risk then tobacco, just that it's better for cancer patients than tobacco is.

Well it is less of a health risk.
As I said earlier, marijuana doesn't contain the deadly chemical cocktail that cigarette companies shamelessly add to their products.

 

[theprokrastinator]

Smoking is an enjoyable thing. I think people who smoke inside are gross, but if they want to do it whatever. Making it illegal? Have you guys ever watched Demolition Man? That kind of 1984 meets Mr. Rogers sort of future where everything thats bad for you is made illegal? I know it's a pretty dumb movie but the social context is something that we should look at.

Haha, man I love that movie whilst finding it incredibly creepy at the same time. Only 'cos I've realised things will probably end up that way

 

[Inner Pickle]

Ah, the religious non-smoker. I used to preach at that particular alter, now sadly I am a sinner.

Smoking is not a crime, if we lose the freedom to do to our bodies what we wish we essentially become property of whoever is telling us what is healthy. Enjoying a cigarette now and then is not morally wrong, it relaxes you and the five minutes you take to smoke it clarifies the mind. People need vices, if you drink alcohol or coffee you're in no position to judge smokers because its all drug abuse one way or the other as you're still using the drug to alter your state of mind.

Heath wise - Too much of anything is bad for you and everything you put into your body these days will make you die a slow painful death sooner or later so choose your poison...