Poll: Should smoking be made illegal?

[Marik Bentusi]

I hate people drinking and smoking, but banning it won't work. They're common drugs. Well at least smoking has more open conflict. Alcohol is pretty much omnipresent and people think it'll only hurt them if they overdo it. I don't want another discussion over this, but to make it short, there's a reason alcohol as a disinfect is good at killing stuff.

 

[Alpha Centauri]

No, they tried this in the ye old times, whith booze.

Didn't work out

 

[QuantumT]

Small chance? Think about every small thing that could happen to any number of things and how that can affect your drive. It's an outlandishly large amount of possibilities when it comes down to it.

And yet it's still WAY lower than the risk posed by smoking.

Honestly, when all is broken down every statistic is 50/50. It will or will not happen.

That sentence is so incredibly wrong I don't know where to begin. I guess I'll do it with an example.

Let's say I jump into the air. According to you the chance of me landing on the moon is 50/50. I mean hey, either it will happen or it won't right?

Also "basically every study" isn't exactly a legitimate response. People overthink things and panic. If they think they can't breathe and believe it, regardless of actual ability, it will begin to become more difficult and thus starting a domino effect. It happens frequently, and usually with breathing/drowning cases.

Do a single google search and revel in the mountains of evidence that support this conclusion. Are you claiming to be smarter than the doctors that conducted the multitude of studies that show a causal link between smoking and asthma attacks?

I didn't ignore anything. I plainly stated that some places aren't meant for everyone. Also, that most smokers go out of their way and smoke away from people. Since you're intent on continuously bringing up that fact and ignoring that life isn't fair and that people are(gasp) selfish creatures, I'll just end it. I have the right to because I can. If I can kill your friend with a puff of smoke, I win. Evolution was on my side, and might makes right. Even if that might was a minimal amount of secondhand smoke. I can because at the end of the day, I'm the one still breathing.

If you've gone out of your way to smoke away from people, then that's fine. I don't really care at that point. It's your life. Just don't ruin mine.

Are you seriously arguing a "might makes right" philosophy?

So which did you enjoy more? The polite response or the callous one? The bottom line is if you can't handle or don't enjoy something, you will in fact have to go out of your way to avoid it if others around you disagree, as I previously mentioned.

Your whole argument doesn't even favor your side specifically. I could just as easily say "Well we all don't like smoking, so you can go out of your way to do it if you want." and the argument is equally valid.

 

[DragonChi]

I think most smoking should be heavily taxed until it is universally socially unacceptable.

i'm fine with people smoking weed, but cigarettes are disgusting and you shouldn't smoke them where people can see you. You should be too ashamed. But it is reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally fun to cough at smokers when running by them

What makes marijuana better than cigarettes? Marijuana is in fact worse for your lungs and overall health than cigarettes are. Big gaping hole in your argument.

How can Marijuana possibly be worse than a cancer-causing,lung blackening,teeth staining,life reducing TAR stick that comes out of a packet that has a POISON label on it? are you nuts? MJ actually has medicinal properties, it actually helps certain symptoms that some people have. You don't see doctors prescribe cigarettes to patients. weed is virtually harmless unless you smoke it recklessly to the point of making yourself dumb. Even then, its still not as bad as blackening your lungs and causing cancer. Also, second hand MJ smoke doesn't harm anyone.

Granted, both of them smell bad, and neither of them are good for you really, but they are still on VASTLY different levels of danger. Some of this does boil down to how cavalier you are with a recreational drug, but cigarettes in ANY amount is bad. a little MJ, will just relax you for a little while then your back to normal.

It's on a cigarette-to-joint ratio. The actual damage to your lungs from a joint is worse than a cigarette, but the reason this comparison isn't fair is because people don't smoke ganja like they do cigarettes. It's like comparing how much fat is in a single french fry and a single fish fillet. Sure, the french fry has less, but you eat 50 of them in a sitting. With pot, even the heavy potheads I know only smoke a joint or two a day. A normal smoker has 20+, not to mention the addictive element in smoking tobacco.

But that being said, I still think it should be legal. It doesn't matter if you think it's too dangerous, it's not your place to decide something for everyone else. The government shouldn't have any say over my body. An adult aware of the effects should be able to make an informed decision. Keep it away from kids and make sure there's full disclosure on the risks (surgeon general's warning on the side is plenty). The extra tax is fine too, but I wouldn't increase it any more than it already is (it's insanely high right now).

I forgot to add, that illegalizing it is not going to help anything. I would only suggest that its highly quarantined and heavily taxed so it will motivate people to smoke less, potentially. So I agree with you that it should stay legal.

 

[Taxicab Samurai]

I'm a smoker, I'll get sick, I'll get the tumors I'll die.
Just for the love of god don't make me pay more for death.

 

[Pyode]

No. My point is that laws are not final testaments to what is good or bad. The fact that smoking is currently legal is not an argument to keep it so.

Ok. That makes more sense and I do agree with you on that point. I just don't know why you brought it up because it had nothing to do with anything I said.

"Trivial" is not an opinion. You can't choose to not be affected by its harmful effects. Human beings do not choose to be biologically vulnerable to the toxins and chemicals in cigarette smoke. If you don't mind the idea of sitting in a room full of poison (excuse the dramatic expression) then it may not disturb you on a psychological level - that does not mean your lungs can take the same approach.


Being offended, on the other hand, is entirely voluntary. You're not biologically programmed to hate homosexuals. Bigots have no right to claim special treatment because they are intolerant of something that causes them no grief outside their own minds. As a side note, being offended should have zero relevance in the face of the law.

You are right, triviality is not an opinion, but that doesn't mean it can't be subjective. Triviality is a perception and is therefore directly tied to our personal predispositions. Much like how homophobes perceive homosexuality to be a big deal, but others see it as trivial or unimportant.

What's important is not legality or making sure our free will stays absolute...

I'm sorry, but free will is absolutely important and to completely disregard it because something is potentially harmful to the human that does it is the definition of fascism and completely absurd.

...but the practices and consequences that are invariably related to smoking. Do you honestly think that it's better for society to have smoking? If you had a way to magically end the practice of smoking worldwide, would you turn it down?

I honestly think it's better for society to have free will so, yes, I would turn it down in a heartbeat.

As I've previously stated, smoking has no tangible benefits, it's exclusively detrimental, and should be phased out completely.

Just because it has no physical benefits, doesn't mean it has no benefits period. People smoke because it relaxes them and they enjoy it. That is a benefit and you have no right to tell someone that the health concerns outweigh that. That is for them to decide for themselves.

I'm done. Your views are incredibly extreme and it's obvious I'm not going to change your mind and you're definitely not going to change mine.

Good night and good luck with the whole fascism thing. I hope it works out for you.

 

[QuantumT]

I hate people drinking and smoking, but banning it won't work. They're common drugs. Well at least smoking has more open conflict. Alcohol is pretty much omnipresent and people think it'll only hurt them if they overdo it. I don't want another discussion over this, but to make it short, there's a reason alcohol as a disinfect is good at killing stuff.

Would you like me to get the statistics that show the health benefits of moderate alcohol intake?

Congrats lets go back 10 years. Death is still death. People die from both, so just because one group dies more then another that means the other shouldn't be banned as well?

I said it before and I'll say it again. Moderate amounts of alcohol have well documented health benefits. Smoking is always bad.

I'm not saying that either needs to be illegal, but alcohol and smoking are not at all equivalent.

 

[Blunderman]

That's more than a bit of a stretch, and I know you're smarter than that. Relating someone smoking at home alone to a child rapist? Here, I'll bust out my 'shock tactic' response that popped into my head when I saw your 'no tangible benefits' line: So you'd have us execute all the severely handicapped people since they provide no tangible benefit? There, now we're both silly.

Thanks for the credit, what I wrote was indeed just a bit of levity.

Anyhoo, on to your actual content. It's true that the worse problem is that people are in a position where smoking is their best stress relief option. So instead of banning cigarettes, let's spend that money improving society to a point where people no longer want to smoke.

Your position that functionality is more important than happiness is where we differ.

That is definitely a viable way to begin but since smoking is such a powerful addiction that propagates itself down the generations, I don't think we can realistically wean people off of it, and surely not in the foreseeable future, since that would require the urge to question what you're doing, and it goes without saying that addiction tends to easily override self-awareness on that level.

As for my motivation, I personally think that happiness is the point of life, so functionality would not be what I value the highest. Rather that all humans do not automatically make the better decisions for themselves and it is not a violation of free will to want to help someone. That being said, I'd never advocate a sudden legislation to instantly ban cigarettes everywhere, but the ultimate goal is to make the production and distribution illegal, in the same sense that cocaine and heroine is.

You are right, triviality is not an opinion, but that doesn't mean it can't be subjective. Triviality is a perception and is therefore directly tied to our personal predispositions. Much like how homophobes perceive homosexuality to be a big deal, but others see it as trivial or unimportant.

Technical triviality is something that has either no or negligible consequences. Smoking isn't trivial to others, but homosexuality is.

I'm sorry, but free will is absolutely important and to completely disregard it because something is potentially harmful to the human that does it is the definition of fascism and completely absurd.

I'll have to call Godwin's law on that one. You went to the very extreme even though I certainly did not advocate fascism.

I honestly think it's better for society to have free will so, yes, I would turn it down in a heartbeat.

Just because it has no physical benefits, doesn't mean it has no benefits period. People smoke because it relaxes them and they enjoy it. That is a benefit and you have no right to tell someone that the health concerns outweigh that. That is for them to decide for themselves.

Smoking doesn't exclusively offer anything, and as such its benefits are inadmissible.

I'm done. Your views are incredibly extreme and it's obvious I'm not going to change your mind and you're definitely not going to change mine.

Good night and good luck with the whole fascism thing. I hope it works out for you.

That's one massive straw man you've got going there.

Let me know when you're ready to discuss what I actually said. You may want to read my post again after you're done wetting yourself.

 

[Admiral Stukov]

I'm perfectly fine shortening my life span in a way of my own choosing without someone an ork short of a Whaaaaaaagh! doing it for me by second had smoking.

IE: No smoking in public thank you very much.

 

[Kitteh]

But think! If smoking gets banned then it will just create another dangerous product to create a dangerous situation for the consumers of illicit substances via gangs, mobs, dealers, and cartels!

 

[Whitenail]

You?ll forgive me if I don?t get the reference, and I still stand by what I wrote, if smokers are so obsessed with poisoning themselves then they should just be shot now and save themselves the trouble.

Firstly, how can you be on the escapist and not know what the metal gear series is?

Secondly, if you truly are committed to what you wrote then you're gonna leave me an orphan and leave the world with two less responsible, hard working tax-paying citizens that smoke responsibly because it's tough to catch a break in their daily lives of working their asses off for the benefit of others and taking care of a family. Some people go through whole packs every day and live until 80, some people never touch a fag in their entire life and come down with lung cancer. Are you really so opposed to things like cigarettes because you're willing to spend 90 years living safely and without thrills?

I didn't realize that was a requirement and yes I would gladly turn your parents in if smoking were a crime. whatever difficulties they're going through aren't my concern.

The day that they're shot for something so small and insignificant I'll ask them to spare me the horrors of such an Orwellian regime and shoot me as well.

People smoke, we've been doing it for thousands of years. Would you like me to call the butt-hurt police because what many choose to do doesn't gel with what you feel is good or do you think you can take it on the chin and not be so holier-than-thou about it?

 

[SinisterGehe]

Smoking should be banned in public spaces, I don't hate smokers, I hate the smoke.
The tobacco smoke causes my throat to itch and makes me cough, Once there was group of smokers sitting front of my orchestra when we had open air gig, I was playing solo horn, I had to stop playing for one song because I started coughing too hard.

I don't care what you do at home. But I do not want to have to breath you smoke in public spaces. I don't want you to litter public spaces with the stumps, I don't want you to waste my tax money for you to get treatment for you smoking in public hospitals. I don't want to stand in rain while you smoke inside the bus-stops cover.

Yes should be banned on public spaces, but not made illegal since that wont stop anyone.

 

[Ciartan]

I wish we could ban the idiots who thinks they are smarter than everyone else and wants to ban everything.

 

[inflamessoilwork]

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

EDIT: Everyone who is quoting me are you all idiots or something? The bottom of this? Heres the bottom, drinking causes just as much problems as smoking. Ever hear of drunk driving, bar fights, abuse due to alcohol, poor judgement under the influence, or alcohol poisoning? Or do all of these just fly past your heads? You don't cancer right away from smoking, you get it later on. ITS THE SAME WITH DRINKING. IF SMOKING GETS BANNED THEN DRINKING SHOULD AS WELL. Fucking hell, think people think

Just to make sure everyone sees it before quoting me again.

Tobacco was the leading cause of death in 2000: 435,000
Alcohol was the third: 85,000

Congrats lets go back 10 years. Death is still death. People die from both, so just because one group dies more then another that means the other shouldn't be banned as well?

People also die from caffiene and prescription medications, so let's just ban those as well. And since people die from diabetes and lack of exercise, lets also get rid of all food that can possibly be fattening, and all food with any sugar added to it.

 

[Zedayen]

As a smoker, I am obviously going to vote no. I enjoy smoking, the taste, the feel, the way the smoke dances in the light as it swirls and curls and loops, the fire inside my lungs exploding forth in a giant cloud of satisfaction.

Now, I?m not a jerk, I don?t go out of my way to inflict my oh-so dreadful second hand smoke on you, in fact I go further out of my own way than I should when there are others around. I don?t smoke near children or pregnant women, the elderly or the sick. I stand downwind, I stay in my ?designated areas? to where I have been ousted and I bin my butts, more often than you your pocket trash.

Having said all that, there are few things in this world that aggravate me, and soapbox standing, preachy, holier-than-thou non-smokers are right up the top of my list. I?ll give up smoking when you, as a society, give up your alcohol, your fried goods, and your vehicles, because they are more likely to kill you than those 2 seconds you take walking past me. I don?t smoke near you, but when you have the all of outdoors to traverse, and you walk directly through my smoke and then have the audacity to say something about it, that?s when I stop playing nice.

And oh how I miss being able to go to a pub and enjoy a quiet refreshing beverage, a good laugh and a fine smoke with my nearest and dearest.

And quoting death statistics is playing with a stacked deck.

 

[QuantumT]

Frankly I don't care about you, I don't care about your parents, I don't care how many kids they have, I don't care if they work some dead end job just to pay the rent, if they break the law any law then the only thing they deserve is death.

That penalty sounds a bit harsh...

Can we kill you for jaywalking?