And its a good idea - smoking is a serious, serious health hazard to those who do it and those who are near a smoker. Thus it is necessary to stop this selfishness from happening in public places.
Although, I am against the ban as such because....
Wait for it....
.. THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT ARE UNAFFECTED!
So basically Tony Blair can smoke in Parliament as much as he wants but the average Joe Bloggs has to go outside of a pub/bar. Its laughable.
If smoking is going to be combated it needs to be banned completely and that will never happen because this country thrives on tobacco tax.
well, it doesn't affect me since I don't live in the UK and am already over 18. However, if one or both of those were different I might be pretty pissed, as I am a hardcore social liberatarian. In my eyes, if you want to damage your own body without hurting others, be my guest. It eliminates teh weak genes from the gene pool.
"He who takes a life...it is as if he has destroyed an entire world....but he who saves one life, it is as if he has saved the world entire" Talmud Sanhedrin 4:5
!Hasta la victoria siempre! (Always, until Victory!)
-Ernesto "Che" Guevarra
Frankly, I think smoking should be outlawed all together. Drugs, cigarettes, chewing tobacco etc--they are really all the same. Only difference is that drugs are illegal. They all are addictive, costly to the health--and cigarettes actually harm everyone around the smoker as well. It's ridiculous.
No offense to all pro-smoking-advocates, but I just don't see any point in it. Our state just passed a 'smoke-free-state' bill, it was supposed to take affect on Dec 4th and many places have, but the industry that would enact that bill and make sure it's followed had no plan to make it work because they never thought it would pass. ...that's a good way for a government to think, "why bother, it won't happen". Idiots.
If smoking should be outlawed we'll have the same problem that we do with drugs being outlawed. Our prisons get filled with people who aren't committing the real crimes. There are so many people who get arrested for drug use in our prisons, that there leaves no room for murders, rapists, pedophiles, robbers, the real criminals. And drug users tend to go to prison, then leave, and just get arrested again. It doesn't solve the problem of them using the drugs.
Though, I think there are some Rehab programs in prisons, which I think are good.
As for the smoking thing, it would be nice if it was publicly banned in America, but I don't see it happening. We have too many people hanging on "Freedom" and all, and then you ask when does said freedom press on someone else's freedom? (or health, in this case)
In my town (small one) smoking is banned in restaurants all together, which makes for a nice environment. I couldn't see it working across the state, though.
“It's necessary to have wished for death in order to know how good it is to live.” ― Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo
I agree Claudette, there's an issue there. But I think that, using the drug example, there are less people using now then there would be if drugs were legal. I think maybe there needs to be an alternate punishment for drug users [and cigarette users, if that were to happen]. Perhaps they would just be sent straight to rehab instead of going to jail for long periods of time or something like that.
That is what our state did this year, it banned all public establishment smoking completely--over the entire state. But like I said, no one planned for it so it's not exactly effective at the moment.
I find it hard to believe that there are less people using drugs simply because its illegal. If you REALLY want to use drugs, you must not care how they harm your body, so why would you care if you could be put in jail?
And its no help that a good number of rehab people don't stay clean, which is the sad truth, because even when they're out of rehab they get put back into the same situations and its starts all over.
I think its one of those things that can't be done. So I try hard not to care.
“It's necessary to have wished for death in order to know how good it is to live.” ― Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo
I think the main reason I care so much is because I live in a house where everyone smokes besides me, and I know [as most all of us have been taught] what the smoking does to me even though I'm not a smoker. I just don't think it's fair for people to legally be allowed to harm others like this.
But I also think there is a big difference between 'i don't care about my body' and 'i don't care if i go to jail'. More people consider such an outcome as this not worth it.
And yes, rehab centers do not work for all people--we can't dispute the facts--but it does help some, and even the smallest amount is better than none.
I think a total ban of smoking would have as much a chance of succeeding as a total ban on alcohol would.
That is, it wouldn't at all.
The only way to make sure that a behavior isn't repeated is to kill the person. This plan has obvious flaws.
I'm glad to see that England is raising the age limit to buy cigarettes though. If you know what you do damages your body, that's one thing. If you don't, then there is a problem.
//
well, it doesn't affect me since I don't live in the UK and am already over 18. However, if one or both of those were different I might be pretty pissed, as I am a hardcore social liberatarian. In my eyes, if you want to damage your own body without hurting others, be my guest. It eliminates teh weak genes from the gene pool.
//
Thing is - It does affect others through passive smoking. Smokers are selfish b*stards If I am being honest because they dont give a monkeys (sorry nate) about anyone else, as long as they can puff on their ciggies.
A total ban wouldn't be affective but it would cut down on the use of cigarettes if it was made illeagal.
The difference between smoking and alcohol is that alcohol is not dangerous if used sensibly, smoking is killing a person and those around them.
Simple logic; if you're considered an adult at 18, everything choice-wise should be available to you then, from smoking to sex to alcohol. If you think kids are wise enough to make their choices at 16, then bunk everything down to that age.
As for banning smoking; I'd say it's a person's right to injure themselves in whatever way they want to - they just should have to do it in private, and shouldn't get any state healthcare for injuries related to their choices, considering it's their own fault. You smoke and you get lung cancer, well: cheer up, buttercup, and live with your choices - you can pay for your own passing. You drink and you get liver failure, same deal - don't expect the government to go coughing up to heal you of things you know you're getting into.
Yet another example of personal liberties going down the drain... I guess someday we'll all be living in a socialist paradise where we are always told what to do, where to go, and what to say. Can't wait.
If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov
Gender:
Points: 22481
Reviews: 558