Young Writers Society

Doesn't make much difference in schools though. People wanna smoke in school, they smoke. In the toilets. Hence, avoid the toilets. Ironic, really, that schools are one of the more important public places in the country, and yet nothing is done about smoking there. You can ban it in pubs, but it's still inflicted on us innocent little teenagers... yes, umm *cough* innocent...

I don't think smoking will ever be completely banned. When alcohol was banned in America it had a huge amount of problems, simply because everyone still drank because it was once legal. Thanks to that the gangsters made billions.

So many people smoke that a complete ban will never gain enough support. I do not agree with smoking but I do not think that banning it will work or bring about any good.

backgroundbob wrote: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.

Yeah... but what about my two friends with severe asthma from their mothers' smoking? Or the one who was born three months premature because her mother smoked and has the scar from the heart surgery? (All aforementioned parents deny it was the smoking, one still smokes.)

Smoking is so bad because you can't just break your own body parts doing it. 20% of women with lung cancer never smoked. It really should be illegal, but banning it would never work. People are smoking less and less, though.

Where I live, restaurants and such public places have been smoke-free for a while, and it's wonderful not having to worry if you'll accidentlly be seated in the smoking section of a restaurant.

I wonder if it would help to lower the age of buying cigarettes and tobacco related products. I wonder if that would take away the rebellious aspect to it, as many of the people taking advantage of it would more than likely be those who already smoke illegally. It might have the same effect as drinking in much of Europe: my friends there are legally allowed to buy alcohol at sixteen, yet they don't go and get drunk. They are also allowed to buy cigarettes at sixteen, I think, yet none of them smoke. I think lowering the age limit would take away much of the glamour of using prohibited substances.

That could be, but it could backfire.

There are kids out there who are already addicted to smoking. Lowering the age will only make it easier for them to buy and distribute cigarettes.

Also, the companies target young people. They need to snag them when the people young. Studies show that you are less likely to begin smoking or drinking after the age of 21. The companies need to get them while they're young. Still developing neurologically. The young people will then become addicted.

Others may think that it's cool and will have easier access to the cigarettes or alcohol. There would be a major boom in the use. We would have a big problem, but by the time we realized it, it would be too late. We could up the age again, but what good would that do? Kids would continue doing it because they were once legal.*

In the USA, you must be 18 or older to buy cigarettes. You need to be over 21 to buy alcohol. I think it's over 16 for carrying it. So a sixteen year old could work in a restaurant and deliver the beer. Otherwise, they would need to get someone else to deliver it.

I think they need to up the age for buying cigarettes. Up that to 21 and we may not have as much a problem.

Obviously, upping the age will not solve the problem. Proof is all around. We have ten-year-olds smoking and drinking and doing pot. Upping the age may help, but it will not cure. Lowering the age will not help.

Something to keep in mind is laws only stop law abiding people.

*See Ofour's post above

Yes, I see how lowering the age limit could/would easily backfire. Mostly because changing the laws will not change peoples' mindsets. It might do something three generations away, but I agree that it wouldn't do much currently.

It could be that it would do something in the future. I guess I'm more of a now person.

But it wouldn't be in the near future. I don't think so, anyway. Only fools know the future. I don't think it would make a difference for the better, but it would definitely make a difference.

Upping the ages may help in the future. Nothing will cure it at the moment, but in the future...

Well, we can work towards that.

I am glad that they have decided to raise the legal smoking age to 18. To many people smoke at the moment and i think that by changing the age and inforcing the ban it might make a difference. A small difference but it could help save even a few peoples lives.

I do not know if they will ever be banned. But if they are banned that would take forever. Even then it might not work. I say they should be banned. They are terrible things. Smoking is bad for your lungs and bad for the people around you. It also can kill you. Alcohol is also bad for you and could kill you after a long time. You also get drunk and act like a complet idiot. No they should not lower the age on either one of them. It would be way more effective on younger people and would damage and kill them quicker. The age should stick with how it is or go higher!

FireArris

We have already discovered banning won't work.

As has already been said, in America they tried to ban alcohol. Ofour already talked about it in his above post.

It's mildy annoying, but it won't stop me getting fags when i want them. I'm only an occasional smoker and it would be more annoying if i was on 10 a day like some of my friends.

Exactly my point. You can get them when you want them. I have no idea what method you use to get them, but that's not the point.

Ban them, and people will still get them. Up the age, and people who were smoking before will still get them. If people who were smoking before can get them now, what's to say people who have never done it before but want to be 'cool' can't? Nothing.

A minor annoyance is all it comes up to.

However, upping the age does make a difference for the better. There are some people who will not buy cigarettes because they aren't old enough.

I think education would be more effective than doing anything to the age limit.

In the U.S., there isn't an age limit to the actual smoking, just the buying.

Which is kind of strange. You'd think underage posession would be the offence. Cook two pans on one stove, so to speak.