Cigarettes should be illegal.

[Grathius22]

You can't win with banning tobacco, unfortunately.

You don't ban it and well... it continues on as is.

You ban it and it's against personal freedom, and even after a ban people will just create an illegal market for it. Just like what would happen with alcohol.

In an ideal world, tobacco and alcohol would be illegal and no one would complain. It will never be like that.

 

[viranimus]

And in what way does a cigarette help anybody.

If you smoke, a well timed cigarette can mean the difference between sleeping in your bed when you go home at night or twenty five to life.


Honestly I think enough has been done to smokers over the years. Between the constant "Sin tax"ing that make them insanely overpriced, to the constant legislation that bans when and where you can smoke to just the never ending opinionated snideness people give you for smoking. Seriously what other completely legal activity is so tolerated for allowing people to sit in opinionated judgment of others?

Just leave smokers alone, they are a dying breed anyway.

(Smoked for 15 years and had I not gotten too old and too weak to tolerate it, I would be more than happy to continue doing it.)

 

[Flailing Escapist]

By that logic, one shouldn't rage-fuck anything, because there's always something that matters more that they should rage-fuck.

Yes, because I said that people should only rage-fuck the most rage-fuckable thing (delicious, chocolatey rage-fuckables mmmmm mmmm).

You know what should be illegal? Mindlessly spewing hate filled speeches where ever you go.

It's-*cough* worst even that second hand smoke *cough* *cough* because more people see, hear and are affected by it. *weeze* It should be outright- *cough* banned, man.

[sub]Source:[/sub]

[sub]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.[/sub]

 

[frizzlebyte]

As someone with asthma, I would love to see smoking go away. However, with the roaring success that was prohibition, I would not want to see tobacco made illegal.

And the argument that cannabis is natural and tobacco is not is just about the most hilarious thing I've ever heard in my life. And perfect stoner logic, too...

Spoiler: You're arguing this soil-grown plant *is* natural...

Spoiler: ...while this one is not.

Yeah...that's why I don't do drugs.

Yes, cannabis is a drug.

 

[NiPah]

Weed is less harmful than cigarettes. At least weed help people in a way. That and it's natural unlike the thousands of chemicals in the average cigarette. And in what way does a cigarette help anybody. If you know a way please tell me. But they should just ban them without hesitation.

You bring up two very different topics there my friend, one cigarettes are harmful and should be made illegal, I agree with this and I believe all airborne drugs should be banned due to their impact on others. I believe non-airborne nicotine drug applications such as nicotine-patches should remain legal for those addicted or the idiots who want to become addicted as there is little risk of airborne transmission of the drug.

Your second topic, that weed is less harmful then cigarettes is true but does little to make marijuana look good, weed is also less harmful then meth but that doesn't make me want to legalize it anymore. There is also the issue with smoking weed as it too becomes airborne and effects anyone who passes by. THC also has short term memory loss side effects, dulls reaction time much in the same was as alcohol, and on a 1 to 1 ratio has more carcinogens and tar then cigarettes. I agree there are medical uses of marijuana, but personal use is still harmful, I'd just vote to legalize non-airborne applications of the drug and put it in the same class as the drug alcohol.

 

[lacktheknack]

The problem is, it's like moonshine. Anyone can make moonshine easy. That's why it's illegal. Cus they (use your imagination) cannot make money off of it.

Also, because if you fail to get the methanol out of it (which is pretty common) it will <link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol#Health_and_safety>eat your eyes.

Anyways, I live in a country where health care is public, I DO give a damn about how you're killing yourself, because I'm shelling out for your hospitalization. I'm fine with people smoking as much as they damn well want, as soon as they're booted out of the health system. End of.

Since they are not, I'll go with the more popular route of trying to make them stop smoking.

 

[him over there]

The problem is, it's like moonshine. Anyone can make moonshine easy. That's why it's illegal. Cus they (use your imagination) cannot make money off of it.

Also, because if you fail to get the methanol out of it (which is pretty common) it will <link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol#Health_and_safety>eat your eyes.

Anyways, I live in a country where health care is public, I DO give a damn about how you're killing yourself, because I'm shelling out for your hospitalization. I'm fine with people smoking as much as they damn well want, as soon as they're booted out of the health system. End of.

Since they are not, I'll go with the more popular route of trying to make them stop smoking.

Wouldn't having a public healthcare system that excludes people undermine the purpose of it being public?

 

[lacktheknack]

The problem is, it's like moonshine. Anyone can make moonshine easy. That's why it's illegal. Cus they (use your imagination) cannot make money off of it.

Also, because if you fail to get the methanol out of it (which is pretty common) it will <link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanol#Health_and_safety>eat your eyes.

Anyways, I live in a country where health care is public, I DO give a damn about how you're killing yourself, because I'm shelling out for your hospitalization. I'm fine with people smoking as much as they damn well want, as soon as they're booted out of the health system. End of.

Since they are not, I'll go with the more popular route of trying to make them stop smoking.

Wouldn't having a public healthcare system that excludes people undermine the purpose of it being public?

Not as far as I know, "public welfare" only applies to a certain percentage of the populace, for instance.

But if you think it does, that's another reason to want smoking to be stopped.

 

[Nemesis729]

No it shouldn't, cigarettes pose no threat to the people who don't smoke them. Please don't bring up that second hand smoke crap. It's not like most drugs that can make you a danger to the people around you.

 

[WolfThomas]

Ugh, even though I agree that cannabis is largely comparable to alcohol and tobacco in terms of risk, I can't abide that myth that cannabis is magically safer than tobacco.

http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/31/2/280.full

 

[Vrach]

Weed is a narcotic. Cigarettes are just harmful to the person smoking them (don't give me the second hand smoking bullshit, you get more poison in you in the air from car exhausts and the like just being out in the streets - besides, there are so many places you can't smoke anymore, it's easy to avoid it for the most part).

It's not about protecting people themselves, it's about protecting people from other people who use shit. Alcohol is not illegal because you can drink it and not get drunk - even drunk there are various levels and people can control themselves unless they're completely trashed from alcohol (despite the fact we use it as an excuse in a lot of situations). There's plenty of things that are illegal when you're drinking, hell, where I live, we've had a series of laws implemented making it illegal to get onto a public transport or even walk home if you're pissed and a cabbie can legally refuse to drive you home - so if you're out drinking, you better have a chauffeur with you.

Weed can get people on bad trips. A lot of people will get paranoid from smoking it and can do a host of things under the influence. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not demonizing weed here, I honestly think it'd be fine to make it legal and control it the same way alcohol is, maybe a bit more sternly, but comparing weed to smoking is just nothing short of stupid.

 

[somonels]

There are people who don't do weed and don't want it to be legal - not yet - and there are people who do weed anyway and are druggies so nobody should take them very seriously.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I really don't care. I'm not often forced to be in the same space as smokers, and in public I can deal with it. Passive smoking has not been shown either to be a serious issue or to lead to active smoking, and while occasionally very irritating, there are plenty of other behaviours that are equally irritating and which are not banned, such as coughing and sneezing. However I do believe that smokers should not have breaks during work specifically for it. It should be treated like any other product. I only agree with the restriction to certain areas because you are unlikely to come across a restaurant full of people coughing and sneezing profusely, and would be right to complain if you did.

 

[Bertylicious]

We should ban fatty food as well. Also, if we could somehow destroy the human orgasm we would end teenage pregnancy overnight and significantly reduce the spread of HIV.

Non-proffesional sport also should be banned as it costs industry billions in lost days from workers injuring themselves in sporting accident.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

I smoke a pipe... I find it relaxing, and due to the time it takes, when socially smoking it on a night out it stops me drinking too much and saves me from hangovers... also it tastes good... Should that be banned too?

The issue here isn't harm to the user, it is harm to others... If a smoker wants to put harmful chemicals in their lungs, despite warnings, then so be it... it doesn't harm anyone else, (especially with modern day smoking laws in most countries) and it doesn't effect the person's short term abilities.


On the other hand Weed alters the state of mind. It puts people in a slightly elevated state, and effects reaction speeds and spatial awareness... like alcohol. This now puts others in danger, especially when in charge of cars, or other dangerous items that could cause harm to others! You could limit it like alcohol, but unlike alcohol it is harder to tell on the spot if someone has used it. Imagine someone killing a pedestrian in a car crash, under the influence of weed, and the police turning up... how do they tell if that guy is breaking the law, or if the smell of weed is from another time?

Also, alcohol and smoking have been part of culture and society for hundreds of years. It has it's roots buried deep in our ethics. Weed on the other hand is reletively new, and is frowned upon in society. This means that a misplaced, misinformed rant on a gaming website, that has a blatent air of lack of care and attention unfortunately is rendered even more obselete...

 

[Korolev]

Prohibition doesn't work. It just doesn't. I support legalizing marijuana, and I don't want cigarettes banned. Or alcohol.

Now, let me be clear - I don't drink. I don't smoke. I don't use recreational drugs. I know exactly how harmful all of those drugs are, and none of them are harmless. While Marijuana is NOT as deadly or horrible as the government would have you believe, it is NOT entirely harmless. Less harmful that cigarettes? Perhaps. Less harmful that alcohol? I think so. That's why I don't use any of those three drugs or smoking devices.

I think the world would be a better place without alcohol or cigarettes or drugs - but, I don't think we should or could effectively ban them. They've tried it. Remember the 1920's and the 1930's? Well, okay, sure, none of us remember the 1930's, because 99.999999% of people using this form weren't around then, but the 20's and the 30's taught us a lesson - you can't ban alcohol. They tried. They tried really hard. It didn't work.

Prohibition isn't working on drugs either. They've fought Marijuana for decades upon decades. It hasn't worked - we have celebrities who nearly openly use the drug. We've got presidents from both sides of the US political system admitting to using marijuana in their youth. Marijuana use is here to stay, as surely as is whiskey drinking or beer drinking or wine drinking.

I don't think it's a good idea to use these drugs. While I don't think they are nearly as harmful as the Government would have you believe, I don't think they are nearly as harmless as the hippie crowd would have you believe. Both sides distort the facts to either demonize Marijuana or elevate it to some wonder drug that will free our minds and cure cancer. It isn't either of those things, and if you actually read the research papers (I recommend using PubMed or the Cochrane library, both of which are online) you'd realize that Marijuana is mostly but not totally harmless for most people. There are a few people who will develop mental problems and mental illness from even light marijuana use, but that's a genetic thing and the risk isn't the same across the board.

Now, should Cigarettes be illegal? I certainly think they've claimed more lives than marijuana use ever did or could. I've done the research - those cigarettes are BAD for you. Really bad for you. It raises the risk of lung cancer, emphysema, asthma exacerbation, high blood pressure (contrary to popular belief, cigarettes do not actually relax you or lower your risk of cardiovascular disease), atherosclerosis, stroke, the list goes on and on. It's a bad thing for you to do.

But life is about making mistakes. We learned this in Medical ethics - freedom means the freedom to stuff up your life. People grow from mistakes, and they should be allowed the freedom to make mistakes. Cigarette smoking is, to anyone with even a lick of medical training or scientific education, a big mistake. But it's a mistake that people should be allowed to make.

 

[slippereend]

With alchohol you only hurt yourself physically (if you don't start to bash people's heads in). With sigarettes, you always hurt the other people around you that breathe in your smoke.

Alcohol can help people loosen up a bit and can, when regulated, even be good for you.

I don't drink or smoke myself, both of my parents smoke and I've always hated it, and another family member is a an alcoholic. Seeing what alcohol can do to you makes me stay away from it.

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

Weed is less harmful than cigarettes. At least weed help people in a way. That and it's natural unlike the thousands of chemicals in the average cigarette. And in what way does a cigarette help anybody. If you know a way please tell me. But they should just ban them without hesitation.

Aside from the synthetic weed that causing people to strip naked and eat people yeah your right.

I would say though that alcohol is the worse evil. With cigarettes you never really lose control (unless you count the crankiness when you haven't had a cigarette) but alcohol you lose control. Its damn near guaranteed.

I just think we are concentrating on the wrong drug in this world right now. Yeah cigarettes cause cancer, but it almost always causes cancer in the person who is smoking. Alcohol kills thousands of innocent people a year in drunk fights and car accidents.

So if cigarettes is worse than weed, and alcohol is worse than cigarettes yes I can see that part being correct in your argument... however.

Now I believe your intended argument is why do we ban weed when cigarettes are so much worse. Look weed causes short term memory loss and impaired function. It also has more tar than cigarettes. Yes it doesn't contain rat poison, but its no where near harmless. So your argument comes off as childish. To take a quote from cracked.com:

"When they hear rebuttals like this, they're picturing a six year old kid stomping his foot and screaming at his mother, "Why can't I play that game? Jimmy's mom lets him play GTA, and that's way worse!" The end result is still that you're arguing for the right to make things worse than they were before."

Read more: 5 Pro-Marijuana Arguments That Aren't Helping | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping_p2/#ixzz1yVn24QVS

Now don't get me wrong, I've smoked, I've enjoyed it, I understand why it pisses you off that its not legal when other things are. Still, don't use the "weed isn't as worse as..." argument. It pissed me off when I was in college and it still does now.

 

[Yopaz]

Weed is less harmful than cigarettes. At least weed help people in a way. That and it's natural unlike the thousands of chemicals in the average cigarette. And in what way does a cigarette help anybody. If you know a way please tell me. But they should just ban them without hesitation.

Saying something is "natural" is a ridiculous arguement. Plenty of natural things are harmful. Nobody here's going to dispute the harm cigarettes can do, but I also suspect cannabis is not nearly as harmless as you seem to think. For example, some claim cannabis can cause fear, anxiety, distrust, increased heart rate, lower blood pressure, co-ordination issues, memory issues and perception distortion. Now, all of these are contested issues, as are the health benefits, so an outright replacing of cigarettes with cannabis is probably a bad idea as of yet.

Second, people can smoke cigarettes for stress relief, the social aspect, for the taste or maybe even as a way of focusing oneself or concentrating. None of these are physically helpful, and of course will, in the long run, lead to damage, but they're still ways in which people can be helped by smoking.

Finally, as much as I'm favour of some form of controlled legalisation of cannabis, it's unlikely to be all as peachy-perfect as you make it out to be. Certainly the wrong answer would be to ban cigarettes, especially if your answer to that is to then all but replace them with cannabis. Controls on smoking in public places, especially indoors are sensible and for the benefit of the public, but above and beyond that it's no-one's business but their, your or my own when, where, if or how many they, you or I smoke.

Hey man, don't knock natural products. The earth wouldn't want to hurt us...

http://listverse.com/2011/07/02/top-10-plants-that-will-kill-you/

I hate that "natural=good" argument.

*edit* also read the post above me, it has a lot of good points ^

Don't forget botulinum, the deadliest poison currently known. Commit genocide with just a tea spoon of it.

Also banning cigarettes is stupid. People like it and it works to relax people without giving them a feeling of being high. Nicotine (which is also natural along with tar) is a mild drug which causes enhanced concentration while it reduces irritation. It's harmful, it increases risk of cancer, but that's a choice that smokers should be free to take. As long as they don't smoke inside of public buildings or my house I am willing to let them smoke all they want.
Oxygen is bad for you too, but I don't see anyone wanting to ban that.

 

[nuba km]

I agree as smoking has no upside except stopping the downsides of not smoking in a while after you have started smoking, getting drunk can at least be fun.