Cigarettes should be illegal.

[Booze Zombie]

We can get into an arguement about second-hand smoke... but I shall not.

All I shall say is people are allowed their vices, but we should preform them in moderation.
Alcohol, smoking, coffee, sex... addiction to anything from water to a particular vegetable can be harmful.

This is my rather round-about way of saying "legalise everything and teach people the definition of moderation".

 

[Treblaine]

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.

Nope. Smoking weed causes emphysema and various pulmonary cancers. The tendency to smoke less cannabis cigarettes is ruined by how it is held in for longer and traditionally smoked without any filter. Smoking 1 cigarette a day vs 20 cigarettes a day doesn't mean you have 1/20th the increased chance of getting cancer. The more you smoke the more the risk, but even one cigarette per day is very harmful as the toxic and carcinogenic by products of smoking have a biological half life in the tissue.

If you do the math, you'll see the concentration of toxins in your body stay dangerously high whether smoking a cigarette every 12 hours or every 2-3 hours. The point is you have to go DAYS between inhaling smoke or not smoking at all.

Tobacco and Cannabis are just as natural or unnatural as each other. Most cigarettes don't have any chemicals added to them, the plant alone is addictive, pleasurable and harmful enough. Cannabis has been extremely selectively bred in an UNNATURAL way.

Cannabis doesn't help typical people. It's an analgesic like opiates that means it has use as a PRESCRIBED DRUG, not as a recreational drug. Cannabis's active chemical should be chemically separated and administered in pill form for treating actual medical conditions, not smoked. Inhaling SMOKE in medicine is counter-productive. Inhaling any smoke increases Carbon Monoxide in blood which makes any surgical operation harder as wounds will heal worse. Smokers have been turned away from getting operations as their willing habitual smoke inhalation will make healing impractical after any operation.

Cannabis and Nicotine doesn't give any more common benefits than chocolate or coffee. The medical benefits of Cannabis are the same as those from heroine and cocaine, they should be controlled, prescribed by accountable doctors and administered gradually and in measured amounts in pill form. It is hugely irresponsible to self-medicate with psychoactive drugs especially via smoke inhalation.

If you wish to consume cannabis, EAT IT! Bake it into brownies or something. It defies the basic logic of self-preservation to burn it and deeply inhale the smoke.

There is never a good reason to inhale smoke! The benefits are almost always outweighed by the cost. It is is fundamental human logic (that is backed up by testable, proven and falsifiable science) that you shouldn't inhale smoke that is only defied by how inhaling either tobacco or cannabis smoke has a pleasure reward system that by-passes the natural aversion to inhaling and irritant toxic gas.

I don't think these should be banned though. But they should not be without penalty. Like being shamed as a moron for starting a fire and deliberately inhaling the smoke. And materials sold specifically for the smoking purposes should have a very high (200%) taxation rate.

See, some people are going to shove a can bodyspray up their nose and huff on vapours for solvent abuse. This is a FUCKING RETARDED thing to do, but that's not a reason to ban all solvents. People just need to have it reaffirmed that you should not do such things.

Bottom line: People need to be educated on the dangers of habitually inhaling ANY smoke, not just tobacco smoke, and the media has a responsibility not to glamorise such activities as without consequence. I'm not saying ban the depiction of smoking on film, just don't have the film act like this is a character who is looking to the future, so a devil-may-care character or a foolish character

 

[El Danny]

Second hand smoking actually harms the health of the people nearby.

To what extent? If it really bothers you, ask the guy having a smoke at the bus stop to move up, but I seriously don't see how one can develop health issues based to standing next to a smoker at the bus stop, or passing one in the street.

It's my habit, and it's not anybodies business what I do with it.

 

[ninjaRiv]

Good lord, this argument again.

Can we ban cars, too? They're about as harmful. Also, booze. And a lot of different foods. Look, I know what you're getting at but banning cigarettes is pointless. Governments get a lot of tax from it, meaning other taxes are lower.

As for weed being less harmful? Man, I've never seen a friend waste their life on a couch, not bothered to get a job, always ruining relationships through laziness, spending all their money on junk food and weed and what have you because of cigarettes.

 

[Treblaine]

Second hand smoke is a REAL problem.

It defies the libertarian justification for smoking that "it's my body, I'll take the risk" as if you allow one cigarette in doors you allow many. And what do you know, a hundred small fires billowing out smoke build up in an enclosed space. This DOES lead to cancers and pulmonary problems at a significantly high rate, higher than the rate of working in a building fitted with asbestos insulation.

But seriously, everyone need to stop giving tobacco special treatment because it's got nicotine in it, and the same for Cannabis with it's active chemicals. If I were to go into your place of work or residence, get out a tinder box (about the size of a pack of cigarettes) and start a small fire. How would you feel? Now I'd deliberately stack the fire to produce the maximum amount of smoke with smouldering embers rather than a clean flame (just like any tobacco cigarette or cannabis joint), you'd be livid, you'd call the police and report me for arson and complain about stinking up the place with noxious smoke.

Yet somehow, some people think it is all right for smokers to do this because they inhale the smoke first before they blow it in everyone's faces.

Bullshit.

If you want to start a very smoky fire, go the fugg outside. It's basic reasoning not to start small smoky fires in enclosed spaces out of consideration for others. Of of consideration for yourself, you shouldn't inhale the smoke.

And for all those people who take perfectly harmless plant matter like tobacco or cannabis and start burning it and inhaling the smoke, DO NOT act like you are any different from some punk kid who is huffing solvents in a bathroom toilet. You're doing something very dangerous and inherently harmful to your body for a shallow boost of pleasure.

 

[El Danny]

To what extent?

Cancer?

If it really bothers you, ask the guy having a smoke at the bus stop to move up,

I'm a smoker, I don't give a flying fuck if somebody smokes near me. However, I understand why people want to stop smoking in public seeing as it can actually cause harm to the people around the smoker. That's why a compromise is best.

It's my habit, and it's not anybodies business what I do with it.

It is somebody's business when you do something that might harm the people around you in the middle of a public street.

Sure, you've going to get cancer from standing near a smoker...

By that logic I should be dead by now, if a standing in the vicinity of a smoker is enough to get cancer I'd hate to see what being a smoker would do...

 

[phantasmalWordsmith]

I'm not too sure about weed but yeah, I hate cigarettes. My parents smoke and it smells nasty. I'd love to see them eliminated but they have a niche role in society and they contribute a fair amount of value tax so its unlikely we'll seem them removed in my lifetime

 

[Treblaine]

Second hand smoking actually harms the health of the people nearby.

To what extent? If it really bothers you, ask the guy having a smoke at the bus stop to move up, but I seriously don't see how one can develop health issues based to standing next to a smoker at the bus stop, or passing one in the street.

It's my habit, and it's not anybody's business what I do with it.

I was wondering, how do you feel about people who like to sniff powerful glues to huff on the solvents?

It's their "habit", not your business, but what would you think of such a character. But how is it different from what you are doing? Is it different because Yul Brynner looked "real keeewl" smoking a cigarette? Even though his final public appearance was an earnest insistence was that no one copy his habit as he died from diseases caused by smoking.

I have no illusion that solvent abuse can be solved by banning solvents. Nor can smoking be solved by banning tobacco. I think largely we have succeeded in educating everyone so most people have the sense not to spray Old Spice directly up their nostrils, yet the same sense of self-preservation abandons them when it comes to burning tobacco.

People just need to realise this habit of getting high is really REALLY dangerous to them.

 

[El Danny]

Second hand smoking actually harms the health of the people nearby.

To what extent? If it really bothers you, ask the guy having a smoke at the bus stop to move up, but I seriously don't see how one can develop health issues based to standing next to a smoker at the bus stop, or passing one in the street.

It's my habit, and it's not anybody's business what I do with it.

I was wondering, how do you feel about people who like to sniff powerful glues to huff on the solvents?

It's their "habit", not your business, but what would you think of such a character. But how is it different from what you are doing? Is it different because Yul Brynner looked "real keeewl" smoking a cigarette? Even though his final public appearance was an earnest insistence was that no one copy his habit as he died from diseases caused by smoking.

I have no illusion that solvent abuse can be solved by banning solvents. Nor can smoking be solved by banning tobacco. I think largely we have succeeded in educating everyone so most people have the sense not to spray Old Spice directly up their nostrils, yet the same sense of self-preservation abandons them when it comes to burning tobacco.

People just need to realise this habit of getting high is really REALLY dangerous to them.

Two completely separate things, solvents can kill you instantly, you'd be damn unlucky to die in your first year of smoking, even if you're on 2 packs a day. For what it's worth I tried solvents, like 5-6 years ago, thought they were shite but I maintained friendships for quite a few years with a couple of people who abuse solvents.

Sure, you've going to get cancer from standing near a smoker...

Second hand smoke is quite harmful actually and the risk of cancer increases when you inhale it. You can do whatever you want with your body as long as it doesn't affect the people around you and as it stands, smoking does. A ban on smoking in public is, frankly, going a bit to far.

However, setting up designated areas for smokers to congregate would aleviate concerns regarding harmful second hand smoke by segregating smokers from non smokers. That way, you can still smoke in public without affecting those around you. It's a perfect compromise.

By that logic I should be dead by now, if a standing in the vicinity of a smoker is enough to get cancer I'd hate to see what being a smoker would do...

You can try and justify it all you want but the facts are on my side. Besides, why the fuck are you even wailing on me for? You're acting as if I'm on a crusade to take away your cigarettes.

I agree with your logic on the smoking area ideas (technically we have them at my college) but I just don't think the dangers of second hand smoking are enough to threaten a member of the public, certainly not enough to justify spending £££ to implement and enforce such a scheme. Nobody is going to get cancer from passing a smoking in the street or standing next to one at the bus stop.

 

[Treblaine]

Second hand smoking actually harms the health of the people nearby.

To what extent? If it really bothers you, ask the guy having a smoke at the bus stop to move up, but I seriously don't see how one can develop health issues based to standing next to a smoker at the bus stop, or passing one in the street.

It's my habit, and it's not anybody's business what I do with it.

I was wondering, how do you feel about people who like to sniff powerful glues to huff on the solvents?

It's their "habit", not your business, but what would you think of such a character. But how is it different from what you are doing? Is it different because Yul Brynner looked "real keeewl" smoking a cigarette? Even though his final public appearance was an earnest insistence was that no one copy his habit as he died from diseases caused by smoking.

I have no illusion that solvent abuse can be solved by banning solvents. Nor can smoking be solved by banning tobacco. I think largely we have succeeded in educating everyone so most people have the sense not to spray Old Spice directly up their nostrils, yet the same sense of self-preservation abandons them when it comes to burning tobacco.

People just need to realise this habit of getting high is really REALLY dangerous to them.

Two completely separate things, solvents can kill you instantly, you'd be damn unlucky to die in your first year of smoking, even if you're on 2 packs a day. For what it's worth I tried solvents, like 5-6 years ago, thought they were shite but I maintained friendships for quite a few years with a couple of people who abuse solvents.

----

I agree with your logic on the smoking area ideas (technically we have them at my college) but I just don't think the dangers of second hand smoking are enough to threaten a member of the public, certainly not enough to justify spending £££ to implement and enforce such a scheme. Nobody is going to get cancer from passing a smoking in the street or standing next to one at the bus stop.

So "completely separate" because they *can* kill instantly, only in the sense of passing out and suffocating on ones own vomit. And anyway you said it was their own body, their own habit, what is this distinction on different degrees of danger?

So you'd see no problem with your close family and friends all huffing solvents as long as there was someone around to roll them over if they pass out and start vomiting? The ongoing health risks of solvent abuse are very equivalent to habitual smoking. I'm not talking ongoing friendship, I'm saying do you have a PROBLEM. Do you think they shouldn't do that and that they should quit their solvent habit.

Your vouching for insistence of the acceptability of smoking is not help by how you also vouch acceptance of solvent abuse.

I'm not saying solvents nor tobacco should be banned. I'm saying these people should be helped and every effort made to get them to quit this habit permanently.

PS: ban on smoking in public may be also a factor of the litter and fire risks of smoking. It's pretty easy to put a food or drinks container back in your pocket till you find a bin, but what to do with a smouldering tar-oozing cigarette butt? What almost all smokers do, they throw it on the ground. They are hardly going to put the stinking thing in their pocket. Tossed directly in a trash can it'll likely set it on fire. Or tossed onto dry grass or onto an oily rag.

I'd never seen a smoker on the streets finish a cigarette and not immediately throw it on the ground. I don't know any smoker who carries around a case for their spent cigarette butts till they find a place to dispose them. Of all the litter I see on the streets, cigarette butts are the most common. The government provides these streets for everyone, no one should be allowed to discard crap all over them.

 

[MercenaryCanary]

"Guys, let's ban a substance that is harmful but popular within the population!"
Sure thing, 1920's America!
How could this ever go wrong?
Prohibition era, when crime was rampant and boozed up.

 

[Alade]

I'm a smoker and I agree that cigarettes should be banned, however weed has no reason to be allowed either. Even alcohol has a shaky case but I don't drink anymore so I can't be objective about that.

 

[Hunter65416]

Nope. Shut up. Complaining about the legality of alcohol in comparison to weed for example can be some-what justified but when you smoke 30 cigarettes a day the only person you hurt is yourself which is completely your choice.

If we follow the 'just because its bad for you' logic then by all means why not ban fatty or sugary foods while we're at it.. and we'll take away alcohol and make it illegal to have sex except for the purpose of reproduction..infact lets just saturate life of all things that give pleasure so we can be a healthier and safer species.

"Oh fuck off" -Me on reading the title of this thread.

 

[Cuacuani]

Thousands of chemicals in a lit cigarette you say?!

Not bad value for a fiver.

There I was worrying about the latest price hike. Seems like I was getting more for my money than I knew.

 

[Shadowcreed]

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.

I agree that they should ban Cigarettes. Alcohol isn't that big a factor if you're responsible with it, whilst a single cigarette is already harmful as far as I'm concerned. Not a big fan of weed. The thing is, I feel that these products should be used only to entice yourself - if I'm at a bus stop and somebody is smoking I'm directly affected by his smoke, and I didn't sign up for it. Same goes for weed though that wouldn't be much of an issue because you don't really see people smoke weed outside at a public area
I cannot get drunk when some other dude is consuming alcohol so I don't really mind it - as long as they stick to themselves. I don't want to be affected by someone else's bad habits. If I'm not, then smoke/blow/drink away, no fuck given on this end.

 

[smeghead00]

There's far too much tax on tobacco for it to be banned

 

[SpAc3man]

Ban it in public places and in homes with children. Anyone who wants to smoke can do it in the privacy of their own home or outside on their property/on a balcony of their home if they have kids. I cant stand walking through town to go to work while all the workers are standing outside their office building having a fag. Its disgusting.