UK considers banning cigarettes for next generation(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
UK considers banning cigarettes for next generation
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/22/rishi-sunak-considers-banning-cigarettes-for-next-generation
17 comments
Starting from the duo Tatcher-Nixon, politicians have already barred the next generation from a lot of things like owning a home. So, why not cigarettes?
Fuck tobacco btw
> like owning a home
Don't worry, politicians have already found a solution to this, just change the definition of what "owning a home" is.
Don't worry, politicians have already found a solution to this, just change the definition of what "owning a home" is.
I'm all in favour of removing the nicotine from our societies, but banning seems a bit strong.
Maybe it could be something like Portugal has, where you have to go through rehab if you are cought consuming certain drugs. But I guess that would cost the government a bit more money compared with just outright banning cigarettes.
Maybe it could be something like Portugal has, where you have to go through rehab if you are cought consuming certain drugs. But I guess that would cost the government a bit more money compared with just outright banning cigarettes.
Honest question, why is tobacco/nicotine such a big deal to people?
Every major city in Europe has street corners where you can witness hopeless alcoholics in the throes of delirium tremens, each one representing a life broken by an addictive and harmful drug.
Watch any local news station in the United States and you'll routinely hear about a drunk driver getting into a crash that kills other innocent people who were just trying to reach their destination.
Somehow these costs to society are acceptable, while somebody choosing to smoke/chew/dip tobacco which may eventually cause them serious health conditions and death isn't.
For the record, I think keeping both alcohol and tobacco legal in the status quo way is fine, but I've long felt that the negative attention given to tobacco is disproportionate.
Every major city in Europe has street corners where you can witness hopeless alcoholics in the throes of delirium tremens, each one representing a life broken by an addictive and harmful drug.
Watch any local news station in the United States and you'll routinely hear about a drunk driver getting into a crash that kills other innocent people who were just trying to reach their destination.
Somehow these costs to society are acceptable, while somebody choosing to smoke/chew/dip tobacco which may eventually cause them serious health conditions and death isn't.
For the record, I think keeping both alcohol and tobacco legal in the status quo way is fine, but I've long felt that the negative attention given to tobacco is disproportionate.
The history of making alcohol illegal in the US is what gives society pause. We're it up to some, they'd make alcohol totally illegal.
Right. I think prohibition is completely unthinkable, given its history and how easy alcohol is to make at home from basic ingredients.
But beyond that, no politicians are advocating to plaster liquor bottles with graphic crime scene photos from drunk driving crashes or medical diagrams for fetal alcohol syndrome.
But beyond that, no politicians are advocating to plaster liquor bottles with graphic crime scene photos from drunk driving crashes or medical diagrams for fetal alcohol syndrome.
> somebody choosing to smoke/chew/dip tobacco which may eventually cause them serious health conditions and death
In a crowded street, somebody's choice to smoke tobacco isn't just causing them serious health conditions.
I don't advocate banning smoking (Brits seem to love banning things they disagree with). I'm fine with people smoking so long as they do it in an isolated area where it's just harming them. It would be better if they didn't (especially to ease the burden on the healthcare system and spending), but that's their prerogative. I'm just as much an NHS burden if I break my leg doing sport.
In a crowded street, somebody's choice to smoke tobacco isn't just causing them serious health conditions.
I don't advocate banning smoking (Brits seem to love banning things they disagree with). I'm fine with people smoking so long as they do it in an isolated area where it's just harming them. It would be better if they didn't (especially to ease the burden on the healthcare system and spending), but that's their prerogative. I'm just as much an NHS burden if I break my leg doing sport.
Personally, I want to be able to go out and use my cloths again on the next day.
Most days I go out, my cloths reek of tabacco smoke, I can only imagine what I smoked second handed.
Most days I go out, my cloths reek of tabacco smoke, I can only imagine what I smoked second handed.
[deleted]
Somehow it's fine for the corporations to pump the food and water supply full of microplastics and PFAS but if the common man wants a smoke every now and then, that's a big no no.
Somehow alcohol escapes the degree of scrutiny that tobacco receives all the while being as or more destructive.
Somehow alcohol escapes the degree of scrutiny that tobacco receives all the while being as or more destructive.
Whataboutism
I'll believe it when I see it, especially when the tories are involved.
Prediction: if this happens, tobacco prices will go up and someone will start trafficking it. That'll be illegal, police will fight it, they'll use their revenues to fight off the police.
Almost like some sort of, Prohibition
Any many politicians for vibes reasons want to decrim smoking other drugs. Top minds one and all