Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should smoking be banned completely ?

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    A_Sober_Paddy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,221 ✭✭✭A_Sober_Paddy


    I would love to see it banned totally in public...nothing worse that walking into a shopping centre and having to walk through second hand smoke at the door...

    Same goes for cafe, bars on the street


  • Options
    #123
    Sam Kade
    Registered Users Posts: 12,313 ✭✭✭✭Sam Kade


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    end of the road wrote: »
    grand, where is the money coming from both to replace lost revenue and enforce the ban? over all, it would be billions lost
    So you believe that ex smokers will bank the money they save, somehow I doubt it.


  • Options
    #124
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,777 ✭✭✭SeanW


    RayM wrote: »
    Oh, and as for smokers' rights - fuck your 'right' to make your loved ones watch you die a horrible, avoidable, lingering death.
    So you want the government to fight a "War on Selfishness" ...

    Good luck with that.


  • Options
    #125
    Lia_lia
    Registered Users Posts: 6,691 ✭✭✭Lia_lia


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    Don't know about making them illegal, people would still smoke them. And no tax profits.

    I do wished cigarettes did not exist. Hate them. Both my parents smoke and so does my OH. I wonder in 20 years time will it still be "cool" for teenagers to take up smoking. Hopefully not!


  • Options
    #126
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,517 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Yes, the price should be increased to €15 a pack.
    Lia_lia wrote: »
    Don't know about making them illegal, people would still smoke them. And no tax profits.

    I do wished cigarettes did not exist. Hate them. Both my parents smoke and so does my OH. I wonder in 20 years time will it still be "cool" for teenagers to take up smoking. Hopefully not!
    No the kids will be vaping instead.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    kylith wrote: »
    So we're back to alcohol; the addict's family there will lose them to a drug with no benefits. And what about scuba diving, or base jumping? Those carry a high risk of death with no benefits, so are we banning them as well?

    I've heard all these flimsy arguments before. There is no comparison. The vast majority of drinkers aren't addicted. Is there an argument for banning a product that most people can consume safely and in moderate amounts? Cigarettes, on the other hand, are inherently addictive, which limits the element of choice involved.
    SeanW wrote:
    So you want the government to fight a "War on Selfishness" ...

    Good luck with that.

    No, I want the government to gradually phase out an industry that kills around 7,000 Irish people per year.


  • Options
    #128
    Chris_Bradley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,818 ✭✭✭Chris_Bradley


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    Whether the government should or shouldn't they'll always find a way to say it's bad for you and could kill you yet never convict their cash-cow to the death sentence.

    I'd personally like to see them gone as many of my family have died from them.


  • Options
    #129
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    RayM wrote: »
    I've heard all these flimsy arguments before. There is no comparison. The vast majority of drinkers aren't addicted. Is there an argument for banning a product that most people can consume safely and in moderate amounts? Cigarettes, on the other hand, are inherently addictive, which limits the element of choice involved.

    I don't believe that alcohol is a flimsy argument. Not all smokers die young, and many give up smoking. Whereas an alcohol addiction can not only contribute to the death of the addict it often leads to the loss of their job, the spending of every penny they have on alcohol, violence, road deaths, abusive behaviour; all things which are not the case with cigarettes. No-one has ever, as far as I know, left their children starve so they could buy cigarettes. No-one has smoked a cigarette and then gotten into a car and killed someone because of cigarette-impaired judgement. And, worst of all, a borderline alcohol addiction often seems all-but mandated in this country - not drinking is, to some people, seen as weird, aberrant behaviour.


  • Options
    #130
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I'm all for banning alcohol. But only because prohibition seemed like great fun. Speakeasies! Beer barons. I want to be the new Al Capone.

    I'm an asthmatic non-smoker, but I'd never ban it. However something that does make me frustrated is seeing people smoking around young kids, especially their parents.


  • Options
    #131
    Sam Kade
    Registered Users Posts: 12,313 ✭✭✭✭Sam Kade


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »
    Ahh yea. Ban it. Let the gangs and black market thrive.

    Yet if you ask any smoker would they smoke smuggled cigarettes they'll say that they could have anything in them ignoring legal cigs with 4k chemicals in them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Sam Kade wrote: »
    So you believe that ex smokers will bank the money they save, somehow I doubt it.
    what money will be saved? remember, your replacing the lost revenue, and spending money on enforcement. the current revenue more then covers treatment for smokers. why should we piss more money down the drain for more failure

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #133
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    RayM wrote: »
    I've heard all these flimsy arguments before. There is no comparison. The vast majority of drinkers aren't addicted. Is there an argument for banning a product that most people can consume safely and in moderate amounts? Cigarettes, on the other hand, are inherently addictive, which limits the element of choice involved.



    No, I want the government to gradually phase out an industry that kills around 7,000 Irish people per year.
    well, we can't afford it. its not cost effective. it would be damaging to the economy

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #134
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    kylith wrote: »
    I don't believe that alcohol is a flimsy argument. Not all smokers die young, and many give up smoking. Whereas an alcohol addiction can not only contribute to the death of the addict it often leads to the loss of their job, the spending of every penny they have on alcohol, violence, road deaths, abusive behaviour; all things which are not the case with cigarettes. No-one has ever, as far as I know, left their children starve so they could buy cigarettes. No-one has smoked a cigarette and then gotten into a car and killed someone because of cigarette-impaired judgement. And, worst of all, a borderline alcohol addiction often seems all-but mandated in this country - not drinking is, to some people, seen as weird, aberrant behaviour.

    I don't drink, so I wouldn't shed any tears if alcoholic drinks disappeared off the face of the earth, but the vast majority of people who drink aren't addicted, don't neglect their children, don't commit violent acts or drive when under the influence, etc. As bad as the alcohol industry is, at least their business model isn't reliant upon getting every single user chemically addicted to their products before they're old enough to make an educated decision.
    end of the road wrote: »
    well, we can't afford it. its not cost effective. it would be damaging to the economy

    That's a non-argument. The money spent on cigarettes wouldn't just disappear from the economy.


  • Options
    #135
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    RayM wrote: »
    That's a non-argument.

    no it isn't. its a true argument.
    RayM wrote: »
    The money spent on cigarettes wouldn't just disappear from the economy.

    eventually it would.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #136
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    end of the road wrote: »
    no it isn't. its a true argument.



    eventually it would.

    In what specific way would this happen?


  • Options
    #137
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    Yes, the price should be increased to €15 a pack.
    Fact of the matter is all drugs should be legal, what someone decides to put into their own body is nobody else's ****in business quite frankly, as long as they're not harming other people of course, that's a given. Harming other people is a separate crime and should always be illegal.

    If you ban cigarettes, you simply create a black market, that's a fact, it's also a fact that drugs aren't hard to find, so there's no reason to think that tobacco would be either.

    Proper education is always the best way forward.


  • Options
    #138
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    osarusan wrote: »
    If the government is going to be picking up the pieces (rehab, prison, etc) then I think the government should have have power to regulate it.

    If these vices were legal then prisons would be less burdened ........... the revenue acquired from legalising these vices would more than cover rehab.


  • Options
    #139
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    RayM wrote: »
    No, it's actually a completely valid point, and one borne out of experience. The addict's 'right' to consume a drug that has absolutely no benefits, aside from sating an addiction, should always be less important than their family's right not to lose them prematurely to a wholly avoidable illness.

    That's between an individual and their family .......... it's none of the Government's business ......... or yours for that matter.

    We can't base legislature on what Johnny's Mammy wants Johnny to do or not do.


  • Options
    #140
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Sam Kade wrote: »
    the poster that I quoted, that's who.

    He/She didn't mention smoking in the home at all actually. :)


  • Options
    #141
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,575 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    If these vices were legal then prisons would be less burdened ........... the revenue acquired from legalising these vices would more than cover rehab.

    That's one (speculative) way of looking at it - but it doesn't really address my point, which is that the argument that it is 'a personal choice, and should have nothing to do with the government' ignores the fact that (in Ireland at least) the government will be the one dealing with the consequences of that personal choice, so it does have something to do with the government really.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Sam Kade wrote: »
    How many started smoking and regretted it later on? If they had someone to prevent them from smoking in the first place they would be very thankful to them.

    The same could be said of drugs and alcohol ......... being illegal/legal makes no difference in relation to prevention.


  • Options
    #143
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Sam Kade wrote: »
    So you believe that ex smokers will bank the money they save, somehow I doubt it.

    You believe that all smokers will become ex-smokers because it's now illegal?

    You think those smokers who do become ex-smokers will donate their newly saved money to the "War on Smoking"?

    :D:D:D:D:D


  • Options
    #144
    Liamario
    Registered Users Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭Liamario


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    You can't ban it for existing smokers, but you could ban it for future ones...


  • Options
    #145
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    RayM wrote: »
    That's a non-argument. The money spent on cigarettes wouldn't just disappear from the economy.

    You're right, the money spent on cigarettes wouldn't disappear ......... it's go to Organised Crime instead ......... great idea! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #146
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yes, the price should be increased to €15 a pack.
    wakka12 wrote: »
    if I ever had a child and caught them smoking they'd be getting a right talking to and a good clip around the ear.

    Cept some people want to ban that, too!


  • Options
    #147
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    osarusan wrote: »
    That's one (speculative) way of looking at it - but it doesn't really address my point, which is that the argument that it is 'a personal choice, and should have nothing to do with the government' ignores the fact that (in Ireland at least) the government will be the one dealing with the consequences of that personal choice, so it does have something to do with the government really.

    The Government is answerable to the People (or it should be) .......... the People of Ireland will be asking a lot of questions if smoking was banned.

    "Why can't I make my own decision?"

    "Why are our prisons so over-crowded?"

    "Why are Cigarette Dealers so wealthy?"

    "Why are the Guards under so much pressure?"

    "Why is our economy worse off than ever?"

    "Why are our elected Politicians corrupt?"

    "When are you going to end this stupid ban and all the problems it brought with it??!!"


  • Options
    #148
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,575 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    The Government is answerable to the People (or it should be) .......... the People of Ireland will be asking a lot of questions if smoking was banned.
    None of that has anything to do with my point.


  • Options
    #149
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    osarusan wrote: »
    None of that has anything to do with my point.

    Of course it does ....... your point is, if the Government has to deal with the effects of smoking and/or the fall-out from a smoking ban then it should have the right to independently regulate it on our behalf ......... whereas it is in fact us, the people, who really have to deal with smoking both as individuals and in relation to our loved ones therefore the choice should not be dictated to us by the Government.


  • Options
    #150
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    No, I should be smoke if I choose.
    MadDog76 wrote: »
    You're right, the money spent on cigarettes wouldn't disappear ......... it's go to Organised Crime instead ......... great idea! :rolleyes:

    Most smokers want to give up. It's hard to imagine many people being prepared to become criminals for the sake of a very conspicuous habit that they want to kick anyway (and one which can so easily be supplanted by other methods of nicotine ingestion).
    MadDog76 wrote: »
    The Government is answerable to the People (or it should be) .......... the People of Ireland will be asking a lot of questions if smoking was banned.

    "Why can't I make my own decision?"

    "Why are our prisons so over-crowded?"

    "Why are Cigarette Dealers so wealthy?"

    "Why are the Guards under so much pressure?"

    "Why is our economy worse off than ever?"

    "Why are our elected Politicians corrupt?"

    "When are you going to end this stupid ban and all the problems it brought with it??!!"

    "Remember when people used to get Lung Cancer?"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    rubadub
    Registered Users Posts: 32,379 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    Liamario wrote: »
    You can't ban it for existing smokers, but you could ban it for future ones...

    Why not? they banned magic mushrooms pretty much overnight. Screwing over loads of sellers and users. Same with loads of actually addictive drugs too.

    BUt I suppose mammy and the local garda do not openly admit to abusing those drugs.


Advertisement