Board 8 > Should cigarettes be banned?

(+) Yeah! (+)

It's crazy when you think where smoking used to be allowed. Planes, offices etc

---

People also used to think it was good for you outright.

---

Of course they should be banned in public. There's no justifiable way to defend the act and everyone trying to do so only defends it on the grounds of "slippery slope" and "fuck the government!". It's an OBJECTIVELY BAD product and habit that harms other. You should be able to do it at home if you live alone or with other smokers but that's it.

Basically, smoking should be treated like being nude.

---

Should be banned completely

UshiromiyaEva posted...

It's an OBJECTIVELY BAD product and habit.

Like most drugs there is an actual reason to do it you know. Like caffiene, the stimulants in tobacco can boost certain people's productivity or just relax them. The lack of empathy people have is what's truly troubling to me.

---

pjbasis posted...

Like most drugs there is an actual reason to do it you know. Like caffiene, the stimulants in tobacco can boost certain people's productivity or just relax them. The lack of empathy people have is what's truly troubling to me.

heroin is relaxing too... that doesn't imply it's not objectively bad for you?

---

I mean, there is no second hand heroin right? The people in this topic should be agreeing it's BETTER than smoking.

But like if it's easy to OD on I think that's enough to limit how it's distributed.

---

Maybe more important the search for "objective" badness and goodness is very ego-centric and doesn't belong in any rational conversation.

---

Objectively, smoking is harmful to the health of the person smoking, harmful to the health of others, and harmful to the health of the planet.

Those are facts, there is no way around it. The whole world would be a guaranteed better place if nobody smoked.
---

It's beneficial to the person smoking it sometimes actually. That's a fact, no way around it.

Jesus you're so arrogant.

---

There are other ways to get nicotine.

This is an embarrassing defense.

---

Colegreen_c12 posted...

Why do you act like second hand smoking is either cancer or your perfectly fine.

Like this is a very great point too.

It's not impossible to have a responsible smoking habit. To jump all the way to 100% ban is insane.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

There are other ways to get nicotine.

This is an embarrassing defense.

And cigarettes could be made safer.

How embarrassing for you.

---

I'm sure that's right around the corner

---

It's crazy you'd even reference shame or humiliation during a discussion anyway. Why do you people treat debates like you're supposed to dunk on your opponent? Ugh


---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I'm sure that's right around the corner

So you're retort was just a pointless jab then? My defense was not "embarrassing"?

I'm curious if you value your pride that much.

---

I'm arrogant for citing facts OK
---

If that's what you think you did you're not worth talking to.

I mean clearly you missed how I cited my own fact but you only care about certain ones.

That's the big move isn't it? We're all citing facts, we just choose to ignore some.

---

PJ do you smoke?

---

This sounds like an argument of whether you should save people from themselves tbh. It's true that smoking is terrible for your body. It's also true that it's some people's coping mechanism (it's a habit, as pjbasis said.) So it just depends on whether you think it is worth cutting off those people who smoke to cope (IE sacrifice mental health) in order to preserve their physical health. I think in a perfect world they would not exist and that people would just choose better coping mechanisms, but I think the most reasonable thing to do is what was suggested to just continue the anti-smoking campaign and try to weed it out that way.

Although I obviously disapprove of cigs, I do agree as pj said that it's possible to be responsible, if not for yourself then for others. Not doing it in a crowd full of people, in buildings, etc. To that end, maybe we need more regulations dictating when and where is appropriate to do such things?


---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

PJ do you smoke?

Only weed. I have smoked cigs before and I don't mind them but they don't do a lot for me.

Also the smell is only tolerable for short periods


---

Emeraldegg posted...

but I think the most reasonable thing to do is what was suggested to just continue the anti-smoking campaign and try to weed it out that way.

You put some words together better than I could. I vastly prefer a bottom up approach of just educating people until voluntarily choose to quit. Bans do more harm than good.

---

Lil_Bit83 posted...

Yeah, I remember smoking and non smoking sections in restaurants and hotels and when they had cigarette vending machines.

I ordered a Zima, not emphysema.

---

pjbasis posted...

People also used to think it was good for you outright.

Doctors used to prescribe them for stress/anxiety...unless that's an urban myth

---

Brayze_II posted...

I ordered a Zima, not emphysema.

Ha! That's a good one.

---

I would rather not ban it just so that regulated products are around that can be controlled/relatively safe, but I feel that way about a lot of drugs

Just because I imagine a bunch of people try to circumvent it

---

LiquidOshawott posted...

I would rather not ban it just so that regulated products are around that can be controlled/relatively safe, but I feel that way about a lot of drugs

Just because I imagine a bunch of people try to circumvent it

The issue here is that tobacco has the opposite problem. Store bought cigarettes are worse for you.

---

Hm, I guess I forget theres menthol ones out there that they pack in a bunch of nicotine so eh

Still, if kids can easily get them I dont think banning them will have much of an effect

---