It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A way to stop the nation smoking?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 06:05 AM

Originally posted by scientist
I understand your intent, but a program like this would likely create more criminals than non-smokers.

I think that's an understatement. Such a program would definitely create yet another black market and push more otherwise contributing members of society outside the bounds of our law, resulting in even more good people in prison than we have today.

Until seeing the seeming majority of support this idea has here on ATS, I had the impression that people on this board were a little more enlightened than average. I don't smoke, but I have friends who do. I am happy to tolerate their smoking (not in my house or my car), if for no other reason than to acknowledge their own freedom to make decisions that may tradeoff between their enjoyment of life and their personal health. Maybe in some cases, sitting down for a smoke has saved lives because the smoker had a chance to calm down in their own way rather than escalating some interpersonal situation. Unless you believe that all of your health and medical decisions should be dictated to you by someone else, then to attempt to ban smoking or even other things we have already banned is hypocritical.

It is simply not my business whether or not someone else smokes, and to the rabid non-smokers or reformed smokers who believe they should impose their "truth" on someone else's actions, whether because they don't want second hand smoke around or think it's costing them in taxes because they can't see the big picture of tax generation from cigarettes, I say spend your energy on making good decisions about your own life. I'd bet that the end result of people trying to control others is detrimental to their own personal well being and probably costs us all money in physchiatric or even other medical care. How about banning the ability for anyone to implement laws controlling someone else unless they can prove it directly infringes on their personal rights?

I don't have a problem with littering laws (don't drop your butts on my street). I don't have a problem with indoor public places having a no-smoking policy. I'm even in favor of anti-smoking advertising or education paid for by the cigarette tax. At the same time, when you are in your own home, your own car, or in the outdoors we share, smoke away and I will either be happily oblivious of it (in your own space) or deal with the teensy bit of smoke not carried away on the wind. If only more people could stay clear of infringing on other's decisions about their life, we'd have a much happier and healthier society, IMO.

posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 10:44 PM

posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 11:13 PM
reply to post by fiftyfifty

Ever see the American movie "Demolition Man"?
Thats where this silly little road of ban everything that's bad for you leads.
And well forget freedom.

posted on Jan, 7 2008 @ 01:43 PM
they should raise the age to buy cigarettes by one year each year.

after 50 years you would not be able to buy cigarettes unless you were 68 years old.

how many 68 years old people still smoke and are still alive.

posted on Jan, 7 2008 @ 02:34 PM

Originally posted by hikix
What other substance that knowingly causes millions of deaths worldwide is legal?

Soft drinks, fast food, alchoholic beverages, and I am sure countless others un-named as of yet. I do not smoke but I defend a person's right to do so in their home or car.

Now here is a odd idea. How about they put a substance in tobacco that makes people sterile and shortens your life by 35% of the average.. If they choose to smoke they can not have children. This will also slow down the over population problem in the world. If you smoke, no children and you die young.

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in