Originally posted by MC Mike
They should stay legal as long as the money collected by the tax MORE than pays off the medical, social, and other costs of people directly and second-handedly affected by smoking.
LOL well then better ban them now cuz they don't🙂
However banning tobacco products at this point is stupid and useless. Also I have never seen any medical studies or clinical or anywhere that shows secondhand smoke causing medical difficulties.
I don't smoke I dislike the smell however I feel as though banning cigarettes is wrong...........................now creating cessation programs and such good.
Nope, they should not be banned. Every individual has the right to make a decision if they are going to smoke.
There isn't a law where it says a company may not sell a harmful product - there is however a law which says that companies may not sell a harmfull product if the consumer is not informed.
Consumers are informed on every pack of tobacco or cigarettes - thus tobacco copmanies are technically doing nothing wrong.
Government will never allow ban of cigarettes, because the revenue they bring in is immense and it unfortunately ouweighs the human cost.
The advertisment on cigarettes has been banned since May 2004, yet the sale of cigarettes is growing still...
Illegal, no. Banned in certain places? Sure... in ireland we have a smoking ban in all public places where anyone works (bars, restaurants and so on), and going out is definately easier on my lungs...
One thing i cant stand is ignorance. If you smoke and accept that it is harmful, then fine, do as you like, but the people who assume just because its legal that it isnt harmful, well, frankly, they're idiots...
Originally posted by pr1983
Illegal, no. Banned in certain places? Sure... in ireland we have a smoking ban in all public places where anyone works (bars, restaurants and so on), and going out is definately easier on my lungs...One thing i cant stand is ignorance. If you smoke and accept that it is harmful, then fine, do as you like, but the people who assume just because its legal that it isnt harmful, well, frankly, they're idiots...
i agree. people can drink a bottle of poison as well. the reason drinking poison isn't banned though is because drinking poison only affects that person. and if they want to take the risk, that's fine. not too smart, imo, but fine.
secondhand smoke however affects others. it's more the . . . rudeness of it that bothers me. a smoker dictates to others what another is breathing. and what they are breathing is hazardous.
as for never having seen studies on the hazards of secondhand smoke: methinks one hasn't looked too hard . . .
Originally posted by KharmaDog
I don't think it should be made illegal.But in Canada, it should be that smokers should have to give up their free health care benefits, to treat anything that is remotely smoking related, as they are making a conscious decision that is burdening the system.
that's brilliant! 😄
have you heard of the 'fat tax' proposal? it was mentioned last year some time. it was something similar -- can't recall all the details -- but the bulk of the idea was simple -- obesity was a huge drain on the health care system and it was a proposal would help off-set the cost of taking care of overweight people who were seen as a similar drain on health care resources.
obesity and smoking (and complications that arise from these things) are the 2 largest drains on health care systems in canada and probably in the US as well.
(someone is gonna be po'd at us k-dog . . .) 🙁
The problem with that logic is that the extension of it is that those who play football have to foot the bill for fractures.
Unfortunately, the principle of a social health care system is that everybody gets treatment regardless of how they live their lives. Being choosy about who you treat based on how they got ill or injured is breaking away from that vital principle.