MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
I smoked for 38 years, my health is now very poor suffering with COPD and asthma and many other ailments due to smoking, I finally went cold turkey to stop when I had to undergo an endarterectomy on my neck 26 years ago. It was either stop or face suffering a massive stroke. I only wish this act was in force before I got hooked. What are your views?
|
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
I recall we had a long and heated thread on the subject of banning smoking in pubs etc back in the day … I look forward to seeing how this one unfolds :D
|
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Pointless for a few years yet.
You have to be 18 already, so anyone born in 2009 could not buy them until at least 2027 atm. Also, its a ban on buying them, not smoking them (if someone else buys them for you). I expect many will just turn to vaping as well, which doesnt seem that much better. ---------- Post added at 19:46 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ---------- Plus of course, banning drugs always works so well ...... |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
"You can smoke cigarettes at any age, but you are not allowed to buy them until you are 18.
s.7 (1) Children and Young Persons Act 193 as amended by the Children and Young Persons (Sale of Tobacco etc) Order 2007 If you are caught smoking by a uniformed police officer or park keeper in a public place when under 16, he or she can take away your tobacco and cigarette papers. s.7 Children and Young Persons Act 1933" But it's also illegal to buy alcohol under 18, and it's totally illegal to buy controlled drugs. Does that stop a lot of youngsters and vendors? |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Exactly. When the Americans tried Prohibition, there was more booze, not less - and lower quality at that. The same thing will happen here with cigarettes.
I have some experience - not personal (except for a brief abortive attempt at 13, which only confirmed what I already knew, I have never smoked and never will, nor did my 2 half-sisters, one of whom has sadly passed away), but my late Dad, when I was 6 or so. He caught spasmatic bronchitis, and our doctor gave him a choice: quit smoking or quit breathing. Guess which one he picked? :p: Incidentally this is a kick in the teeth for anyone who 'can't' quit - my Mum was a heavy smoker too, but she quit to support him - and we didn't have patches, vapes or hypnosis back then. She quit anyway. I don't recall seeing her going cold turkey. No relapses, no unhealthy substitutes - she just quit. If she could, they can. The house smelled a lot better after that. |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
I’ll be honest I like smoking, i really like smoking Be that a cigarette or occasionally a cigar
I understand smoking is ultimately going to get me especially as a started approx 37 years ago ironically the day my grandfather died from lung cancer. I’ve made my choices and I’ll have to accept the consequences. What I don’t understand is why alcohol is considered more socially acceptable . |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
The cynic in me would say alcohol employs more people and generates more taxes through the distribution chain (inc. hospitality industry).
|
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Quote:
And much as I think it's probably a good thing not to get kids into smoking and to stop people before they start (I've never smoked and don't intend to), those born in 2009 are what, 14/15 now, so would be a few years off being able to buy cigarettes themselves anyway, as has been mentioned. So how's this going to work in 15 years time when they're 29/30, and someone born in 2008, who is 30/31, can buy cigarettes, but someone born in 2009 can't, but basically the same age? That's going to basically make having proof of age to buy cigarettes mandatory from this point forwards isn't it? |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
It just means more imports.
Quote:
|
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Not a smoker myself but is it not freedom of the individual to make their own personal decisions as long as it does not interfere with those who do not smoke.
---------- Post added at 07:58 ---------- Previous post was at 07:56 ---------- Quote:
And l don't smoke or drink alcohol personally. |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
It’s ironic that many of the same objections levelled here were made when car seatbelt use was made compulsory. However, a lot less people die in car accidents now, and nobody seriously suggests civil liberties make car seatbelt laws odious.
Personal freedom is never absolute, especially not in a complex interconnected society. Every decision we take has the capacity to influence other people. Legislating against something is always a balancing act between an individual’s freedom to choose and the impact of their choices on society, especially those who have to pick up the pieces when our choices have serious negative consequences. I’ve experienced those negative consequences twice in my life - members of my family who died of lung cancer due to smoking. I have also seen other members of my family struggle to quit, because nicotine is always addictive (in a way that alcohol is not). So I have little sympathy with the personal freedom argument, nor with the whataboutery when it comes to other controlled substances like alcohol. |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Sorry but it’s a genuine question not whatsboutery
Why considering all the financial and social impacts is alcohol more socially acceptable? |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Quote:
|
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Quote:
If you don’t want to answer well obviously that’s fine….. |
Re: MPs to vote on smoking ban for those born after 2009
Quote:
It doesn’t require anything more than someone who favours banning but not the other to consider why the same doesn’t apply and what the difference is. If your point would be that it’s not as addictive then fine. But I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss the comparison as whataboutery. (For the declaration I don’t smoke but do enjoy the odd beer, rum or glass of wine) ---------- Post added at 12:01 ---------- Previous post was at 11:55 ---------- Quote:
That’s not to say there aren’t people who do, or that their addictions haven’t caused the same or worse financial, social or health impacts. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:16. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.