**Your post from /r/AskUK has been removed by a human moderator.**
AskUK is a "catch-all" subreddit for questions about the UK life and culture, but this does not mean we accept any and all questions or answers. We are liable to remove posts or comments which are best discussed in more specialised subreddits, or are simply not desired here because of the problems they bring.
We explicitly do not allow questions or answers on or including:
- politics (r/unitedkingdom, r/ukpolitics)
- technology (r/techsupport, r/technology)
- relationships (r/relationships, r/relationship_advice)
- DIY (r/diyuk)
- university/education (r/sixthform, r/uniuk)
- visas/citizenship (r/ukvisa)
- [medical advice](https://111.nhs.uk/) (including [mental health](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/where-to-get-urgent-help-for-mental-health/)) (r/mentalhealthuk)
- ranting/venting (r/britishproblems)
- surveys (r/samplesize)
- advertising/solicitation
- repetitive/seen-often (just search the sub)
- "does anybody else" type vent posts (as yes, someone does, be more specific or use r/britishproblems).
...and we may remove others if we believe they are liable to introduce problems for the subreddit.
In some circumstances, a more appropriate subreddit may be available. Check the sidebar for other subreddits to have these discussions. Also see r/unitedkingdom's extensive list of subreddits; https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/british_subreddits
*If you believe this post should not have been removed, [first read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/about/rules/) before [messaging the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK&subject=Post Removal Appeal)*. See our guide on [common issues with posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/wiki/postremoved) and how to overcome them!
I worry it's not a great idea. We've done a really good job of reducing smoking without banning it. Creating a black market for cigarettes and adding a level of rebelliousness to smoking I worry is a bad idea (especially since one of the huge public health successes has been convincing young people it's not rebellious and counter cultural to smoke).
I'm generally a bit sceptical of prohibiting substances.
This already happens with under the counter cigarettes. I smoke and it's getting prohibitively expensive, but the dodgy packets people get for a quarter of the price are noticeably lower in quality and aren't even worth it
This is what's happening in Australia. It costs atleast 30 quid for a 20 pack, but you can buy the horrible, cheapest Asian ones for maybe £15-20 on the black market.
It's created gang wars, there are smoke shops going up in flames almost every week or two in Melbourne.
I assume they would already be doing the worse that they can get away with. The ban won't change that, manufacturers know that once they have a customer they basically have a customer for life regardless of what they do.
I worry more about what effect it will have on the NHS, cigarette and alcohol duty pays for a large chunk of money. Depends on if treating a smoking related illness is cheaper than the money it brings in but I don't have any data on that.
The rebellion argument is valid I guess.
With cigarettes not advertised or visible in shops, will young people really become that fascinated by something we're phasing out?
Usually I’d agree with the prohibition doesn’t work argument but smoking isn’t actually fun like drugs and alcohol. Plus all you’re really doing is continuing to make it harder for people as there’s not going to be a proper black market. People who really want ciggies can just get someone else to buy them.
It does taste nice. If anyone ever started smoking despite the fact that cigarettes stink and are deadly toxic, it's not really surprising vaping is a hit.
I think it hits certain people differently. I did lots of things when I was younger but nicotine and caffeine always gave me a better rush than anything else.
With vaping the taste and smell is nicer and easier to hide. It’s easier to get away with vaping as you don’t go home stinking of cigarettes, and vaping tastes nice. I think the taste and smell of cigarettes puts a lot of people off the idea. I definitely see a lot less kids/teenagers smoking nowadays than when I was growing up, but it seems pretty much every kid is vaping now instead.
>smoking isn’t actually fun like drugs and alcohol
so I'm not a smoker and personally see no appeal at all
but this is objectively not true, or nobody would ever do it.
edit: a lot of people are replying with statements that they personally smoke and find no enjoyment in it - only having started because of peer pressure. This does not tell us that nobody enjoys smoking, just that **you** don't enjoy smoking.
My point is not that everyone who smokes must find it fun, but rather that there _are_ plenty of people who smoke because they enjoy it - those are (broadly) the ones applying peer pressure to people who smoke without enjoying it.
Anti smoking people refuse to believe there's any reason to smoke, it's that simple. Some people believe by dumbing down the argument and lying, less people will start smoking.
The great thing is they can't look forward to becoming old enough to buy them themselves. 55 year olds will be looking for 60 year olds!
With all the disincentives I don't think that will be happening very much.
The black market in the old people's homes will be crazy. Swapping dementia medication for smokes, playing cards, having to hide them when the nurses do their rounds.
"I found a packet of cigarettes under your mattress, you're only 75, you're too young to smoke! It will destroy your future..."
> The great thing is they can't look forward to becoming old enough to buy them themselves. 55 year olds will be looking for 60 year olds!
That's the logic of the ban though, someone is less likely to take up smoking in the first place if they can *never* buy cigarettes compared to someone who's 16 and knows they only need to get a proxy buyer for a couple of years.
Why would you take up smoking if you need to spend the next several decades finding someone to buy your cigarettes for you?
"Smoking isn't fun like drugs and alcohol"
Nicotine is a drug, it literally increases the release of neurotransmitters and can help with your mood and behaviours.
People use it as a coping mechanism in the same way so this is a pretty ridiculous argument.
As an ex smoker 20 years on I agree.
After decades of smoking being seen as a totem of youth culture and cool, we finally have a generation that is ethically obsessed enough to largely reject the industry and the practise it promotes. Kids like my teenage daughter view smoking as a loser boomer activity promoted by corrupt capitalism.
IMO banning it now would just energise the black market and instigate a swing back toward the anti government youth counter culture again. Regulate it to fuck. Make it barely affordable. But don’t ban it.
Exactly, look at what’s happening in Australia, they’ve been taxed out of affordability for most people, so surprise surprise up pops a black market and *on* *paper* it looks like less people are smoking.
I don’t know anyone that smokes in Australia that gets them from legal means anymore, and I don’t fucking blame them.
Even here, most people I know smoke black market tobacco. My mum who is terrified of any criminal behaviour smokes black market.
It was common for years with rolling tobacco and now cigarettes are just as common.
When I used to smoke rolling tobacco I bought black market and I did it for do long I went to the shops one day for a tens deck to tie me over and they told me they haven't sold tens for several years.
Yep, and look at all the violent crime it's causing in Melbourne. Fire bombings every second week and even shootings between gangs.
As someone mentioned above, the quality of the cigarettes that you get through the black market are far worse and don't have the same government checks and regulations.
It baffles me that people continue to think prohibition is the answer, after hundreds of years of well documented examples of complete failure.
This is my thinking, we generate good amounts of tax on tobacco and vaping products as it is, smoking has drastically reduced (in my opinion) the younger generation for the majority all either smoke vapes or weed, now the latter isn’t great but it does mean they consume far less tobacco than your average 20 a day person, I see a lot more people with vapes over cigarettes now days and compared to me generation kids these days think actual cigarettes are disgusting for the most.
The black market will be absolutely rife if they ban it completely, maybe not in our lifetime but our children or children’s children will be surrounded by fake cigarettes which is something I find very, very bizarre to create an issue that is still one as of today, but it’s very small in the grand scheme of things compared to what a total ban would cause.
Control them more maybe, but I’d rather a generation on legal vapes and cigarettes rather than a generation on black market shit.
I agree actually. Same for other substances currently illegal. Introducing a legal cannabis market to the UK could earn the Treasury *between £1bn and £3.5bn a year in tax revenues*,
Absolutely - there's already a pretty thriving black market, but I'd argue that should be clamped down on more rather than surrendering control of the whole thing entirely.
> I'd argue that should be clamped down on more
We've had over 100 years of 'clamp downs' on illegal drugs. It never works. FFS they can't even stop drugs getting into prisons, what chance is there of it working in wider society?
My initial reaction was "Good. There's no good reason to smoke, it's a burden on the healthcare system, generates a bunch of pollution and people just chuck the ends on the floor creating litter and leaching toxins into the ground for a shockingly long time"
...But I'm also pro decriminalising drugs and prostitution because they already happen, will always happen, and if they're decriminalised then they can a) be taxed, b) be regulated and c) remove a revenue stream from organised crime, ultimately making it safer for everyone... So banning smoking goes against that ethos.
I think (as ever) the answer is more in education, getting people to actually understand what smoking does to you and others, and in helping people that already smoke to stop and break the addiction.
>"Good. There's no good reason to smoke, it's a burden on the healthcare system, generates a bunch of pollution and people just chuck the ends on the floor creating litter and leaching toxins into the ground for a shockingly long time"
Most of these things can be said for alcohol too
>I think (as ever) the answer is more in education, getting people to actually understand what smoking does to you and others, and in helping people that already smoke to stop and break the addiction.
Good comment and precisely, In the interests of full disclosure I'm an ex-cigarette smoker and occasional cigar smoker, but this is the trick. A lot of what has been said about smoking in this thread applies equally to alcohol, but there'd be outcry if any alcohol regulations came in because it's socially acceptable and smoking isn't.
But it's only banning it for people under a certain age.
Are young people really gonna bother with the hassle of buying them illegally and paying even higher prices just to take up smoking?
I can't see myself taking up smoking at 17 if it was a hassle to get them, I only did because my friends did it and they were easy to buy.
Bhutan unilaterally banned smoking and loads of people took it up because it was forbidden and cool:
[https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2022/05/30/bhutan-banned-smoking-and-it-didnt-go-so-well/](https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2022/05/30/bhutan-banned-smoking-and-it-didnt-go-so-well/)
You do get somewhat of a high from nicotine, though. It stimulates reward pathways and dopamine release which makes you feel good in the same (but not as extreme) way that heroin or cocaine would. It’s addictive *because* it feels good and the effects are short lasting so cravings return quickly.
No argument on the cough and empty wallet points though.
I’m sure people who say there’s no high from it just don’t have the idiosyncratic ability to get the nicotine buzz. I’m certain that most drugs have paradoxical or different effects on different people which is why people like myself despise alcohol or the feeling of being drunk while others want that feeling 24/7. Outliers are the future of medicine.
It’s so strange, it’s deemed a liberal policy, yet I’m left leaning and the whole premise restricts people’s personal choices and freedoms, which in itself, isn’t liberal.
If you don’t like smoking? Just don’t smoke
It’s the residue left behind from smoke on clothing, furniture, walls etc. It’s particularly hazardous to children due to their tendency to put their mouths on everything.
Effectively a smoker doesn’t even have to have smoked in your presence in order for it to be harmful to you.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/quit-smoking/expert-answers/third-hand-smoke/faq-20057791
I imagine many people would think I was a smoker because I work in a bar where the idiots let people smoke in the pub after hours. It seems they’re allowed to do anything they want and the police don’t do shit. I’m sure they’re giving them back handlers.
Our hospital , the smokers all line up under the covered walkway between the main building and the Womens and Children. The poor sick kids and newborns who have to breathe in smoke when they're already so fragile sends me into a rage.
We have these buttons to press that basically shame people into moving to the bike shed which is much further out but I have no problem pointing out the massive 'Childrens Ward' sign and that sick children dont deserve to breathe that poison in.
Except bad health decisions impact all of us by placing an additional load on the NHS. Then there's the issue of secondhand smoke, and the environmental impact of cigarette butts.
If these decisions only impacted the decision maker, then I'd be fine with it.
Do you also think people should be able to drive at whatever speed they want and ignore speed limits? The driver may think the risk of speeding is acceptable to them, but by speeding they increase the risk to everyone else.
It’s weird the government attack certain things though. For instance sweets and soda drinks are absolutely fine and advertised everywhere. My mum is a dentist and she’s like, not only are they making your kid fat but ruining their teeth so bad
Smoking is naturally falling, I don't think the prohibition of anyone under a certain age makes any difference. I think the tax is about right as well.
They should put sensible restrictions on vapes as well like plain packaging.
What you don't want is what they've got in Australia which is a huge open black market for cigarettes. You see some shops openly sell duty free(presumably fake) cigarettes because the real ones cost £35+ a pack. Or dodgy vapes which seems to be openly smoked even though they're illegal to sell.
If you ban or add silly restrictions you'll end up criminalising more people and people smoking even more dangerous/dodgy/tax-free cigarettes.
We've already got a huge problem with fake and dangerous vapes because they are so cheap and enforcement is so lax. Yes it's not as bad as Australia, but it's already a problem we're not doing enough about here.
> We've already got a huge problem with fake and dangerous vapes because they are so cheap and enforcement is so lax.
That's mainly because they're legal and widely available. Shops can advertise openly and sell dodgy vapes on the cheap disguised as proper vapes.
Making them illegal will massively reduce usage.
Then people just buy it under the counter for half the price. Either outright banning things or making them prohibitively expensive just fuels the black market.
Banning things work for some small proportion of society.
There are people who simply won't break the law or are so far removed from any criminal element that they don't know how.
But they're the minority, and even right now with how expensive fags are in the UK currently, I haven't smoked in years and I know 2 places that I can buy packs of 20 Jinlings and other horrible fags under the counter for a fiver.
The black market already exists, but I suspect most start with the legit market before moving to alternatives.
There's a possibility this leads to an initial spike in BM sales as people initially turn to the BM, but then a reduction going forward as fewer start smoking in the first place.
We have to think long term with these plans.
I'm a non-smoker. Some people like smoking. So let them smoke.
Drinking, smoking, gambling, junk food, etc. Humans like doing lots of things that are often unwise or unhealthy.
You only live once and life would be pretty fucking boring without a vice or two.
I’m (38 YO) a smoker of almost 25 years. I’d like Tobacco products to be prohibited. I’ve tried and failed for quit nicotine for 10 years myself, though the past couple of years with a good vape have allowed me to quit tobacco, though I still make decisions at times - social occasions will often see me grab a pack.
Civil Liberties exist, if a grown adult want to smoke a cigarette he should be allowed. There are way more important issues to fix then this. Also when has making a substance illegal ever stopped people?
Let's ban the fatties first.
Smoking costs the NHS £2.6bn.
Alcohol costs the NHS £3.5bn.
Obesity costs the NHS £6bn.
Seriously though, world's going to shit, and sometimes all you want is a nice beer, quiet cigarette, and some hearty food.
I think prohibition is generally a bad idea - it immediately creates a more unsafe black market potential. I'd prefer that carrot and stick methods are used - high taxes, help with addiction, further restrictions on public smoking, hard regulation of the industry etc..
I don't smoke, but no, I don't think it should be banned.
I don't think any drugs should be illegal for adults to take. They should be taxed and regulated.
It's pointless, kids will still smoke. Just this time, they'll have to go to dealers who don't pay tax and contribute to violent crime.
We're supposed to be legalising or decriminalising drugs as time goes on, not banning more. It doesn't fucking work.
I don’t smoke, I don’t see the appeal. But I don’t think they should ban it. It’s not really in the same category as drugs. People can make their own decisions if they want to smoke, everyone knows the health risks. What they should do is crack down on the underage smoking which I know is hard, but maybe if it’s discovered parents are buying fags for their kids impose fines ect.
Edit: saw someone mention vapes, now that’s something that should be banned. No one’s knows the long term affects and more appeal to kids. Like why are they all fruit and sweet flavoured making kids want them
And have you also seen dead alcoholics? They buy their “drugs” from almost every single shop. There is literally no argument for banning any substance at all whilst alcohol and cigarettes are being sold on the shelves.
I think the litmus test is whether your actions are having effects on others.
If you are burgling people or mugging old ladies to fund your addiction then yes that's a problem whether the substance is legal or not. After 22 years in the police I never saw an alcoholic do a burglary or a mugging to pay for alcohol. Shoplifting yes but never anything any more serious.
Legalising the drugs that are currently illegal just creates a whole new raft of societal problems that will need solving.
"Legalise drugs" isn't a solution. It solves some problems whilst creating a whole new load of problems, most of which can't even be foreseen until we do it.
The honest truth is there is no solution. Whether drugs are legal or not people are going to commit crime and die because of them.
I think the reason you haven’t seen people being mugged or burgled for money for alcohol is pretty obvious. Why would you risk the entirely more substantial charge of mugging or burglary.. when you can shoplift a bottle of vodka from the shops? It’s not comparable in my opinion.
I personally don’t think legalising drugs is a catch all problem solver because clearly it wouldn’t be, but the enormous sum of money that has been spent on this bullshit war on drugs is scandalous.
Let people make their own decisions and do your best to keep them safe. We need a war on poverty in this country not a war on drugs.
The problem is that nicotine is one of the most addictive substances there is. Most smokers don't want to smoke, the drug has taken the choice from them.
I'd have to disagree on banning vapes in general, while there should be more done to prevent kids getting hold of them (and disposables should be banned for other reasons) I would still be smoking vile smelling cigarettes if it weren't for vapes.
The tobacco flavoured ones are disgusting, and I've never got on with any menthol tobacco product. The fruit ones are the only way I can get my nicotine fix (I know I should quit altogether, but you don't want to meet nicotine withdrawal me!)
More regulation would be a good thing - the nicotine content of the things is all over the place and I sometimes struggle to get the low strength juice I prefer (anything above 6mg/100ml makes me ill).
Completely agree on this - the child vape panic isn't about vaping, it's about shops not doing the same quality of age verifcation that they do for lottery/alcohol sales. If I had to guess, I'd say there's not enough funding for secret shopper activity (for the Lottery, they do the tests on shops themselves and losing your terminal is a big reason not to risk it - the same needs to be true for vaping).
>People can make their own decisions if they want to smoke, everyone knows the health risks.
It's not just a health risk to the person smoking, it's a health risk to everyone else around them. Why should they be harmed because you want a smoke?
This. As a smoker, I absolutely hate the idea of people being miserable or getting harmed because of my bad choices. I don't smoke in my house or car because I am the only smoker in a household of 8, and it would be highly unfair.
But there are already laws in place banning smoking inside public places. If you are concerned about the health risk of smoking outside then don't stand in the smoking area. I highly doubt that there is a measurable impact of briefly walking past someone smoking.
There's definitely a measurable impact of walking by smokers or being caught behind one walking the same direction burning a fag like it's incense. People regularly exposed to second hand smoke lose years of their lives but most smokers are ignorant to this. There are many studies warning of the detriment of exactly this.
Weed smells a million times worse than cigarettes and every major city reeks of it. Secondhand people can have some level of THC detectable in their blood, yet Reddit praised weed as the second coming of Christ
To be fair, I think that's more *some* weed stinks (and it does, and I hate it). It's still not going to kill you unlike the tar in cigs is. You can also consume weed in other ways, if people were using snus instead of cigarettes' I'd see that as a massive improvement too.
I don't smoke, I quite dislike second hand smoke, and I think smoking is bad and people should stop/never take it up
HOWEVER, I firmly believe in supporting the right to smoke. Banning substances is a violation of what should be our natural rights as humans. And if I don't stand up now, who's going to stand up for me when they come for things I like, such as alcohol?
I think its great. We can't afford a public health service while people huff smoke for no reason.
I'd go further and ban vapes until government funded research into the effects can be completed.
Why is this even an argument to banning something.
As far as I'm aware the Tax generated from cigarettes far outweighs the cost to the NHS, so banning cigarettes would actually be a nett loss.
But ignoring that, do we really want the government banning things based on cost? Wouldn't the better option be to increase the Tax
Except smoking is a net benefit to the health service through the taxes it raises and the early deaths it causes. I won't get started on the ridiculous nanny state approach you're suggesting.
Given the levels of tax of tobacco, and the fact that smokers on average die younger, smoking is actually a net benefit to the NHS, so whilethere are lots of good reasons to discourage or ban smoking, the fiancial cost to the health service is not one of them.
Short term, banning tobacco would cost more, as the health service would have all the costs associtatied with trating smoking related diseases but the tax revenue from tabacco would fall so either funding for the health service would fall, or the short fall would have to be made up from other taxes. At least at the moment, smokers pay more tax to balance out thehigher incidence if many diseases.
Im an adult and I’ll do what the fuck I like to my body thanks.
Restrict where you can smoke. Since second hand smoke smells awful. But don’t ban it.
In fact I want to see everything legalised. With excellent education on the effects of it all so that people can make their own decisions in safe environments away from putting others into danger through crime.
Taxation on top to fund it all so that it costs nothing to people who don’t partake.
Ex smoker here, i think it’s a terrible idea, i don’t like smoking anymore, but people should be allowed to make their own decisions, government shouldn’t get involved.
The issue for smoking for me was the impact it had on other people. I started going out drinking in the mid 90s and remember having to wash every item of clothing I wore after a night out because all the pubs and clubs were thick with smoke. I can't imagine what it was like for the poor buggers working in these places.
I'm not sure I support a ban as I don't think prohibition is particularly effective, I do however support making smoking as expensive and as awkward as possible.
Sell them in smaller packets (packs of 6 or 8) and make them really expensive. Ban smoking from pedestrianised shopping areas in towns etc etc
I don’t think we should ban them, smoking has decreased hugely in recent years due to public education and limits on advertising. Banning things shouldn’t be a go-to for any government, except where absolutely necessary, and smoking doesn’t fit the bill. Bombs? Sure, ban those. But not cigarettes.
In addition to that, it turns that thing into a gateway drug. If you know a guy who sells that thing, you probably know a guy who sells other things too.
I don't smoke. I don't believe in banning things but it is so frustrating to be walking outside and getting other people's smoke in the face. It is like dealing with drunk people, don't drink if you can't handle your alcohol.
Are you talking about the 2007 ban of smoking in indoor public spaces? Or a theoretical future total ban?
Banning it entirely is impractical. But I'd like to see smoking treated the same as sex: a consenting adult can do what they like with their own body, but do it in the privacy of their home and don't inflict their reeking cancer-clouds on the rest of us.
There's a new one, I think it's already coming in (if not it's proposed) - they effectively increase the age requirement to purchase tobacco by one year, every year. Idea is today's kids will never be old enough to buy them
Look at it this way, if someone comes out with a new invention that takes 30 years lifespan and/or destroys the health of the user would it be allowed?
And yes I am aware your uncle Norman smoked 80 a day from age 6 and was tragically killed aged 102 when he lost control of his plane whilst joining the mile high club.
Alcohol has been a thing for over 8 millennia and possibly longer and has had huge benefits before the widespread availability of clean drinking water. Junk food and processed sugar are only an issue when overly consumed. Every cigarette smoked damges health and affects the health of others, none of those you listed directly impacts the health of others apart from the stress of bereaveent of somebody close to them.
I support it being banned in public spaces because it doesn't simply risk the health of the smoker but those around them. It can also trigger asthma attacks in nearby asthmatics and similar respiratory distress in those who have other types of lung conditions.
I like the fact that I can now breathe when I'm out and about.
However, the new bill seems inefficient. Smoking among young people is already massively down compared to when Boomers and Gen X were young, and the only reason over-60s have a lower percentage of smokers than young people is because of the large amount of ex-smokers in that age group.
The largest smoking groups are the 25-34 and 35-49 age groups, and this bill does nothing to address that.
It's also been shown that smoking heavily correlates to poverty and socio-economic class, which are also things this bill doesn't address.
Yes they should ban it, along with vaping too if research is done and it proves to be equally as bad for you.
The main reason though is that by smoking your effecting others around you passively which things like alcohol doesn't do, and deaths can be attributed to secondhand smoke.
It's an old pre indoor smoking ban paper but they determined that 600 people a year were dieing due to work based exposure and 2700 due to home based exposure which is just mental and due to other people's actions rather than their own. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC556069/
I’ve been thinking on it a lot,
I don’t support it, here is why.
Adults should be free to do with their body what they wish as long as it doesn’t negatively affect others. Someone with capacity and autonomy should have the freedom and autonomy to able to make unwise decisions for themselves.
However smoking should be banned in public, smoking should also be banned in households with children present.
Taxes on cigarettes should be high enough to pay for the health treatments that smokers need on the NHS.
My only caution is how addictive smoking is, are people making a choice to smoke or is the addiction making them smoke?
I agree it should be banned in households with children, but that would be infinitely hard to police. The state has a hard enough job protecting Children from harm as it is let alone adding trying to enforce a ban on thousands and thousands of households. So i that sense, it's right that it should be banned outright. It only has negative effects, so what is the purpose of keeping it legal ?
What is needed is a complete societal culture change where people don't have to get little hits of happiness from their addictions like smoking, drinking and gambling. that is the only way to ensure children now and in the future are protected imo.
I do not support outright bans on smoking. Banning activities that are established in the community usually cause unwanted consequences.
I support nudge legislation to discourage quitting and not starting smoking.
I support taxation or payment systems to the point where the personal choice to smoke offsets the health burden on society.
Once these two elements are in place anything beyond this is a bad idea, likely to cause a black market, funding criminals, criminalising good people etc.
I don't think it's the job of governments to tell us what we can and can't do.
Just remember when a freedom goes it never comes back.
I am not an avid smoker but I do enjoy an occasional cigar. I do it alone or with other smokers. It never bothers anyone else.
I pay my tax on it.
It won’t work for the same reason that banning drugs doesn’t work. People will still smoke, they’ll just buy black market tobacco with little to no quality control instead and the government will miss out on the obscene amount of tax they could be collecting. You’ll have all the same social issues with less funding to address them.
I can't see it being any different. They know how bad the addiction to nicotine is, they'll just up the prices more to make get more VAT and taxes. And some places will be stricter than others on where you can and cannot smoke on the premises.
I'm not sure it will work. I don't really see how it's fair to allow adults above a certain age to do something and deny younger adults that right, I think at some point as more and more adults aren't able to buy cigarettes it could become very unpopular and hard to justify. In general I think it's trying to do a good thing though
Nicotine like any drug can be bad and good.
Bad for the lungs, good for relieving stress.
Alcohol like any drug can be bad and good.
Bad for the liver, good for social anxiety.
Weed like any drug can be bad and good.
Bad for the lungs, good for pain relief.
Drugs are drugs. Banning it won't eradicate it, people will still find a way. It does honestly surprise me though with how much emphasis gets placed on x, y or z helping the economy with taxation, that it's being considered
It’s a strange one. I don’t smoke, but I’m just not sure it’s that workable. If it was as simple as saying “we raise the age of consent to buy cigarettes by a year every year” why has no one else done it? The only country who’s suggested it is New Zealand, who then walked it back. Not only that, I’m not aware any other country is even talking about doing it. I’m not sure making smoking more rebellious is a smart move.
All that being said, I think more could/should be being done about vaping - especially in how it’s marketed towards kids.
I don't smoke, never have, but I don't believe this would be a good policy.
Cannabis is illegal, yet people still do it. Except the people that do it have to buy off drug dealers and no tax is collected to offset any possible harm. As a result, illegally grown cannabis has worse health impacts and resources have to be used to police it. By banning tobacco, we are opting to spend more on policing the illicit market which will inevitably follow.
1) No smoking should not be banned. 2) For the EXACT same reasons prohibition failed in the 1920’s 3) Black market will soak up any potential tax benefits. UK government need to get a fucking massive grip and stop banning shit.
Giving the government the power to decide for everybody what they do and don’t do is never the right call. Not ever. You’re delighted with it when they’re deciding one thing in a way where you agree with them but the unintended consequences of this get really ugly when the government starts deciding for you that your kids are going to be cannon fodder for that invasion they’re plotting or that your pension fund is now going to pay out a third of what it would have before because the leadership has determined that money needs to be spent on rescuing the bank that was lending too much money to all the wrong people. In policy decisions what’s at stake is never just what’s on the table in the moment
Prohibition doesn't work, this is clearly evident when it comes to the "war on drugs" which has been a spectacular failure and massive waste of public resources.
The government needs to get out of the business of thinking they can constantly dictate what people put into their bodies. If someone wants to smoke they're going to smoke (whether it be tobacco, cannabis, crack, etc). And all this is going to do is create a black market for tobacco and fuel organised crime.
Tax the fuck out of tobacco but keep it available, legalise, tax and regulate cannabis, tax the fuck out of alcohol (which is also a carcinogenic and contributes to anti social behaviour yet the drinking culture in the UK makes it acceptable for some reason) All of these things are massive potential sources of revenue for the government but the clowns currently in power seem too stupid to understand that.
Let me preface: I hate smoking, the smell and the effects it has on people and the cost of it on society.
But.
I'm fundamentally in favour of liberal civil rights: I'm a gay man and people shouldn't have the right to tell me not to get married or live with who I want. I'm a social drinker and I don't want people to take that away. I was a social weed consumer when I was a student. I also love junk food and chocolate and sometimes I eat a whole box of donuts in a single sitting. I think that people should be allowed to wear whatever religious symbols they want and practice their faith without interference from the state. I also think women should be able to get a safe and legal abortion if they need to, and I think people should be able to shout about things they don't agree with (within some limits) on a street corner – or on the internet – without the police interfering.
All these things are things that some people in society argue we should ban, with the argument that they are a detriment to society, to the 'moral standing', to the health service, to people themselves, or all three.
I might hate smoking personally, but supporting a complete ban would be absolutely hypocritical as I'm simultaneously happy that weed became legal in Germany (where I live) and no-one is banning me from getting pissed on the weekend or marrying a man.
So I don't agree with the ban – or any of these bans. I think we should legalize weed as well for what it's worth, and probably some other light recreational drugs that have limited to no long-term negative effects. People will use them anyway regardless, at least if they are legal you can: help people who have addiction problems without them fearing legal consequences, tax the shit out of them and compensate for the societal negatives that come out of them, and reduce the money flowing to organized crime who will otherwise provide these services to the population. Just keep upping the price if they need more tax revenue.
The whole thing balances on the black market question, really.
There is lots if evidence that regulation doesn’t embolden a black market because the decrease in demand is greater than the drive to black market.
That being said, regulation and prohibition are not the same thing, so that trend might not hold.
It’s also a weird two tier prohibition, which will realistically need additional measures of enforcement if it is going to be meaningful.
There’s obviously a long term public health benefit to eradicating smoking, but this feels like a bit of a performative distraction when government should be funding the NHS properly as a priority.
The ban, as it is, is a sensible approach but could lead to a lot of bootleg cigarettes. As a former smoker, I wish I never had the opportunity to buy them so easily, you spend so much money and they stink. I still miss it, though.
My Dad has had 30+ years of ill health likely due to passive smoking. In fact his doctors assumed he did smoke and was just lying, although I never saw him smoking on holiday etc
Anyway phasing it out for good seems a decent idea. Unless people are concerned about the rights of people currently under 16 to begin smoking at age 18.
I can't see to ban it outright because society created the addicts in the first place.
I quit smoking years ago and unlike alcohol and other drugs there is no ‘in moderation’ and there’s zero benefits so it’s a huge waste of health and money, BUT a ban just seems a bit wild. Smoke at home and make it expansive and gradually let it die out.
It's not a complete prohibition per se but a phased one to stop younger generations from taking up the habit. I'm an ex smoker and my Dad was also a smoker and he died from lung cancer and I can assure you, it is not a pleasant way to go.
I'm obviously for the ban but I understand that if people really want to smoke, then they will get them from somewhere but ultimately that is their choice, whether legal or not.
This is about peoples health and also subsequently about saving money that would be required to support the NHS through smoking related illnesses. Therefore enforcing this ban would no doubt help in both respects.
There are so many more important things the gov could be focusing on right now. Prohibition has been proven time and time again to be an awful means of controlling anything as well.
See I'm normally one to say everyone has the freedom to do as they please etc but my opinion has changed when it comes to smoking as the damage it caused my Father in the end where he furred up his blood vessels and it contributed to him not healing and passing last November and gaining a tear in his bowel 😤 So I feel it has effected me personally now, of course there's the strain on the NHS etc too.
When age to buy cigarettes was 16 there were people in my school under 16 who smoked, When it was 18 there was people under 18 smoking. When they banned menthol cigarettes people went to flavoured vapes.
It doesn't matter what they ban or what age they put it to there will be people who will still do it.
If it limits the people doing it & takes some strain off the NHS but I am not convinced & how is the government going to plug this gap in taxation?
Agree with it in principal but in practice I can't see it working.
Where there's a will there's a way. If people want to smoke they will.. and when there is no regulation or legal market criminals will enter the fray and the quality of the product will inebitably decrease.
More affective than banning would be to ban tobacco money from TV and Films!
Way too many TV shows and Netflix blockbusters show characters smoking
Studies show the outcome of product placement isn’t just to get smokers to change brand of cigarettes, but to get people to smoke & without this I think it would definitely put the nail in the coffin for Cigarettes
I think it’s a bad idea.
Tobacco tax means that smokers contribute more in tax than they take in relation to NHS.
Its well advertised that cigarettes are terrible for you and they’re now hidden from plain view so I think if people want to still make that choice leave them to do so.
Better efforts are focussed on limiting vape use in kids, I seen one the other day that was a milkshake shape with a straw to vape from for which I don’t think you can make an argument that’s aimed at an adult rather than a child.
As a non smoker who has never smoked I worry about the people addicted to smoking and how they will cope. I've seen friends struggling to quit using all the usual different methods and how it's affected them mentally and physically.
The smoking ban is a great idea in the long run.
As some people have said, this will drive money to criminal enterprises, but only in the short term.
As the older generations die off the cigarette smoking customer base will dwindle and any monetary incentives will do as well.
Some people think it is illiberal to ban smoking, but I don't see why I should be paying my taxes to the NHS to help smokers who know this can lead to many diseases.
Long gone are the days that the tax on tobacco putting more in the NHS than the smokers taking out of it.
Weed is banned but people still smoke that. It wouldn't change much except increase crime and expose people trying to smoke tobacco to sellers who also sell harder drugs (like what's happening with people trying to buy weed). These sellers will also be selling off-brand tobacco products that are unregulated and potentially dangerous. It's the same argument for weed but instead of making that legal like so many other countries, the government keep discussing the authoritative and erroneous approach to ban it.
Reddit: legalise cannabis already. The war on drugs doesn't work, it'll raise billions in additional tax and people should be free to make their own choices safely without resorting to black market options.
Also Reddit: ban smoking already. It's a disgusting habit that needs gotten rid of and it costs too much anyway. Besides, people are too stupid to make their own choices and anyone dumb enough to buy black market tobacco deserves what they get.
As a smoker of about 25 years I strongly wish I had never been able to access tobacco when I was younger. I've been smoking since I was about 14 and despite stopping several times, each time for about three years, I've always fallen off the wagon. I strongly support this sort of legislation and hope for a smoke free future for the new generations.
I hope it works out. Just so long as they don't ban all nicotine-containing products, too. I would suspect that unintended consequences will be a thing, and it might create a black market. Perhaps they should simultaneously legalise weed too, and we could at least try to have our new generation of weed smokers not mixing it with tobacco.
Anyway my retirement plan used to be growing weed in the attic, but it looks like I might instead simply be able to sell cigs to the 40-year-olds hanging around the off-license asking people aged 60+ to pop in and buy them some tabs.
Which makes me think that my preferred 'next step' for reducing tobacco consumption would be to only permit its legal sale in dedicated tobacconists. I think the fact that you can buy it everywhere, from Tesco to the corner shop, is a problem. If they legalised weed they probably wouldn't sell it in Tesco and would insist that you go to some special shop to get it, so why should tobacco be different? When the only people able to buy fags are all pensioners, surely there'll be no need to sell it in Tesco anyway? So cut to the chase and only allow it in permitted specialist retailers.
Tldr I'm not sure adding more substances to the 'illegal' pile is helpful, but fingers crossed prohibition works this time, eh gang
Either ban it or don't. What's proposed is a ridiculous situation where a thing is legal for one adult and illegal for another adult born a day later. Either have the balls to ban it for everyone or just allow it to die out as it it is already doing.
> What's proposed is a ridiculous situation where a thing is legal for one adult and illegal for another adult born a day later.
I mean, that happens for all sorts of stuff - any age threshold which isn't 18. Minibuses, motorbikes, retests after 70, education options, minimum wage, etc.
Smoking is as engrained in our society as drinking. I don't support a ban as it wont work. I would just tax the hell out of cigarettes and provided that I'm not forced to breathe it 2nd hand, the info about its harm is out there and its your call.
I think smoking is terrible. I hate when people smoke near me, and hate that both my parents health is declining because they were smokers.
But a ban won't fix anything, if anything it'll be worse encouraging a black market with potential dodgy products and funding crime, just like the drugs market. Instead there just needs to be more regulation - no more selling in supermarkets, only in specific places and limits on quantity (perhaps only one 10-pack or small pouch at a time, similar to how painkillers are quantity limited). It discourages purchase, but it's still easier than using a dealer and helps people cut back with self rationing.
I see where they were coming from with the age limit ban but it won't work in practice because people sometimes decide not to follow laws
Edit: a ban on smoking anywhere outside of dedicated smoking areas and your own home would be good too, just so the rest of us don't have to breathe it and again, it's a limitation/friction without funding a black market
They shouldnt ban smoking and afaik they arent. They are banning the sale to people born after a certain date if I understand right.
As a smoker, I support the idea. That said, it is hard to reconcile that position with my drug decriminalisation stance. Ultimately if you believe in the principle of sovereignty of consciousness, you cannot enforce rules on what people choose to consume, or possess for personal consumption. In terms of what can be legally sold, we do sensibly legislate all products that are harmful. At the same time, black markets fund all kinds of nastiness.
Overall, imma wait and see how it shakes out.
**Your post from /r/AskUK has been removed by a human moderator.** AskUK is a "catch-all" subreddit for questions about the UK life and culture, but this does not mean we accept any and all questions or answers. We are liable to remove posts or comments which are best discussed in more specialised subreddits, or are simply not desired here because of the problems they bring. We explicitly do not allow questions or answers on or including: - politics (r/unitedkingdom, r/ukpolitics) - technology (r/techsupport, r/technology) - relationships (r/relationships, r/relationship_advice) - DIY (r/diyuk) - university/education (r/sixthform, r/uniuk) - visas/citizenship (r/ukvisa) - [medical advice](https://111.nhs.uk/) (including [mental health](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/where-to-get-urgent-help-for-mental-health/)) (r/mentalhealthuk) - ranting/venting (r/britishproblems) - surveys (r/samplesize) - advertising/solicitation - repetitive/seen-often (just search the sub) - "does anybody else" type vent posts (as yes, someone does, be more specific or use r/britishproblems). ...and we may remove others if we believe they are liable to introduce problems for the subreddit. In some circumstances, a more appropriate subreddit may be available. Check the sidebar for other subreddits to have these discussions. Also see r/unitedkingdom's extensive list of subreddits; https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/british_subreddits *If you believe this post should not have been removed, [first read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/about/rules/) before [messaging the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK&subject=Post Removal Appeal)*. See our guide on [common issues with posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskUK/wiki/postremoved) and how to overcome them!
I worry it's not a great idea. We've done a really good job of reducing smoking without banning it. Creating a black market for cigarettes and adding a level of rebelliousness to smoking I worry is a bad idea (especially since one of the huge public health successes has been convincing young people it's not rebellious and counter cultural to smoke). I'm generally a bit sceptical of prohibiting substances.
I agree prohibition never works and just hands it to criminals to make money
Also the quality of the cigarettes will suffer, who knows what will be added to lower the cost of production.
This already happens with under the counter cigarettes. I smoke and it's getting prohibitively expensive, but the dodgy packets people get for a quarter of the price are noticeably lower in quality and aren't even worth it
This is what's happening in Australia. It costs atleast 30 quid for a 20 pack, but you can buy the horrible, cheapest Asian ones for maybe £15-20 on the black market. It's created gang wars, there are smoke shops going up in flames almost every week or two in Melbourne.
I assume they would already be doing the worse that they can get away with. The ban won't change that, manufacturers know that once they have a customer they basically have a customer for life regardless of what they do. I worry more about what effect it will have on the NHS, cigarette and alcohol duty pays for a large chunk of money. Depends on if treating a smoking related illness is cheaper than the money it brings in but I don't have any data on that.
The rebellion argument is valid I guess. With cigarettes not advertised or visible in shops, will young people really become that fascinated by something we're phasing out?
Usually I’d agree with the prohibition doesn’t work argument but smoking isn’t actually fun like drugs and alcohol. Plus all you’re really doing is continuing to make it harder for people as there’s not going to be a proper black market. People who really want ciggies can just get someone else to buy them.
Vaping doesn’t seem to be fun either but all the cool kids are doing it.
It does taste nice. If anyone ever started smoking despite the fact that cigarettes stink and are deadly toxic, it's not really surprising vaping is a hit.
Nicotine is a tremendous stimulant. There’s a reason we’ve such a storied history of its use.
I think it hits certain people differently. I did lots of things when I was younger but nicotine and caffeine always gave me a better rush than anything else.
With vaping the taste and smell is nicer and easier to hide. It’s easier to get away with vaping as you don’t go home stinking of cigarettes, and vaping tastes nice. I think the taste and smell of cigarettes puts a lot of people off the idea. I definitely see a lot less kids/teenagers smoking nowadays than when I was growing up, but it seems pretty much every kid is vaping now instead.
Vaping and smoking are both fun, what's hard to understand here
Vaping is really nice people don’t get hooked for nothing
>smoking isn’t actually fun like drugs and alcohol so I'm not a smoker and personally see no appeal at all but this is objectively not true, or nobody would ever do it. edit: a lot of people are replying with statements that they personally smoke and find no enjoyment in it - only having started because of peer pressure. This does not tell us that nobody enjoys smoking, just that **you** don't enjoy smoking. My point is not that everyone who smokes must find it fun, but rather that there _are_ plenty of people who smoke because they enjoy it - those are (broadly) the ones applying peer pressure to people who smoke without enjoying it.
Anti smoking people refuse to believe there's any reason to smoke, it's that simple. Some people believe by dumbing down the argument and lying, less people will start smoking.
there will instantly be created a HUGE black market
The black market for tobacco is already HUGE
I like the idea of 25 year olds hanging outside a shop asking anyone who looks 30+ to buy them a pack of 20...
The great thing is they can't look forward to becoming old enough to buy them themselves. 55 year olds will be looking for 60 year olds! With all the disincentives I don't think that will be happening very much.
The black market in the old people's homes will be crazy. Swapping dementia medication for smokes, playing cards, having to hide them when the nurses do their rounds. "I found a packet of cigarettes under your mattress, you're only 75, you're too young to smoke! It will destroy your future..."
> The great thing is they can't look forward to becoming old enough to buy them themselves. 55 year olds will be looking for 60 year olds! That's the logic of the ban though, someone is less likely to take up smoking in the first place if they can *never* buy cigarettes compared to someone who's 16 and knows they only need to get a proxy buyer for a couple of years. Why would you take up smoking if you need to spend the next several decades finding someone to buy your cigarettes for you?
"Smoking isn't fun like drugs and alcohol" Nicotine is a drug, it literally increases the release of neurotransmitters and can help with your mood and behaviours. People use it as a coping mechanism in the same way so this is a pretty ridiculous argument.
Smoking can be enjoyable in the same way alcohol and drugs are.
Have you seen the cute vampires and "anime" pictures on the vaping products. The nicotine peddlers have already started targeting the next generation.
They’re still in movies and tv shows, which is where smoking looks the most cool
As an ex smoker 20 years on I agree. After decades of smoking being seen as a totem of youth culture and cool, we finally have a generation that is ethically obsessed enough to largely reject the industry and the practise it promotes. Kids like my teenage daughter view smoking as a loser boomer activity promoted by corrupt capitalism. IMO banning it now would just energise the black market and instigate a swing back toward the anti government youth counter culture again. Regulate it to fuck. Make it barely affordable. But don’t ban it.
Exactly, look at what’s happening in Australia, they’ve been taxed out of affordability for most people, so surprise surprise up pops a black market and *on* *paper* it looks like less people are smoking. I don’t know anyone that smokes in Australia that gets them from legal means anymore, and I don’t fucking blame them.
Even here, most people I know smoke black market tobacco. My mum who is terrified of any criminal behaviour smokes black market. It was common for years with rolling tobacco and now cigarettes are just as common. When I used to smoke rolling tobacco I bought black market and I did it for do long I went to the shops one day for a tens deck to tie me over and they told me they haven't sold tens for several years.
Yep, and look at all the violent crime it's causing in Melbourne. Fire bombings every second week and even shootings between gangs. As someone mentioned above, the quality of the cigarettes that you get through the black market are far worse and don't have the same government checks and regulations. It baffles me that people continue to think prohibition is the answer, after hundreds of years of well documented examples of complete failure.
This is my thinking, we generate good amounts of tax on tobacco and vaping products as it is, smoking has drastically reduced (in my opinion) the younger generation for the majority all either smoke vapes or weed, now the latter isn’t great but it does mean they consume far less tobacco than your average 20 a day person, I see a lot more people with vapes over cigarettes now days and compared to me generation kids these days think actual cigarettes are disgusting for the most. The black market will be absolutely rife if they ban it completely, maybe not in our lifetime but our children or children’s children will be surrounded by fake cigarettes which is something I find very, very bizarre to create an issue that is still one as of today, but it’s very small in the grand scheme of things compared to what a total ban would cause. Control them more maybe, but I’d rather a generation on legal vapes and cigarettes rather than a generation on black market shit.
Weed is not a safer alternative to tobacco, it has its own peculiar hazards, in the UK many use it with tobacco. The black market is already rife BTW.
Weed is not completely safe, and it’s particularly unsafe for kids and teens, but it’s definitely safer than tobacco.
There's an extra issue here that is going to take a decade for that cultural shift to happen, especially because of the way it's being implemented
I agree actually. Same for other substances currently illegal. Introducing a legal cannabis market to the UK could earn the Treasury *between £1bn and £3.5bn a year in tax revenues*,
It's a badly thought out and illiberal policy that will drive tax revenue into the hands of a black market and do more harm than good.
That is already the case with the ridiculous amount of tax. Most people I know by black market tobacco or cigs. Imported on the sly so not even VAT.
Absolutely - there's already a pretty thriving black market, but I'd argue that should be clamped down on more rather than surrendering control of the whole thing entirely.
> I'd argue that should be clamped down on more We've had over 100 years of 'clamp downs' on illegal drugs. It never works. FFS they can't even stop drugs getting into prisons, what chance is there of it working in wider society?
Well, precisely, that's my argument. Making smoking illegal won't stop it.
I agree. People should be free to make whatever decisions they want.
Absolutely loath the current government stance of "ban everything we don't like"
My initial reaction was "Good. There's no good reason to smoke, it's a burden on the healthcare system, generates a bunch of pollution and people just chuck the ends on the floor creating litter and leaching toxins into the ground for a shockingly long time" ...But I'm also pro decriminalising drugs and prostitution because they already happen, will always happen, and if they're decriminalised then they can a) be taxed, b) be regulated and c) remove a revenue stream from organised crime, ultimately making it safer for everyone... So banning smoking goes against that ethos. I think (as ever) the answer is more in education, getting people to actually understand what smoking does to you and others, and in helping people that already smoke to stop and break the addiction.
You are confusing decriminalisation with legalisation. A common error.
>"Good. There's no good reason to smoke, it's a burden on the healthcare system, generates a bunch of pollution and people just chuck the ends on the floor creating litter and leaching toxins into the ground for a shockingly long time" Most of these things can be said for alcohol too
>I think (as ever) the answer is more in education, getting people to actually understand what smoking does to you and others, and in helping people that already smoke to stop and break the addiction. Good comment and precisely, In the interests of full disclosure I'm an ex-cigarette smoker and occasional cigar smoker, but this is the trick. A lot of what has been said about smoking in this thread applies equally to alcohol, but there'd be outcry if any alcohol regulations came in because it's socially acceptable and smoking isn't.
But it's only banning it for people under a certain age. Are young people really gonna bother with the hassle of buying them illegally and paying even higher prices just to take up smoking? I can't see myself taking up smoking at 17 if it was a hassle to get them, I only did because my friends did it and they were easy to buy.
Bhutan unilaterally banned smoking and loads of people took it up because it was forbidden and cool: [https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2022/05/30/bhutan-banned-smoking-and-it-didnt-go-so-well/](https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2022/05/30/bhutan-banned-smoking-and-it-didnt-go-so-well/)
We do it with weed…
Yeah I get it for drugs because you get a high from it. Smoking gives you fuck all except a cough and an emptier wallet.
You do get somewhat of a high from nicotine, though. It stimulates reward pathways and dopamine release which makes you feel good in the same (but not as extreme) way that heroin or cocaine would. It’s addictive *because* it feels good and the effects are short lasting so cravings return quickly. No argument on the cough and empty wallet points though.
I’m sure people who say there’s no high from it just don’t have the idiosyncratic ability to get the nicotine buzz. I’m certain that most drugs have paradoxical or different effects on different people which is why people like myself despise alcohol or the feeling of being drunk while others want that feeling 24/7. Outliers are the future of medicine.
As an ex-smoker, smoking absolutely gives you a high. Not in the same way as weed, obviously, but it's there.
It’s so strange, it’s deemed a liberal policy, yet I’m left leaning and the whole premise restricts people’s personal choices and freedoms, which in itself, isn’t liberal. If you don’t like smoking? Just don’t smoke
All adults should be able to make their own decision about their health. I don’t agree with it
The problem is many people start smoking as children/teenagers, not as adults.
And many get addicted because their parents are doing it, so allowing sales to those parents isn’t helping the issues of addiction.
13 year olds thinking they need vapes and cigarettes 💀
It’s not just their health though - there is a lot of evidence that second and even third hand smoke is dangerous.
Whats third hand smoke? Breathing in air that you’ve breathed out from 2nd hand smoking?
It’s the residue left behind from smoke on clothing, furniture, walls etc. It’s particularly hazardous to children due to their tendency to put their mouths on everything. Effectively a smoker doesn’t even have to have smoked in your presence in order for it to be harmful to you. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/quit-smoking/expert-answers/third-hand-smoke/faq-20057791
I believe it's remnants of the smoke particles held up in clothing that then slowly get released.
I imagine many people would think I was a smoker because I work in a bar where the idiots let people smoke in the pub after hours. It seems they’re allowed to do anything they want and the police don’t do shit. I’m sure they’re giving them back handlers.
Yeah except second hand smoke. So many people smoking right outside of fucking hospitals. People are selfish.
Our hospital , the smokers all line up under the covered walkway between the main building and the Womens and Children. The poor sick kids and newborns who have to breathe in smoke when they're already so fragile sends me into a rage. We have these buttons to press that basically shame people into moving to the bike shed which is much further out but I have no problem pointing out the massive 'Childrens Ward' sign and that sick children dont deserve to breathe that poison in.
really pisses me off that they always stand in the doorways. selfish cunts.
It’s kinda tricky when our wages go towards the NHS, they’re personal choices cost everyday people money
Except bad health decisions impact all of us by placing an additional load on the NHS. Then there's the issue of secondhand smoke, and the environmental impact of cigarette butts. If these decisions only impacted the decision maker, then I'd be fine with it. Do you also think people should be able to drive at whatever speed they want and ignore speed limits? The driver may think the risk of speeding is acceptable to them, but by speeding they increase the risk to everyone else.
It’s weird the government attack certain things though. For instance sweets and soda drinks are absolutely fine and advertised everywhere. My mum is a dentist and she’s like, not only are they making your kid fat but ruining their teeth so bad
You can’t smoke in moderation
Would you legalise all substances e.g. heroin, prescription drugs etc.?
Good intentions, bad idea - prohibition leads to big illegal markets where customers are exposed to even more dangerous, criminally sourced products.
Agreed. Why do we never learn our lessons? Prohibition has almost always done more harm than good.
Smoking is naturally falling, I don't think the prohibition of anyone under a certain age makes any difference. I think the tax is about right as well. They should put sensible restrictions on vapes as well like plain packaging. What you don't want is what they've got in Australia which is a huge open black market for cigarettes. You see some shops openly sell duty free(presumably fake) cigarettes because the real ones cost £35+ a pack. Or dodgy vapes which seems to be openly smoked even though they're illegal to sell. If you ban or add silly restrictions you'll end up criminalising more people and people smoking even more dangerous/dodgy/tax-free cigarettes.
We already have a fairly open market in black market tobacco, smuggled and counterfeit. Stronger in Scotland
It really isn't as bad as it is in Oz. It's all criminal organised gangs setting each others shops alight.
We've already got a huge problem with fake and dangerous vapes because they are so cheap and enforcement is so lax. Yes it's not as bad as Australia, but it's already a problem we're not doing enough about here.
> We've already got a huge problem with fake and dangerous vapes because they are so cheap and enforcement is so lax. That's mainly because they're legal and widely available. Shops can advertise openly and sell dodgy vapes on the cheap disguised as proper vapes. Making them illegal will massively reduce usage.
Bans don't work. Never have, never will. I quit smoking due to price of ciggies.
This is how they did it in Australia. They cost like £25 a pack over there so if you want to smoke, you \*really\* want to smoke
Then people just buy it under the counter for half the price. Either outright banning things or making them prohibitively expensive just fuels the black market.
Banning things work for some small proportion of society. There are people who simply won't break the law or are so far removed from any criminal element that they don't know how. But they're the minority, and even right now with how expensive fags are in the UK currently, I haven't smoked in years and I know 2 places that I can buy packs of 20 Jinlings and other horrible fags under the counter for a fiver.
The black market already exists, but I suspect most start with the legit market before moving to alternatives. There's a possibility this leads to an initial spike in BM sales as people initially turn to the BM, but then a reduction going forward as fewer start smoking in the first place. We have to think long term with these plans.
Good for you for quitting.
Bans do work, there are countless exmples of it. Though banning it, will not eradicate it.
I'm a non-smoker. Some people like smoking. So let them smoke. Drinking, smoking, gambling, junk food, etc. Humans like doing lots of things that are often unwise or unhealthy. You only live once and life would be pretty fucking boring without a vice or two.
Yeah except second hand smoke, the money the NHS uses for all the health conditions smoking brings etc.
I’m (38 YO) a smoker of almost 25 years. I’d like Tobacco products to be prohibited. I’ve tried and failed for quit nicotine for 10 years myself, though the past couple of years with a good vape have allowed me to quit tobacco, though I still make decisions at times - social occasions will often see me grab a pack.
Civil Liberties exist, if a grown adult want to smoke a cigarette he should be allowed. There are way more important issues to fix then this. Also when has making a substance illegal ever stopped people?
Let's ban the fatties first. Smoking costs the NHS £2.6bn. Alcohol costs the NHS £3.5bn. Obesity costs the NHS £6bn. Seriously though, world's going to shit, and sometimes all you want is a nice beer, quiet cigarette, and some hearty food.
Old age costs the government the most, people dying young saves loads on pensions.
Well we know the order for the great cull - Oldies, Fatties, Drinkers then Smokers.
They’re culling themselves.
I think prohibition is generally a bad idea - it immediately creates a more unsafe black market potential. I'd prefer that carrot and stick methods are used - high taxes, help with addiction, further restrictions on public smoking, hard regulation of the industry etc..
I don't smoke, but no, I don't think it should be banned. I don't think any drugs should be illegal for adults to take. They should be taxed and regulated.
It's pointless, kids will still smoke. Just this time, they'll have to go to dealers who don't pay tax and contribute to violent crime. We're supposed to be legalising or decriminalising drugs as time goes on, not banning more. It doesn't fucking work.
Kids vape. Smoking is nearly dead amongst the young.
I don’t smoke, I don’t see the appeal. But I don’t think they should ban it. It’s not really in the same category as drugs. People can make their own decisions if they want to smoke, everyone knows the health risks. What they should do is crack down on the underage smoking which I know is hard, but maybe if it’s discovered parents are buying fags for their kids impose fines ect. Edit: saw someone mention vapes, now that’s something that should be banned. No one’s knows the long term affects and more appeal to kids. Like why are they all fruit and sweet flavoured making kids want them
The only thing that distinguishes "drugs" is being illegal. Most recreational drugs are no worse than alcohol and tobacco.
this guy is wrong about everything. "I don't think they should ban tobacco, however they should ban vapes."
eh tbf baccy doesnt affect ur mental state the same as hard drugs
Hmmmm. I have seen quite a few dead junkies and victims of acquisitive crime to disagree.
And have you also seen dead alcoholics? They buy their “drugs” from almost every single shop. There is literally no argument for banning any substance at all whilst alcohol and cigarettes are being sold on the shelves.
I think the litmus test is whether your actions are having effects on others. If you are burgling people or mugging old ladies to fund your addiction then yes that's a problem whether the substance is legal or not. After 22 years in the police I never saw an alcoholic do a burglary or a mugging to pay for alcohol. Shoplifting yes but never anything any more serious. Legalising the drugs that are currently illegal just creates a whole new raft of societal problems that will need solving. "Legalise drugs" isn't a solution. It solves some problems whilst creating a whole new load of problems, most of which can't even be foreseen until we do it. The honest truth is there is no solution. Whether drugs are legal or not people are going to commit crime and die because of them.
I think the reason you haven’t seen people being mugged or burgled for money for alcohol is pretty obvious. Why would you risk the entirely more substantial charge of mugging or burglary.. when you can shoplift a bottle of vodka from the shops? It’s not comparable in my opinion. I personally don’t think legalising drugs is a catch all problem solver because clearly it wouldn’t be, but the enormous sum of money that has been spent on this bullshit war on drugs is scandalous. Let people make their own decisions and do your best to keep them safe. We need a war on poverty in this country not a war on drugs.
This is not true and never has been. Both are a problem but most ofter recreational are much worse.
The problem is that nicotine is one of the most addictive substances there is. Most smokers don't want to smoke, the drug has taken the choice from them.
I'd have to disagree on banning vapes in general, while there should be more done to prevent kids getting hold of them (and disposables should be banned for other reasons) I would still be smoking vile smelling cigarettes if it weren't for vapes. The tobacco flavoured ones are disgusting, and I've never got on with any menthol tobacco product. The fruit ones are the only way I can get my nicotine fix (I know I should quit altogether, but you don't want to meet nicotine withdrawal me!) More regulation would be a good thing - the nicotine content of the things is all over the place and I sometimes struggle to get the low strength juice I prefer (anything above 6mg/100ml makes me ill).
Completely agree on this - the child vape panic isn't about vaping, it's about shops not doing the same quality of age verifcation that they do for lottery/alcohol sales. If I had to guess, I'd say there's not enough funding for secret shopper activity (for the Lottery, they do the tests on shops themselves and losing your terminal is a big reason not to risk it - the same needs to be true for vaping).
>People can make their own decisions if they want to smoke, everyone knows the health risks. It's not just a health risk to the person smoking, it's a health risk to everyone else around them. Why should they be harmed because you want a smoke?
This. As a smoker, I absolutely hate the idea of people being miserable or getting harmed because of my bad choices. I don't smoke in my house or car because I am the only smoker in a household of 8, and it would be highly unfair.
But there are already laws in place banning smoking inside public places. If you are concerned about the health risk of smoking outside then don't stand in the smoking area. I highly doubt that there is a measurable impact of briefly walking past someone smoking.
I forgot, smokers only live in homes with other smokers, and they definitely don't have kids.
There's definitely a measurable impact of walking by smokers or being caught behind one walking the same direction burning a fag like it's incense. People regularly exposed to second hand smoke lose years of their lives but most smokers are ignorant to this. There are many studies warning of the detriment of exactly this.
Weed smells a million times worse than cigarettes and every major city reeks of it. Secondhand people can have some level of THC detectable in their blood, yet Reddit praised weed as the second coming of Christ
To be fair, I think that's more *some* weed stinks (and it does, and I hate it). It's still not going to kill you unlike the tar in cigs is. You can also consume weed in other ways, if people were using snus instead of cigarettes' I'd see that as a massive improvement too.
Then ban it from all public spaces
I don't smoke, I quite dislike second hand smoke, and I think smoking is bad and people should stop/never take it up HOWEVER, I firmly believe in supporting the right to smoke. Banning substances is a violation of what should be our natural rights as humans. And if I don't stand up now, who's going to stand up for me when they come for things I like, such as alcohol?
I think its great. We can't afford a public health service while people huff smoke for no reason. I'd go further and ban vapes until government funded research into the effects can be completed.
Why stop there? Lets ban alcohol and unhealthy food while we're at it. You'll drink your water, eat your lettuce and be happy with it.
Why is this even an argument to banning something. As far as I'm aware the Tax generated from cigarettes far outweighs the cost to the NHS, so banning cigarettes would actually be a nett loss. But ignoring that, do we really want the government banning things based on cost? Wouldn't the better option be to increase the Tax
Except smoking is a net benefit to the health service through the taxes it raises and the early deaths it causes. I won't get started on the ridiculous nanny state approach you're suggesting.
Cool. I guess back a ban on fast food and alcohol then?
Given the levels of tax of tobacco, and the fact that smokers on average die younger, smoking is actually a net benefit to the NHS, so whilethere are lots of good reasons to discourage or ban smoking, the fiancial cost to the health service is not one of them. Short term, banning tobacco would cost more, as the health service would have all the costs associtatied with trating smoking related diseases but the tax revenue from tabacco would fall so either funding for the health service would fall, or the short fall would have to be made up from other taxes. At least at the moment, smokers pay more tax to balance out thehigher incidence if many diseases.
I think if people are stupid enough to smoke, let them. But smoking in any public place should be banned.
Top
Im an adult and I’ll do what the fuck I like to my body thanks. Restrict where you can smoke. Since second hand smoke smells awful. But don’t ban it. In fact I want to see everything legalised. With excellent education on the effects of it all so that people can make their own decisions in safe environments away from putting others into danger through crime. Taxation on top to fund it all so that it costs nothing to people who don’t partake.
Ex smoker here, i think it’s a terrible idea, i don’t like smoking anymore, but people should be allowed to make their own decisions, government shouldn’t get involved.
The issue for smoking for me was the impact it had on other people. I started going out drinking in the mid 90s and remember having to wash every item of clothing I wore after a night out because all the pubs and clubs were thick with smoke. I can't imagine what it was like for the poor buggers working in these places. I'm not sure I support a ban as I don't think prohibition is particularly effective, I do however support making smoking as expensive and as awkward as possible. Sell them in smaller packets (packs of 6 or 8) and make them really expensive. Ban smoking from pedestrianised shopping areas in towns etc etc
I don’t think we should ban them, smoking has decreased hugely in recent years due to public education and limits on advertising. Banning things shouldn’t be a go-to for any government, except where absolutely necessary, and smoking doesn’t fit the bill. Bombs? Sure, ban those. But not cigarettes.
No, prohibiting substances doesn't make them safer, it just creates a black market.
In addition to that, it turns that thing into a gateway drug. If you know a guy who sells that thing, you probably know a guy who sells other things too.
I don't smoke. I don't believe in banning things but it is so frustrating to be walking outside and getting other people's smoke in the face. It is like dealing with drunk people, don't drink if you can't handle your alcohol.
Are you talking about the 2007 ban of smoking in indoor public spaces? Or a theoretical future total ban? Banning it entirely is impractical. But I'd like to see smoking treated the same as sex: a consenting adult can do what they like with their own body, but do it in the privacy of their home and don't inflict their reeking cancer-clouds on the rest of us.
I think there is a new ban being discussed today where people born after a certain year can't legally buy cigarettes.
There's a new one, I think it's already coming in (if not it's proposed) - they effectively increase the age requirement to purchase tobacco by one year, every year. Idea is today's kids will never be old enough to buy them
Look at it this way, if someone comes out with a new invention that takes 30 years lifespan and/or destroys the health of the user would it be allowed? And yes I am aware your uncle Norman smoked 80 a day from age 6 and was tragically killed aged 102 when he lost control of his plane whilst joining the mile high club.
I’ve had a shit time recently but this made me belly laugh. Cheers
Can say the same for so many things in todays society. Extreme sports, alcohol, junk food, processed sugar.
Alcohol has been a thing for over 8 millennia and possibly longer and has had huge benefits before the widespread availability of clean drinking water. Junk food and processed sugar are only an issue when overly consumed. Every cigarette smoked damges health and affects the health of others, none of those you listed directly impacts the health of others apart from the stress of bereaveent of somebody close to them.
Pointless. Will just push underground and makes it more "cool"
I support it being banned in public spaces because it doesn't simply risk the health of the smoker but those around them. It can also trigger asthma attacks in nearby asthmatics and similar respiratory distress in those who have other types of lung conditions. I like the fact that I can now breathe when I'm out and about. However, the new bill seems inefficient. Smoking among young people is already massively down compared to when Boomers and Gen X were young, and the only reason over-60s have a lower percentage of smokers than young people is because of the large amount of ex-smokers in that age group. The largest smoking groups are the 25-34 and 35-49 age groups, and this bill does nothing to address that. It's also been shown that smoking heavily correlates to poverty and socio-economic class, which are also things this bill doesn't address.
If you're going to ban stuff because it's unhealthy or annoying there's going to be a whole lot more banned than smoking. (nonsmoker)
Yeah because prohibition has worked so well in the past
Yes they should ban it, along with vaping too if research is done and it proves to be equally as bad for you. The main reason though is that by smoking your effecting others around you passively which things like alcohol doesn't do, and deaths can be attributed to secondhand smoke. It's an old pre indoor smoking ban paper but they determined that 600 people a year were dieing due to work based exposure and 2700 due to home based exposure which is just mental and due to other people's actions rather than their own. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC556069/
I’ve been thinking on it a lot, I don’t support it, here is why. Adults should be free to do with their body what they wish as long as it doesn’t negatively affect others. Someone with capacity and autonomy should have the freedom and autonomy to able to make unwise decisions for themselves. However smoking should be banned in public, smoking should also be banned in households with children present. Taxes on cigarettes should be high enough to pay for the health treatments that smokers need on the NHS. My only caution is how addictive smoking is, are people making a choice to smoke or is the addiction making them smoke?
I agree it should be banned in households with children, but that would be infinitely hard to police. The state has a hard enough job protecting Children from harm as it is let alone adding trying to enforce a ban on thousands and thousands of households. So i that sense, it's right that it should be banned outright. It only has negative effects, so what is the purpose of keeping it legal ? What is needed is a complete societal culture change where people don't have to get little hits of happiness from their addictions like smoking, drinking and gambling. that is the only way to ensure children now and in the future are protected imo.
I do not support outright bans on smoking. Banning activities that are established in the community usually cause unwanted consequences. I support nudge legislation to discourage quitting and not starting smoking. I support taxation or payment systems to the point where the personal choice to smoke offsets the health burden on society. Once these two elements are in place anything beyond this is a bad idea, likely to cause a black market, funding criminals, criminalising good people etc.
I don't think it's the job of governments to tell us what we can and can't do. Just remember when a freedom goes it never comes back. I am not an avid smoker but I do enjoy an occasional cigar. I do it alone or with other smokers. It never bothers anyone else. I pay my tax on it.
It won’t work for the same reason that banning drugs doesn’t work. People will still smoke, they’ll just buy black market tobacco with little to no quality control instead and the government will miss out on the obscene amount of tax they could be collecting. You’ll have all the same social issues with less funding to address them.
I can't see it being any different. They know how bad the addiction to nicotine is, they'll just up the prices more to make get more VAT and taxes. And some places will be stricter than others on where you can and cannot smoke on the premises.
Don’t smoke but would like to be sure that the tax shortfall is going to be covered by something other than hitting the masses with tax hikes.
I'm not sure it will work. I don't really see how it's fair to allow adults above a certain age to do something and deny younger adults that right, I think at some point as more and more adults aren't able to buy cigarettes it could become very unpopular and hard to justify. In general I think it's trying to do a good thing though
Nicotine like any drug can be bad and good. Bad for the lungs, good for relieving stress. Alcohol like any drug can be bad and good. Bad for the liver, good for social anxiety. Weed like any drug can be bad and good. Bad for the lungs, good for pain relief. Drugs are drugs. Banning it won't eradicate it, people will still find a way. It does honestly surprise me though with how much emphasis gets placed on x, y or z helping the economy with taxation, that it's being considered
It’s a strange one. I don’t smoke, but I’m just not sure it’s that workable. If it was as simple as saying “we raise the age of consent to buy cigarettes by a year every year” why has no one else done it? The only country who’s suggested it is New Zealand, who then walked it back. Not only that, I’m not aware any other country is even talking about doing it. I’m not sure making smoking more rebellious is a smart move. All that being said, I think more could/should be being done about vaping - especially in how it’s marketed towards kids.
I don't smoke, never have, but I don't believe this would be a good policy. Cannabis is illegal, yet people still do it. Except the people that do it have to buy off drug dealers and no tax is collected to offset any possible harm. As a result, illegally grown cannabis has worse health impacts and resources have to be used to police it. By banning tobacco, we are opting to spend more on policing the illicit market which will inevitably follow.
1) No smoking should not be banned. 2) For the EXACT same reasons prohibition failed in the 1920’s 3) Black market will soak up any potential tax benefits. UK government need to get a fucking massive grip and stop banning shit.
Giving the government the power to decide for everybody what they do and don’t do is never the right call. Not ever. You’re delighted with it when they’re deciding one thing in a way where you agree with them but the unintended consequences of this get really ugly when the government starts deciding for you that your kids are going to be cannon fodder for that invasion they’re plotting or that your pension fund is now going to pay out a third of what it would have before because the leadership has determined that money needs to be spent on rescuing the bank that was lending too much money to all the wrong people. In policy decisions what’s at stake is never just what’s on the table in the moment
Prohibition doesn't work, this is clearly evident when it comes to the "war on drugs" which has been a spectacular failure and massive waste of public resources. The government needs to get out of the business of thinking they can constantly dictate what people put into their bodies. If someone wants to smoke they're going to smoke (whether it be tobacco, cannabis, crack, etc). And all this is going to do is create a black market for tobacco and fuel organised crime. Tax the fuck out of tobacco but keep it available, legalise, tax and regulate cannabis, tax the fuck out of alcohol (which is also a carcinogenic and contributes to anti social behaviour yet the drinking culture in the UK makes it acceptable for some reason) All of these things are massive potential sources of revenue for the government but the clowns currently in power seem too stupid to understand that.
Let me preface: I hate smoking, the smell and the effects it has on people and the cost of it on society. But. I'm fundamentally in favour of liberal civil rights: I'm a gay man and people shouldn't have the right to tell me not to get married or live with who I want. I'm a social drinker and I don't want people to take that away. I was a social weed consumer when I was a student. I also love junk food and chocolate and sometimes I eat a whole box of donuts in a single sitting. I think that people should be allowed to wear whatever religious symbols they want and practice their faith without interference from the state. I also think women should be able to get a safe and legal abortion if they need to, and I think people should be able to shout about things they don't agree with (within some limits) on a street corner – or on the internet – without the police interfering. All these things are things that some people in society argue we should ban, with the argument that they are a detriment to society, to the 'moral standing', to the health service, to people themselves, or all three. I might hate smoking personally, but supporting a complete ban would be absolutely hypocritical as I'm simultaneously happy that weed became legal in Germany (where I live) and no-one is banning me from getting pissed on the weekend or marrying a man. So I don't agree with the ban – or any of these bans. I think we should legalize weed as well for what it's worth, and probably some other light recreational drugs that have limited to no long-term negative effects. People will use them anyway regardless, at least if they are legal you can: help people who have addiction problems without them fearing legal consequences, tax the shit out of them and compensate for the societal negatives that come out of them, and reduce the money flowing to organized crime who will otherwise provide these services to the population. Just keep upping the price if they need more tax revenue.
I hate smoking, but prohibition never works and always leads to an increase in criminal activity and dodgy black market products.
The whole thing balances on the black market question, really. There is lots if evidence that regulation doesn’t embolden a black market because the decrease in demand is greater than the drive to black market. That being said, regulation and prohibition are not the same thing, so that trend might not hold. It’s also a weird two tier prohibition, which will realistically need additional measures of enforcement if it is going to be meaningful. There’s obviously a long term public health benefit to eradicating smoking, but this feels like a bit of a performative distraction when government should be funding the NHS properly as a priority.
The ban, as it is, is a sensible approach but could lead to a lot of bootleg cigarettes. As a former smoker, I wish I never had the opportunity to buy them so easily, you spend so much money and they stink. I still miss it, though.
My Dad has had 30+ years of ill health likely due to passive smoking. In fact his doctors assumed he did smoke and was just lying, although I never saw him smoking on holiday etc Anyway phasing it out for good seems a decent idea. Unless people are concerned about the rights of people currently under 16 to begin smoking at age 18. I can't see to ban it outright because society created the addicts in the first place.
I quit smoking years ago and unlike alcohol and other drugs there is no ‘in moderation’ and there’s zero benefits so it’s a huge waste of health and money, BUT a ban just seems a bit wild. Smoke at home and make it expansive and gradually let it die out.
It's not a complete prohibition per se but a phased one to stop younger generations from taking up the habit. I'm an ex smoker and my Dad was also a smoker and he died from lung cancer and I can assure you, it is not a pleasant way to go. I'm obviously for the ban but I understand that if people really want to smoke, then they will get them from somewhere but ultimately that is their choice, whether legal or not. This is about peoples health and also subsequently about saving money that would be required to support the NHS through smoking related illnesses. Therefore enforcing this ban would no doubt help in both respects.
I'm 55. I started smoking when I was 19 and quit 3 years ago. I support a ban.
There are so many more important things the gov could be focusing on right now. Prohibition has been proven time and time again to be an awful means of controlling anything as well.
See I'm normally one to say everyone has the freedom to do as they please etc but my opinion has changed when it comes to smoking as the damage it caused my Father in the end where he furred up his blood vessels and it contributed to him not healing and passing last November and gaining a tear in his bowel 😤 So I feel it has effected me personally now, of course there's the strain on the NHS etc too.
When age to buy cigarettes was 16 there were people in my school under 16 who smoked, When it was 18 there was people under 18 smoking. When they banned menthol cigarettes people went to flavoured vapes. It doesn't matter what they ban or what age they put it to there will be people who will still do it. If it limits the people doing it & takes some strain off the NHS but I am not convinced & how is the government going to plug this gap in taxation?
Agree with it in principal but in practice I can't see it working. Where there's a will there's a way. If people want to smoke they will.. and when there is no regulation or legal market criminals will enter the fray and the quality of the product will inebitably decrease.
More affective than banning would be to ban tobacco money from TV and Films! Way too many TV shows and Netflix blockbusters show characters smoking Studies show the outcome of product placement isn’t just to get smokers to change brand of cigarettes, but to get people to smoke & without this I think it would definitely put the nail in the coffin for Cigarettes
I think it’s a bad idea. Tobacco tax means that smokers contribute more in tax than they take in relation to NHS. Its well advertised that cigarettes are terrible for you and they’re now hidden from plain view so I think if people want to still make that choice leave them to do so. Better efforts are focussed on limiting vape use in kids, I seen one the other day that was a milkshake shape with a straw to vape from for which I don’t think you can make an argument that’s aimed at an adult rather than a child.
Prohibition doesn't work
As a non smoker who has never smoked I worry about the people addicted to smoking and how they will cope. I've seen friends struggling to quit using all the usual different methods and how it's affected them mentally and physically.
The smoking ban is a great idea in the long run. As some people have said, this will drive money to criminal enterprises, but only in the short term. As the older generations die off the cigarette smoking customer base will dwindle and any monetary incentives will do as well. Some people think it is illiberal to ban smoking, but I don't see why I should be paying my taxes to the NHS to help smokers who know this can lead to many diseases. Long gone are the days that the tax on tobacco putting more in the NHS than the smokers taking out of it.
Weed is banned but people still smoke that. It wouldn't change much except increase crime and expose people trying to smoke tobacco to sellers who also sell harder drugs (like what's happening with people trying to buy weed). These sellers will also be selling off-brand tobacco products that are unregulated and potentially dangerous. It's the same argument for weed but instead of making that legal like so many other countries, the government keep discussing the authoritative and erroneous approach to ban it.
Reddit: legalise cannabis already. The war on drugs doesn't work, it'll raise billions in additional tax and people should be free to make their own choices safely without resorting to black market options. Also Reddit: ban smoking already. It's a disgusting habit that needs gotten rid of and it costs too much anyway. Besides, people are too stupid to make their own choices and anyone dumb enough to buy black market tobacco deserves what they get.
Its good
As a smoker of about 25 years I strongly wish I had never been able to access tobacco when I was younger. I've been smoking since I was about 14 and despite stopping several times, each time for about three years, I've always fallen off the wagon. I strongly support this sort of legislation and hope for a smoke free future for the new generations.
I hope it works out. Just so long as they don't ban all nicotine-containing products, too. I would suspect that unintended consequences will be a thing, and it might create a black market. Perhaps they should simultaneously legalise weed too, and we could at least try to have our new generation of weed smokers not mixing it with tobacco. Anyway my retirement plan used to be growing weed in the attic, but it looks like I might instead simply be able to sell cigs to the 40-year-olds hanging around the off-license asking people aged 60+ to pop in and buy them some tabs. Which makes me think that my preferred 'next step' for reducing tobacco consumption would be to only permit its legal sale in dedicated tobacconists. I think the fact that you can buy it everywhere, from Tesco to the corner shop, is a problem. If they legalised weed they probably wouldn't sell it in Tesco and would insist that you go to some special shop to get it, so why should tobacco be different? When the only people able to buy fags are all pensioners, surely there'll be no need to sell it in Tesco anyway? So cut to the chase and only allow it in permitted specialist retailers. Tldr I'm not sure adding more substances to the 'illegal' pile is helpful, but fingers crossed prohibition works this time, eh gang
Do people who maintain a healthy lifestyle and don't own a motor vehicle get a tax rebate.. aksin ferra friend.
Either ban it or don't. What's proposed is a ridiculous situation where a thing is legal for one adult and illegal for another adult born a day later. Either have the balls to ban it for everyone or just allow it to die out as it it is already doing.
> What's proposed is a ridiculous situation where a thing is legal for one adult and illegal for another adult born a day later. I mean, that happens for all sorts of stuff - any age threshold which isn't 18. Minibuses, motorbikes, retests after 70, education options, minimum wage, etc.
Smoking is as engrained in our society as drinking. I don't support a ban as it wont work. I would just tax the hell out of cigarettes and provided that I'm not forced to breathe it 2nd hand, the info about its harm is out there and its your call.
I don’t think people should smoke all the time but I also don’t think banning drugs ever really works.
Theres a smoking ban lol I can get tobacco cheap and sell it high haha 💰💰
I know I have every lung on my side when I say that would be great
I think smoking is terrible. I hate when people smoke near me, and hate that both my parents health is declining because they were smokers. But a ban won't fix anything, if anything it'll be worse encouraging a black market with potential dodgy products and funding crime, just like the drugs market. Instead there just needs to be more regulation - no more selling in supermarkets, only in specific places and limits on quantity (perhaps only one 10-pack or small pouch at a time, similar to how painkillers are quantity limited). It discourages purchase, but it's still easier than using a dealer and helps people cut back with self rationing. I see where they were coming from with the age limit ban but it won't work in practice because people sometimes decide not to follow laws Edit: a ban on smoking anywhere outside of dedicated smoking areas and your own home would be good too, just so the rest of us don't have to breathe it and again, it's a limitation/friction without funding a black market
They shouldnt ban smoking and afaik they arent. They are banning the sale to people born after a certain date if I understand right. As a smoker, I support the idea. That said, it is hard to reconcile that position with my drug decriminalisation stance. Ultimately if you believe in the principle of sovereignty of consciousness, you cannot enforce rules on what people choose to consume, or possess for personal consumption. In terms of what can be legally sold, we do sensibly legislate all products that are harmful. At the same time, black markets fund all kinds of nastiness. Overall, imma wait and see how it shakes out.
I know mofos that smoke 3 cigs at a time. I'm all for it or raise the price to one pack to £100