4 ms·

> You can kill yourself with alcohol and nicotine is one of _the_ most additive substances we know. Should be prohibit these as well? I understand this is a re

> You can kill yourself with alcohol and nicotine is one of _the_ most additive substances we know. Should be prohibit these as well? I understand this is a relatively extreme viewpoint, but yes. I believe nicotine should be prohibited. I think society would be better off if alcohol was prohibited too, but I understand the historical context behind that. Nicotine, unlike psychedelics, does not “open one’s mind” or have any long term benefits to anyone’s life like MDMA supposedly does. In fact, it seems to be one of the only drugs I can think of where everyone is constantly trying to get off of it, and literally no one is promoting it’s usage.

mancerayder 6y ago
The trouble with your reasoning here is the idea you can protect people from themselves. The second problem is that heart disease is the biggest killer, and there's no rational way to use the law to stop that. Extreme sports, fast cars, alcohol, boxing, hell, even gymnastics, unprotected sex.. you see where I'm going with this. What's moral is a separate question of, what's the best policy for society to keep people as safe as possible. Bootleg cigarettes and fines (prison?) are probably not those things. Besides, some people can smoke moderately or rarely and not get addicted or die. Finally, you're too soft on your alcohol prohibition stance, where you're saying you can see the benefits. Empirically, do you see the benefits in the creation of a criminal syndicate that still exists, a century later? History has spoken, prohibition causes harm.