6 ms·

I think broadly prohibition didn't work but smoking bans do. Where "work" means fewer people smoke and passive smoke.

parineum 9mo ago
Prohibition works to stop some people. It doesn't stop addicts from craving and it doesn't curb the appeal of the product. People who think tobacco/nicotine bans would work are people who think they don't have any positive effect associated with them. People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted. It's a drug, it feels good to do it. A tobacco/nicotine ban will end up exactly like aby other recreational drug prohibition.
- normie3000 9mo ago
  > People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted. Isn't this exactly what happens, and why cigarette advertising is banned in many countries, and why marketing child-friendly tobacco products is commonly restricted, and why there are even regulations/guidelines around portrayal of smoking on TV in some regions?
  - parineum 9mo ago
    People have been smoking for thousands of years.
    - prmoustache 9mo ago
      People have been stealing and killing other people as many years if not longer. That doesn't mean you cannot do a bit of legislation and obtain some positive results against that. I think not banning the cigarette and non reusable vape is the wrong solution but banning smoking in lots of public spaces has improved the situation, maybe not to curb consumption but at least non smokers can breath a little. I wish it would also applies to outdoors cafe/restaurant terraces too as smokers effectively ban to non smokers by spreading their poison around them. They could walk away for a couple of minutes to get their hit but they don't on purpose. There should be a radius around an outdoor terrace where smoking is effectively prohibited.
      - laken 9mo ago
        Outdoor cafes/restaurant terraces that allow smoking effectively are marketing to smokers. Smokers generally stay longer (therefore may order more), and basically are giving themselves dopamine at this venue, therefore creating associations to possibly draw them back in the future. These places could just not provide ashtrays and could just not allow smoking, but they do allow it, because it's good for business. If you really don't like it, you could just not visit these establishments. To these businesses, the benefit of allowing smoking doesn't outweigh the negatives (some people not liking it). Obviously you don't not like it enough to just not go there. Not a smoker, but i've never understood this puritanical attitude towards smoking and only smoking. Yeah, it's not great to breathe in an enclosed space, but in an outdoor space, I don't see how much worse it is than car exhaust, air quality, etc.
        prmoustache 9mo ago
        > If you really don't like it, you could just not visit these establishments. Well I go inside, because there are no establishment in my area that ban smoking in their terrace. > it's not great to breathe in an enclosed space, but in an outdoor space, It is exactly the same unless there is significant wind is in a direction that push the fumes away. Obviously it depends on how tightly the tables are put as well but it is just super annoying. I have a friend whose eyes turn red immediately when exposed to tobacco product fumes and he suffers way more than I do. Also it ruins the taste of food and drinks. > I don't see how much worse it is than car exhaust, air quality Usually those that are close to traffic and car exhaust are less popular than those that are less directly Unless you live in a complete smog, cigarettes/vapes fumes that goes directly to your face are always more annoying. You would have compared to sweaty and smelly bodies in a dance club you would have got a point.
      - parineum 9mo ago
        > People have been stealing and killing other people as many years if not longer. That doesn't mean you cannot do a bit of legislation and obtain some positive results against that. This thread is/was about prohibition of smoking. I was making the point that tobacco/nicotine is a drug that has positive psychoactive effects, that's why people use it. People seem to have this misconception that smoking is just some thing tobacco companies tricked people into doing and so prohibition would work. It wouldn't. We can already see in places where the prices of cigarettes create a nearly de-facto ban that it creates black markets and we know that black markets create crime.
tayo42 9mo ago
If that's how you you define work, prohibition worked.
thinkingemote 9mo ago
Alcohol prohibition did actually work. It reduced the amount of people who drank and it increased health. It increased safety for women and children and reduced violent crime on the streets and in the home. It reduced alcohol related diseases and death. People missed less work. Like with passive smoking, a ban on alcohol positively affects non-drinkers too. It was the organised crime side effects and societal unpopularity which lead to it's "failure". Alcohol prohibition continues to work in some countries today but I wouldn't want to live there. Ultimately it's a bio-ethics and freedom issue, issues that continue to raise their head from time to time here and there, e.g. coronavirus responses. Control of vaping could also be classed in this category.

Prohibition works to stop some people. It doesn't stop addicts from craving and it doesn't curb the appeal of the product. People who think tobacco/nicotine bans would work are people who think they don't have any positive effect associated with them. People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted. It's a drug, it feels good to do it. A tobacco/nicotine ban will end up exactly like aby other recreational drug prohibition.

normie3000 9mo ago
> People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted. Isn't this exactly what happens, and why cigarette advertising is banned in many countries, and why marketing child-friendly tobacco products is commonly restricted, and why there are even regulations/guidelines around portrayal of smoking on TV in some regions?
- parineum 9mo ago
  People have been smoking for thousands of years.
  - prmoustache 9mo ago
    People have been stealing and killing other people as many years if not longer. That doesn't mean you cannot do a bit of legislation and obtain some positive results against that. I think not banning the cigarette and non reusable vape is the wrong solution but banning smoking in lots of public spaces has improved the situation, maybe not to curb consumption but at least non smokers can breath a little. I wish it would also applies to outdoors cafe/restaurant terraces too as smokers effectively ban to non smokers by spreading their poison around them. They could walk away for a couple of minutes to get their hit but they don't on purpose. There should be a radius around an outdoor terrace where smoking is effectively prohibited.
    - laken 9mo ago
      Outdoor cafes/restaurant terraces that allow smoking effectively are marketing to smokers. Smokers generally stay longer (therefore may order more), and basically are giving themselves dopamine at this venue, therefore creating associations to possibly draw them back in the future. These places could just not provide ashtrays and could just not allow smoking, but they do allow it, because it's good for business. If you really don't like it, you could just not visit these establishments. To these businesses, the benefit of allowing smoking doesn't outweigh the negatives (some people not liking it). Obviously you don't not like it enough to just not go there. Not a smoker, but i've never understood this puritanical attitude towards smoking and only smoking. Yeah, it's not great to breathe in an enclosed space, but in an outdoor space, I don't see how much worse it is than car exhaust, air quality, etc.
      - prmoustache 9mo ago
        > If you really don't like it, you could just not visit these establishments. Well I go inside, because there are no establishment in my area that ban smoking in their terrace. > it's not great to breathe in an enclosed space, but in an outdoor space, It is exactly the same unless there is significant wind is in a direction that push the fumes away. Obviously it depends on how tightly the tables are put as well but it is just super annoying. I have a friend whose eyes turn red immediately when exposed to tobacco product fumes and he suffers way more than I do. Also it ruins the taste of food and drinks. > I don't see how much worse it is than car exhaust, air quality Usually those that are close to traffic and car exhaust are less popular than those that are less directly Unless you live in a complete smog, cigarettes/vapes fumes that goes directly to your face are always more annoying. You would have compared to sweaty and smelly bodies in a dance club you would have got a point.
    - parineum 9mo ago
      > People have been stealing and killing other people as many years if not longer. That doesn't mean you cannot do a bit of legislation and obtain some positive results against that. This thread is/was about prohibition of smoking. I was making the point that tobacco/nicotine is a drug that has positive psychoactive effects, that's why people use it. People seem to have this misconception that smoking is just some thing tobacco companies tricked people into doing and so prohibition would work. It wouldn't. We can already see in places where the prices of cigarettes create a nearly de-facto ban that it creates black markets and we know that black markets create crime.

tayo42 9mo ago

If that's how you you define work, prohibition worked.

thinkingemote 9mo ago

Alcohol prohibition did actually work. It reduced the amount of people who drank and it increased health. It increased safety for women and children and reduced violent crime on the streets and in the home. It reduced alcohol related diseases and death. People missed less work. Like with passive smoking, a ban on alcohol positively affects non-drinkers too. It was the organised crime side effects and societal unpopularity which lead to it's "failure". Alcohol prohibition continues to work in some countries today but I wouldn't want to live there. Ultimately it's a bio-ethics and freedom issue, issues that continue to raise their head from time to time here and there, e.g. coronavirus responses. Control of vaping could also be classed in this category.