6 ms·
As a former smoker (who quit for seven years and regrets taking it up again), and as a present-day vape user, wtf. This is a clear restriction on liberty. It ma
by alsetmusic 6mo ago
As a former smoker (who quit for seven years and regrets taking it up again), and as a present-day vape user, wtf. This is a clear restriction on liberty. It may be stupid that I do it. Just like many stupid decisions (junk food included), it ought to be my right to decide how to live.
Cut off production so cigarettes are no longer made or imported. Don't block me from them while letting others have them. (Not in UK)
It'd be kinda funny to see an early 1900s / USA-style mafia / gangster resurgence of bootleggers over cigs in the UK. Much lower stakes, but black markets are a thing.
Edit: added "while letting others have them"
- Sweepi 6mo ago>This is a clear restriction on liberty. So is banning the sale of leaded gasoline.
- reassess_blind 6mo agoThe head rush of the first leaded gasoline inhale in the morning used to beat any cigarette, too.
- plqbfbv 6mo ago> This is a clear restriction on liberty. ... Just like many stupid decisions (junk food included), it ought to be my right to decide how to live. I guess that liberty was plenty abused on every non-smoker in a non-smoking area, that ended up coughing in clouds of smoke anyway. Smoking affects everyone around you whether you want it or not, and while you may smoke for 50 years and end up being perfectly healthy, some may get cancer from it, even for a very small dose.
- rcxdude 6mo agoThere's already some pretty comprehensive bans on smoking in places where it could affect other people. I don't really encounter cigarette smoke in my day-to-day life.
- plqbfbv 6mo ago> There's already some pretty comprehensive bans on smoking in places where it could affect other people. Which I'm arguing are disregarded most of the times by most smokers. I do encounter cigarette smoke in my day-to-day, unfortunately. And unfortunately it's always the same places, mostly bars and restaurants that have outdoor spaces. Places where I'm supposed to smell food I pay for, and I end up smelling smoke instead.
- dranudin 6mo agoHowever, people born before 2008 smoking around you, affects you, as well. If they want to protect people they need to ban it for everybody..
- plqbfbv 6mo ago> If they want to protect people they need to ban it for everybody.. Last time governments tried to force people to do something for their own sake, you saw how it ended (COVID). If people can't start smoking cigarettes, they won't get hooked up, so gradually at least regular cigarettes will be phased out. Vapes are still controversial, but as a non-smoker with a very sensitive nose, vape smoke is 10000x better than cigarette smoke. It doesn't cause me to cough, it doesn't contain harmful chemical compounds, it doesn't soil clothes nearly as much, and I can still smell food at a restaurant.
- voidUpdate 6mo ago> "it ought to be my right to decide how to live" "Why is the government stopping me from murdering people and stealing from them? it's my right to decide how I live!"
- neonstatic 6mo agoThis is a great argument. Let's use it to ban sugar and meat.
- TheCoelacanth 6mo agoI think that a government should be able to ban murdering people but that it would very sketchy for them to ban it for some people and not others. One of the most important foundations of democracy is that the law applies to everyone equally. If smoking is banned, it should be banned for everyone, not banned for some people and allowed for a privileged class who got here first.
- nutjob2 6mo agoThis is nonsense. There is a logic to the law, it's not arbitrary. I could argue (unsuccessfully) that it's discriminatory and unfair that I have to wait an extra 3 years to claim my pension compared to older people.
- MiiMe19 6mo agoYou vill get your state mandated 1 hour of exercise and 5 servings of vegetables. You VILL eat only the state mandated bug based protein that our studies have shown to be 10% less likely of causing heart attacks than red meat. YOU VILL NOT spend more than 1 hour outside to prevent skin cancer.
- cucumber3732842 6mo ago>our studies have shown to be 10% less likely.... You are not nearly jaded enough. If the construction industry is any indication the stuff these people mandate is lucky to have 1% at best and that's with "money motivated" numbers cooked up in academic labs funded by the same industries that benefit from the rules.
- FL33TW00D 6mo agoIn a country with a national health system, why should you be able to internalize the benefit of smoking whilst externalizing the cost?
- masfuerte 6mo agoThe sin taxes more than cover the healthcare costs of the associated sins. It's the untaxed sins, greed and sloth, that are fucking the NHS.
- slibhb 6mo agoYou could use this logic to ban unhealthy foods, or restrict people from eating too much.
- Noumenon72 6mo agoOr to resist ever passing a national health system.
- marcusverus 6mo agoThere is something insidious about the state forcing a citizen to pay for its services, only turn around and insist that the use of said services entitles the state to further control of the citizen.
- DicIfTEx 6mo agohttps://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-views/junk-food-advertising-ban-childrens-health https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-views/junk-foo... https://www.newfoodmagazine.com/government-bans-high-sugar-and-deep-fried-foods-from-school-menus/2135206.article https://www.newfoodmagazine.com/government-bans-high-sugar-a... https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soft-drink-levy-extended-to-protect-children-and-improve-health https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soft-drink-levy-extended-...
- Gud 6mo agoConsidering the general state of the UK population, this may not be such a bad idea.
- projektfu 6mo agoIt's a restriction on liberty but not an unjustified one. I agree that it gives cigarettes a "mystique" that they do not deserve to have one generation able to smoke if they like while another generation has to go outside the law to do so. When I was a smoker, I used to decry places that were less liberal about where I was allowed to smoke, and places with high taxes. As a former smoker, I know that the high taxes have enabled a lot of people to stop, and the restrictions got to a point where smoking was less "cool" and more "pariah" behavior. These influences helped me stop. If you didn't read "The Easy Way to Stop Smoking", go do so, and smoke/vape no more. If everyone appreciated how little value they receive from tobacco/nicotine and how easy it really is to quit, there would be no market.
- MiiMe19 6mo agoIf I want to smoke in my own home I should be able to. Next up the government will ban reading hacker news for people born after 2012 because it incentivizes you sitting in your chair too much.
- projektfu 6mo agoMight be a good idea tbh
- reassess_blind 6mo agoPeople should be able to do things that provide them with little value. Over-eating and drinking alcohol seem to be some of the UK's favourites, far more than smoking.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- ShellackGobln7 6mo agoA restriction on liberty? For a britbong? What a surprise.
- fuzzfactor 6mo agoKinda like being in a country where nobody born past a certain date can ever be a citizen. Unless their ancestors were already citizens beforehand. Which I guess could be considered a more generous concession.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago> wtf. This is a clear restriction on liberty The title is hyperbolic. It isn't a ban on smoking. It's a "ban on buying cigarettes." Commerce is being restricted, not consumption. If, presumably, you bring your own in from France, or someone bums one to you, it would appear you're free to smoke it. That broadly seems to strike a fair balance. Banning purchases and sales, not possession or consumption.
- NoPicklez 6mo agoHow is it that different for it being banned for underage vs banned for people born after 2008? Its just that for one group is never becomes okay