Smoking Ban

[Yellow Fever 4,093]

Simply the bill as passed I'm against.

Ludicrous to have one set of adults in a few years who can buy cigarettes and another say at 29 who can't. Simply ageist.

By all means ban them outright, make minimum purchase age 21 and/or quadruple the price.

[Naturalcynic 791]

With this smoking ban it doesn’t look like the UK will be legalising weed anytime soon!

[TheGunnShow 6,590]

Not sure I'm keen on legislation where further tax increases would probably be a better way around the problem.

EDIT: That said, I quite admire Portugal's stance in legalising all drugs, so forbidding any strikes me as being inconsistent.

Edited April 16 by TheGunnShow

[Herman 10,371]

A shame they are planning to make it harder to vape. It could be a good way to get people off tobacco. 

[If wed kept Howie.. 251]

i love the idea that at some point in the future a 48 year old will ask a 49 year old to go into a shop to buy cigarettes for them

[Aggy 828]

Haven’t really seen much about it but all seems a bit nanny state. Given the number of smokers has almost halved in the past decade and, I imagine, is as low as it ever has been in the younger generations, probably see it as something that won’t get much opposition.

Which makes you wonder whether alcohol is a few decades behind. It already results in more cost to the NHS and society than smoking, and is becoming less and less popular with younger generations….

 

[KiwiScot 1,608]

Reckon it's a great idea. Forced gradual decline allows tobacco sales/taxes to adjust. Less people die from it. Don't need to deal with a nation full of addicts if there was a nationwide ban.

[Fen Canary 1,096]

Ridiculous law. Why shouldn’t people be allowed to smoke if they wish? As long as we tax it enough to cover the costs to the health service (it’s banned indoors to protect non smokers) I say let them get on with it.

What worries me more is that now the Puritans have got rid of smoking they’ll start applying the same tactics to alcohol, and I enjoy a drink more than I do a cigar. Once that’s banned they’ll move on to gambling, fatty foods, fizzy drinks etc. It’s a very slippery slope 

[Naturalcynic 791]

3 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Ridiculous law. Why shouldn’t people be allowed to smoke if they wish? As long as we tax it enough to cover the costs to the health service (it’s banned indoors to protect non smokers) I say let them get on with it.

What worries me more is that now the Puritans have got rid of smoking they’ll start applying the same tactics to alcohol, and I enjoy a drink more than I do a cigar. Once that’s banned they’ll move on to gambling, fatty foods, fizzy drinks etc. It’s a very slippery slope 

Ah, but have they made it illegal to grow your own tobacco?  Perhaps they’ll allow up to three plants for personal consumption!

[DraytonBoy 206]

4 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to smoke if they wish?

Why should the majority of non-smokers pay to treat the few that continue to smoke?

Unlike alcohol, even moderate consumption of tobacco products will damage your long term health.

[Fen Canary 1,096]

32 minutes ago, DraytonBoy said:

Why should the majority of non-smokers pay to treat the few that continue to smoke?

Unlike alcohol, even moderate consumption of tobacco products will damage your long term health.

You don’t. Between the high taxes on tobacco and the reduced pension costs due to earlier death smoking more than pays for itself. If I didn’t they’d have banned it years ago.

Ive never smoked either, but I don’t believe in banning something simply because some do gooders don’t approve 

[MooreMarriot 319]

39 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

You don’t. Between the high taxes on tobacco and the reduced pension costs due to earlier death smoking more than pays for itself. If I didn’t they’d have banned it years ago.

 

The costs to the economy of smoking far outweigh any taxes raised.

https://ash.org.uk/media-centre/news/press-releases/new-figures-show-smoking-costs-billions-more-than-tobacco-taxes-as-consultation-on-creating-a-smokefree-generation-closes

[ricardo 7,618]

I haven't smoked for over 50 years but I consider this to be Nanny State over reach.

Some people just love to be ordered around.

[dylanisabaddog 5,490]

Having been a smoker I wish this law had existed when I was young. 

The difference between smoking and drinking alcohol is that it's possible to drink occasionally or moderately without becoming addicted. Nicotine is almost as addictive as heroin.

From the point of view of the NHS, a doctor at the N&N told me recently that their admissions are now caused mainly by obesity and diabetes. Alcohol comes next followed by smoking. Smokers will claim (probably rightly) that the tax they pay and pension they don't get covers their treatment but unfortunately successive governments haven't ringfenced the tobacco tax. 

I'm in favour of the ban simply because smoking is very bad for you and nicotine is extremely addictive. We don't legalise heroin for the same reasons. 

Like @Fen CanaryI'm a bit concerned about alcohol being targeted but that's because I'm capable of drinking in moderation(apart from when we beat Ipswich). I don't like the idea of it being taxed more but at the same time I'm a bit baffled that Tesco are allowed to regularly encourage their customers to buy 6 bottles of wine for the price of 4.

At the centre of this is the question, what are Governments for? Should they be meddling with people's lives because they know better? When it comes to health that question is more pertinent here because we have the NHS. If we had a private health service based on insurance I suspect it would solve a lot of unhealthy habits. We do unhealthy things at the moment because we have a safety net. 

But in general I think they should. They meddle with our lives in many different ways to keep us safe. We aren't allowed to drive fast because it kills us and other people. Health and safety in workplaces is another one of thousands of things that are designed with us in mind. If they don't meddle is there any point in having them? 

Edited April 17 by dylanisabaddog

[dylanisabaddog 5,490]

14 minutes ago, MooreMarriot said:

The costs to the economy of smoking far outweigh any taxes raised.

https://ash.org.uk/media-centre/news/press-releases/new-figures-show-smoking-costs-billions-more-than-tobacco-taxes-as-consultation-on-creating-a-smokefree-generation-closes

@Fen Canaryis right in that the fact that smokers don't live as long isn't taken into account in studies. That saving is huge both in terms of pension savings and in reducing pressure on the NHS who won't have to deal with those people who would inevitably fill beds with non smoking related issues. 

[king canary 8,085]

12 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

With this smoking ban it doesn’t look like the UK will be legalising weed anytime soon!

Feels like we're going somewhat in the wrong direction with this.

I don't smoke, I don't like smoking and I'll go out of my way to make sure my kids don't do it but I don't think it should be banned. Advertising bans, higher taxes, all for them but an outright ban concerns me.

12 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

We do unhealthy things at the moment because we have a safety net. 

I'm not sure that stacks up at all- look at the rate of obesity in America where such a safety net doesn't exist. 

[BroadstairsR 2,272]

Smoking seems to be dying a death of its own, what with increasing awareness of the associated health problems and the sheer cost of the habit.

Prohibition of any kind could lead to more black market activity, if there wasn't enough already.

I don't know where I stand on the latest legislation, but even the casual observer should be concerned with the explosion of vaping amongst the young and growing health concerns about the habit.

More law making to stop this trend is urgently needed, imo.

Smoking cigarettes is becoming the past. 

 

[king canary 8,085]

11 hours ago, Herman said:

A shame they are planning to make it harder to vape. It could be a good way to get people off tobacco. 

Vapes are a double edge sword in my view.

Yes they help get smokers off tobacco but they are also very accessible and designed in a way that appeals to younger people. 

[Yellow Fever 4,093]

Interesting comments - at least nobody is for smoking!

As stated I'm against the law simply on the basis as unworkable and ludicrously ageist especially in a few years. You're either an adult and competent or you're not.

Personally, smoking needs to go the way of snuff - a once fashionable but now disgusting, very old fashioned and uncool habit.

[A Load of Squit 5,640]

6 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Interesting comments - at least nobody is for smoking!

As stated I'm against the law simply on the basis as unworkable and ludicrously ageist especially in a few years. You're either an adult and competent or you're not.

Personally, smoking needs to go the way of snuff - a once fashionable but now disgusting, very old fashioned and uncool habit.

Yeh, another thing the 'do gooders' ruined.

I remember my great granfather telling me about the years of poverty he went through when they banned his bear bating job, if it wasn't for the underground bear bating community he would've died in the workhouse.

[Yellow Fever 4,093]

10 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Yeh, another thing the 'do gooders' ruined.

I remember my great granfather telling me about the years of poverty he went through when they banned his bear bating job, if it wasn't for the underground bear bating community he would've died in the workhouse.

Yes ban it outright (along with vaping) or make it seriously uncool (perhaps its only something the elderly still do) but this is neither! 

There's an idea - need to show an OAP bus pass to purchase! 

Edited April 17 by Yellow Fever

[Fen Canary 1,096]

26 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Yeh, another thing the 'do gooders' ruined.

I remember my great granfather telling me about the years of poverty he went through when they banned his bear bating job, if it wasn't for the underground bear bating community he would've died in the workhouse.

Trying to compare it to bear baiting is nonsense, as that was banned for being cruel to an animal. Smoking hurts nobody but the person smoking, and nobody today can claim to be ignorant of the long term health effect so if they still choose to I say let them get on with it.

Will cigars also be banned, despite them being much less harmful than cigarettes? 

[A Load of Squit 5,640]

1 minute ago, Fen Canary said:

Trying to compare it to bear baiting is nonsense, as that was banned for being cruel to an animal. Smoking hurts nobody but the person smoking, and nobody today can claim to be ignorant of the long term health effect so if they still choose to I say let them get on with it.

Will cigars also be banned, despite them being much less harmful than cigarettes? 

Tell that to the Beagles.

 

[Mello Yello 2,390]

"Do you smoke after s ex?"....."No, but I get the occasional friction burn".....

[Yellow Fever 4,093]

30 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes ban it outright (along with vaping) or make it seriously uncool (perhaps its only something the elderly still do) but this is neither! 

There's an idea - need to show an OAP bus pass to purchase! 

Going to add to this - the 'age' thing in its first few years may actually be counterproductive. The 'young' may well wish to look 'older' than they are (i.e 17 year old like to be 18 and look cool etc) - and it becomes a cool 'symbol' of rebellion and age. 

I just think its very simplistic and no doubt will have to revisited as unworkable / unenforceable in a few years - the phrase will be 'what were they smoking at the time...'. 

[BroadstairsR 2,272]

2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

You don’t. Between the high taxes on tobacco and the reduced pension costs due to earlier death smoking more than pays for itself. If I didn’t they’d have banned it years ago.

Ive never smoked either, but I don’t believe in banning something simply because some do gooders don’t approve 

That's a very good point.

I remember my old boy smoking a lot (Player Weights) without tips.

So many did, and yellow fingers caused by nicotine were not uncommon.

When he had friends around, the lounge was cloudy with smoke. I've hardly ever smoked but suffer from mild COPD which I assume was caused by my old man's habit. 

Smoking was a given. That has long since ceased.

I do agree with the slippery slope view, too. A lot of people need props, and many will do anything to get them. I use alcohol, but sensibly, as I probably kid myself. Banning that would not end the product. We would find other means and that could lead to Prohibition style crime that happened in the US, but on a much smaller scale obviously than during that era. 

Ban this, ban that is never the answer. Education is. I think this has genuinely been effective with the smoking habit.

Edited April 17 by BroadstairsR

[Herman 10,371]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Vapes are a double edge sword in my view.

Yes they help get smokers off tobacco but they are also very accessible and designed in a way that appeals to younger people. 

Aye, can't disagree. Now Big Tobacco have got involved the young have been a perfect cash cow. 

[Yellow Fever 4,093]

Can we do something about betting too - destroys a huge number of lives.

Remove the TV advertising for a start. 

[Mello Yello 2,390]

Candy ciggies were bad for your chompers.....

[......and Smith must score. 1,436]

16 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Simply the bill as passed I'm against.

Ludicrous to have one set of adults in a few years who can buy cigarettes and another say at 29 who can't. Simply ageist.

By all means ban them outright, make minimum purchase age 21 and/or quadruple the price.

As an ex-smoker and knowing how hard it is to kick the habit I think people should be allowed to smoke but only in controlled environments. The ban on indoor smoking in public must be one of the best pieces of legislation any government has ever passed.

YF's suggestion of quadrupling the price of cigarettes is interesting as smokers have always been hammered over the years. I'm not an against increase in prices above inflation but smokers have certainly felt it in their pocket.

I gave up in 1976 and a packet of 20 B & H Special Filter cost 47p. The RRP for the equivalent B & H Gold is now £17.06.

Had ciggie prices merely kept up with inflation they would only be £4.70 or thereabouts.

Edited April 17 by ......and Smith must score.