IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Cigarettes - Why not ban them?, And I smoke
TallDarkAndHands...
post Jan 23 2015, 10:17 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,214
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



I've never understood why cigarettes are not illegal. blink.gif

I smoke. I don't want to but I have a habit and I don't have a lot of willpower.
When the going gets tough the fags come out. I gave up for seven years but started again. Stupid.

However - I'm not a law breaker (like 99% of the population) so if they were illegal I would not try and source them from some dealer.

So why go with this new "plain packaging" legislation.

Ban them. And put up taxes to raise the revenue lost so that all tax payers have to pay for the loss in income the Government receives.

We'd all be healthier and we'd have a fairer tax system not based on peoples habits that they struggle with. Just a thought

Well - a Random Rant wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Jan 23 2015, 10:56 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Jan 23 2015, 10:17 PM) *
I've never understood why cigarettes are not illegal. blink.gif

I smoke. I don't want to but I have a habit and I don't have a lot of willpower.
When the going gets tough the fags come out. I gave up for seven years but started again. Stupid.

However - I'm not a law breaker (like 99% of the population) so if they were illegal I would not try and source them from some dealer.

So why go with this new "plain packaging" legislation.

Ban them. And put up taxes to raise the revenue lost so that all tax payers have to pay for the loss in income the Government receives.

We'd all be healthier and we'd have a fairer tax system not based on peoples habits that they struggle with. Just a thought

Well - a Random Rant wink.gif

How would it be just to criminalise smoking?

For that matter how is it just to criminalise marijuana? As recreational drugs go it's relatively benign, and the criminalisation of marijuana creates more problems than there are to be solved.

There are health problems with smoking cigarettes, but criminalisation is hardly the way to go, education and a change in social attitudes is much preferable.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Jan 23 2015, 11:16 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,214
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jan 23 2015, 10:56 PM) *
How would it be just to criminalise smoking?

For that matter how is it just to criminalise marijuana? As recreational drugs go it's relatively benign, and the criminalisation of marijuana creates more problems than there are to be solved.

There are health problems with smoking cigarettes, but criminalisation is hardly the way to go, education and a change in social attitudes is much preferable.



Marijuana - What is marijuana these days? Certainly not the old type. I think they call most of it "skunkweed" now and from what
I gather it is similar to Class A... A lot of people end up in the loony bin (sorry not PC)...

Education will always fail on this matter. Its a waste of time. It's in a lot of peoples nature to destroy themselves.

If its available and it makes you "forget" then for a lot of the poor its a lifestyle "choice"
Always has been - Always will - In bygone years it was "Mothers Ruin" - Now where have I put my gin bottle? blink.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jan 24 2015, 09:02 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



Then of course there is the gross misuse of alcohol. I disagree with a lot of their culture but perhaps the US is right in this instance in making the legal age 21.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jan 24 2015, 10:21 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,897
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



Prohibition doesn't work. It is also treating the symptom, not the cause. The biggest problem we have with drugs, etc, is prohibition: crime is built on it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Brown
post Jan 24 2015, 10:21 AM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 323
Joined: 21-September 13
Member No.: 10,072



Ignoring the personal freedom bit, the only real objection I have to smoking is the bits they leave behind. Fag buts and empty packets don't easily degrade and both just make the place look filthy. Rather than putting cigarettes in plain boxes, I'd suggest selling them in thin plain single paper bags would be far better.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Jan 24 2015, 12:13 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



The government have had a go at reducing smoking by increasing the tax and getting it banned in workplace and public places.
I would like it to be banned in cars and lorry cabs as well. I saw some dangerous git getting out a fag and then lighting it the other day. Must be as bad as using a mobile phone IMO.
Watched a bit of a program the other night when a few of the UK's scroungers were on screen with debts and on benefits, non payment of rent and rates etc. Every one of them seemed to have a fag on whenever they appeared. I wondered how they could afford to smoke but not pay their rent. I got really pee'd off and changed channels.
I don't care what people do to themselves by using a known carcinogenic but as the NHS is under such pressure I do object to smokers using up our facilities because of their conscious habit.
Packaging in fancy boxes might be construed as advertising but I would have thought the manufacturers might be glad to get rid of the expensive box as long as it had a brand name on it. People who smoke know their brand and probably don't give the style of packet or any other message a second glance. How this nonsense about packaging came about Lord only knows but it has to be a real timewaster with, as far as I can see, no benefit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post Jan 24 2015, 03:43 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,927
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



I agree with banning it but slowly. Anyone under the age of 35 who smokes is clearly pretty foolish, but there is still a generation around who were told it was good for them. They are now hooked and it would seema little unfair to punish them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 24 2015, 06:11 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



Why not raise the age limit for purchasing cigarettes by a year, every year?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Jan 24 2015, 06:56 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (blackdog @ Jan 24 2015, 06:11 PM) *
Why not raise the age limit for purchasing cigarettes by a year, every year?


Good idea but difficult to check.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jan 24 2015, 07:00 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,897
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 24 2015, 12:13 PM) *
The government have had a go at reducing smoking by increasing the tax and getting it banned in workplace and public places.
I would like it to be banned in cars and lorry cabs as well. I saw some dangerous git getting out a fag and then lighting it the other day. Must be as bad as using a mobile phone IMO.
Watched a bit of a program the other night when a few of the UK's scroungers were on screen with debts and on benefits, non payment of rent and rates etc. Every one of them seemed to have a fag on whenever they appeared. I wondered how they could afford to smoke but not pay their rent. I got really pee'd off and changed channels.
I don't care what people do to themselves by using a known carcinogenic but as the NHS is under such pressure I do object to smokers using up our facilities because of their conscious habit.
Packaging in fancy boxes might be construed as advertising but I would have thought the manufacturers might be glad to get rid of the expensive box as long as it had a brand name on it. People who smoke know their brand and probably don't give the style of packet or any other message a second glance. How this nonsense about packaging came about Lord only knows but it has to be a real timewaster with, as far as I can see, no benefit.

Branding isn't about keeping customers, it's about getting them and I suspect smokers and drinkers pay for themselves, judging by the tax they pay. I don't begrudge scroungers smoking: I'd rather be a tax payer than a benefits receiver.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Jan 24 2015, 07:32 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jan 24 2015, 07:00 PM) *
Branding isn't about keeping customers, it's about getting them and I suspect smokers and drinkers pay for themselves, judging by the tax they pay. I don't begrudge scroungers smoking: I'd rather be a tax payer than a benefits receiver.


It's not that they smoke, not all of them I might add, but scroungers who smoke but don't pay their dues so that you the tax payer is penalised by the shortfall of rental and rates. Those I begrudge.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newres
post Jan 25 2015, 07:05 AM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,622
Joined: 27-November 12
Member No.: 8,961



QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 24 2015, 07:32 PM) *
It's not that they smoke, not all of them I might add, but scroungers who smoke but don't pay their dues so that you the tax payer is penalised by the shortfall of rental and rates. Those I begrudge.

On the other hand they pay a disproportionately high level of tax on the fags. Assuming they're not duty frees.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Jan 25 2015, 12:54 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (newres @ Jan 25 2015, 07:05 AM) *
On the other hand they pay a disproportionately high level of tax on the fags. Assuming they're not duty frees.


Yes, but it's my money that is paying the tax that I have already paid.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Jan 25 2015, 02:34 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jan 24 2015, 10:21 AM) *
Prohibition doesn't work. It is also treating the symptom, not the cause. The biggest problem we have with drugs, etc, is prohibition: crime is built on it.
The biggest argument against prohibition is that you'll force a load of people addicted to nicotine who aren't necessarily bad people, to interact with a load of existing criminals who could well be, to supply their habit. Sure they could all give up smoking, but as we've heard from the OP, it isn't as easy as that for some people.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jan 25 2015, 04:57 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



The only thing that's really likely to stop it is public opinion. In my youth, many years ago, it was quite acceptable to drink and drive, it isn't anymore, and whilst there are still offenders, they don't get much sympathy.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jan 25 2015, 06:04 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,897
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Exhausted @ Jan 25 2015, 12:54 PM) *
Yes, but it's my money that is paying the tax that I have already paid.

WTFAYTA huh.gif


I understand that the tax yield from smokers is higher than the cost of smoking is to the NHS and people claiming benefits rather than work are people that are not competing for my job. tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Jan 25 2015, 08:00 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (On the edge @ Jan 25 2015, 04:57 PM) *
The only thing that's really likely to stop it is public opinion. In my youth, many years ago, it was quite acceptable to drink and drive, it isn't anymore, and whilst there are still offenders, they don't get much sympathy.

Absolutely. Social change is far more effective. Criminalisation is a clumsy weapon.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post Jan 25 2015, 09:44 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jan 25 2015, 06:04 PM) *
WTFAYTA


Sorry if that doesn't work for you.

I pay tax which pays their benefit

They spend the money on fags and pay tax on them but they don't pay their rent cos they've spent it on fags

I pay tax which makes up the rent shortfall that they haven't paid and no court will be able to make them pay

I've paid, as you have as well, for their expensive habit.

Do you see my logic ?




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post Jan 25 2015, 10:18 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,927
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jan 25 2015, 06:04 PM) *
WTFAYTA huh.gif


I understand that the tax yield from smokers is higher than the cost of smoking is to the NHS and people claiming benefits rather than work are people that are not competing for my job. tongue.gif

There's a lot more costs than that though, the clean ups, the drain blockages, and the working time lost to name a few.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st May 2020 - 11:24 AM