Amazon.com Widgets
  • Banning smoking doesn't harm individual freedoms

    If the government banned cigarettes, they're taking steps to secure the safety and well-being of thousands of individuals, not just those who smoke but those around them too. Even if you believe in freedom of the individual, banning cigarettes means the government is giving you the freedom to live a better life. The government has a responsibility to those in the specific country and banning cigarettes means they are fulfilling this responsibility.

  • Smoking is dumb you bastards

    Why would you ruin your health just to get a negative pleasure when you can make a hobby out of something else. Smoking tobacco ruins the economy because the federal government has to spend billions of dollars a year and borrow a lot of money from the other countries for health care. Plus you dumb bastards are ruining the health of others around you and the air that is suppose to be clean. Stop smoking you dumb bastards

  • My Grandma Has COPD

    My grandma stopped smoking when I was born, so it has been 11 years now since she has smoked. A week and a half ago my grandma went to the hospital with a collapsed lung. She has had 2 surgeries since she has went into the hospital. My Grandma used to just have to use oxygen when she went to sleep, but now she has to use oxygen all the time. She is in a special treatment room now. So please, can everybody stop smoking and not try to kill themselves? ;-( ;-(

  • Reduces the risk of child's health

    If you smoke near your child, the smoke goes into their lungs and they could receive athsma. A further reason would be, if the government do ban smoking, although a lot of people will be more grumpy, it will reduce the air pollution and also litter, because loads of people just put their old cigarette butts on the floor. LITTERING!!!!!!!!!!!

  • We're allowing our children to use a carcinogenic substance which has every possibility of shortening their life and ruining their quality of life

    My sons have smoked since they were 16 and they're now in their late 20s, how long have they got?( Apparently if you've smoked from young, by middle age you've got 50% chance of dying from a smoking related disease. ) They're hooked , if they couldn't have bought them from a shop in this country legally allowed to sell a known carcinogenic, and a known lung and heart disease causer, they may have had a chance of living a healthier life. Thanks British government for not having the balls to ban them

  • Smoking Is A Carcinogen and Is Extremely BAD!!!

    Cigarettes contain 200 known poisons and 40 CARCINOGENS!!! Which to me is extremely insane and our government should be a lot more responsible and not so easy going on smoking, because it is a very hazardous radioactive, cancer causing poison that hurts environment and yourself. So stop smoking, and stop!!!

  • Smoking Is A Carcinogen and Is Extremely BAD!!!

    Cigarettes contain 200 known poisons and 40 CARCINOGENS!!! Which to me is extremely insane and our government should be a lot more responsible and not so easy going on smoking, because it is a very hazardous radioactive, cancer causing poison that hurts environment and yourself. So stop smoking, and stop!!!

  • It sucks to smoke.

    Smoking kills and ruins peoples body. Once their body is ruined, they either live a life full of self indulged suffering or they don't live at all. Its long term suicide. 3,400 non smokers die because of second hand smoke every year. Stop killing yourself. The defending arguments of smoking are ridiculous and are laced with fallacies. They are mostly made by smokers or people who make money off of smokers. They're motives are obviously tainted by either addiction or money. Free will? You can eat trash all day if you please and the government can't stop you. Most people wouldn't touch trash let alone eat it. It isn't appealing and eating it could harm your body. Tobacco may have an appeal (only because it is addictive) and it definitely harms you and the ones around you. People are still willing to kill themselves slowly . So much free will. Smokers are sad, but they are salvageable. Banning tobacco would save lives. What other reason would you need?

  • Please quit smoking

    Quit!! Do you know how many innocent people die a year because of smoking? Every year tobacco kills more Americans than World War II, in fact it has killed more than 443,000 people — more than AIDS, cocaine, heroin, alcohol, vehicular accidents, homicide and suicide combined! And that’s only for smoking, for lung cancer (which is caused by smoking) it’s over 1,370,000 deaths each year! You also kill tons of other people through second hand smoke. Almost 42,000 people die from second hand smoke a year. For infants its almost 900!! So, if you want to kill yourself or other people quit smoking!!

  • Your killing yourself

    Loads of people don't realise how bad they are damaging their body and don't think about quitting. This has to be stopped and the best way is for it to be banned! I have done lots of research for my discursive essay for English to ban it and I agree for it to stop. So many life's have been taking away from us and it's not fair.

  • I agree, smoking is nothing but killing yourself.

    I know people do things that are bad for them regardless. But the government keep them aloud to help kill off the population, so sure keep smoking... :[

    Quoting ---
    "It's a pure fact that tobacco is very bad for your health and has no benefits. Smoking tobacco is suicide. However, it shouldn't be banned outright since the government should not (and cannot) stop people from putting toxins into their bodies. It should be banned in public places and cars with children inside though."

    -nathancjohnson

  • Bad for all.

    Most of my family smokes and I hate it! I already lost two of my grandfathers to it and my grandmother has gotten asthma from second-hand smoking. Some people even introduce smoking to their children! Some of the children were WAY too young to be smoking! Just look it up cause it's there!

  • Only in places where others will be affected

    I think smoking should definitely be banned in public indoor places such as restaurants because it affects non-smoking people's health. Cigarettes are nothing but garbage that should never have been invented in the first place - they do nothing good. The use of tobacco kill millions annually worldwide and second-hand smoke is surprisingly worse than smoking cigarettes yourself. Smoking cigarettes is slow suicide. However, as much as I would love it if they banned cigarettes, it would not work. We learned with Prohibition that government banning something does not stop anyone and in fact makes it worst. The same goes for marijuana. The use is high but it's illegal. Banning something doesn't stop people from doing it. Even though I am 100% against marijuana as well, why in the world did the government ban that but not tobacco (the real killer)?! Tobacco actually kills people whereas marijuana has not ever directly killed anyone.

  • Smoking is unhealthy!

    Smoking is responsible for the death of more than 15000 Australians a year. Smoking is the biggest preventable cause of our two biggest killers, cancer and heart disease, and is a factor in many other deadly diseases. Research shows that tobacco eventually kills one in two long term smokers, half of which deaths are in middle age. In addition, children who live in smokers households are 4 times more likely to be admitted to hospital with respiratory illness. There is undisputed evidence that smoking has a negative effect on the health of smokers as well as the people around them.

  • It's far more dangerous

    According to CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - www.Cdc.Gov) , smoking causes more deaths each year, than HIV, car accidents, alcohol abuse, illegal drugs consumption, suicide and murders combined.
    This is enough reason to ban tobacco consumption and sale like we deal with any other addictive substances which are not legal.

  • Smoking should be banned !

    Millions of people here in the UK are dying due to cigarette causing diseases. When people are aware of the harm smoking causes then why shouldn't you ban it? Smokers are unable from quitting smoking because they are addicted to the nicotine that is found in a cigarette it is extremely hard for them to quit, each year the cigarette companies are increasing the amount of nicotine put in each cigarettes just to increase their income. The NHS are spending millions of pounds to treat many smoking linked diseases such as heart disease and numerous types of diseases. Smoking also harms the community; passive smoking is just as harmful as smoking itself. The chemicals that are found in a cigarette are also found in the second hand smoke, so why should the community suffer when smoker don't know any better. If its about how much profit the economy is getting due to the expenses of smoking then the economy is losing a lot of money due to the accidents, injuries and health care support that is given to smokers that need help.

  • Tobacco tax hypocrisy

    Government make money from smokers by applying very heavy taxes on tobacco; they are not interested in public health but only in making money. If they were to ban smoking public health would be dramatically improved but hey where will governments recover the money lost from all the tax revenues?

  • Cigarettes are filthy

    Cancer waiting to happen. Cigarettes are so gross. The smoke effects not only the smoker, but everyone around them. Second hand smoking is responsible for countless deaths, diseases and illnesses. Smoking is highly addictive and extremely challenging to quit. Cigarettes are the cause of many birth defeats among newborns. Bad dental problems follow.

  • Yes Smoking should be banned.

    Just like dangerous drugs, smoking is lethal, can cause cancer, and it kills people. No matter how hard others will say, smoking is wrong. You may say that smoking is a personal choice, but it's still the wrong choice from any viewpoint. It's like were promoting our bodies to get harmed in exchange of personal leisure. Also imagine how much money is being spent on cigarettes. A pack worth $5/day * 365 days = $1825 / year. Imagine what you can do with that amount of money. Also imagine if tobacco plants were converted into something more useful. Smoking has no benefits and whether people like it or not, it should be banned. The use of "personal choice" or "tax" as reason for not banning smoking is what I believe is a ridiculous excuse so that people will continue to cause damage to their health whilst at the same time causing harm to the environment, in exchange of profits.

    Think about it. What if tobacco smoking never existed? Our society wouldn't be purely perfect if there's a ban, but at least, the health of many would extend, and the environment would benefit.

  • YES, smoking should be banned.

    Government has the right to ban drugs, so why not smoking?! Smoking itself is like a drug. You are poisoning your body with every breath. The government has banned drugs which do the same thing, why not cigarettes?
    The government has done a great job of banning smoking from public areas. But nothing stops smokers from walking two feet off of premises and smoking. It is absolutely DISGUSTING for those who have to pass. My daughter who is 12 forces me to drive her places just so she doesn't have to breath that retched air. Feel free to poison yourself in your house, but if you do it in front of another human, I believe that you should be arrested

  • America Loves Tobacco

    Although tobacco is often viewed as a dangerous thing, most Americans have to admit that they have fond memories associated with cigarettes and cigars. The fact is that Americans are well aware of the dangers of tobacco, but as a free people each American has the capability to make their own informed decisions about tobacco consumption. There is no reason for the government to inhibit its people's free will; it never has and it never will. Get comfy with tobacco.

  • No, it would be an unconstitutional restriction of personal liberties.

    Smoking is a personal choice, just like the choice to choose your place/method of religious practice. Every time the government declares something illegal or unlawful they are chipping away at our rights as individuals. Smoking causes many health-related issues and that may become a burden on the government but in reality, the health issues those individuals have is self-inflicted, so why are we supporting that choice? Again it is a persons choice to decide whether to smoke or not, it's not the federal governments business, or the state governments business, it's an individuals choice.

  • No, the government should not ban smoking

    Although smoking is bad for the health, the government should not ban smoking just because it can generate tax and revenue for the government. If people are not addicted to cigarettes, they will find something else in place of that. Also, while smoking is really bad for the health, it is not as bad as some other substances such as abusive drugs and arguably alcohol.

  • Adults have the right to kill themselves if they choose.

    The government should not ban smoking outright. If an adult wants to put toxic chemicals into their body, that is, and should be, their right. I do think it should be banned in all public buildings, and also from the front of all public buildings. I also have no issue with making it illegal to smoke in a car with children.

  • No, the Government Should Not Ban Smoking

    Government agencies have done a good job of banning smoking in public venues. That is good because of the meaning of the Bill of Rights - one person's rights end where another person's rights begin. Therefore, although a person should have the right to smoke if they so choose, they should not have the right to force another person to inhale second hand smoke. So, the government should not ban smoking, just limit its locations.

  • Individual Rights and Freedoms

    One should have the right to do whatever they want. If i decide to smoke and harm myself or my children thats no one else's business. My car and my house are my private property and the government can't tell me that I can't smoke in my own care or home. If I decide to smoke near my children that's also my PERSONAL decision, the government can't tell me not to smoke in the care because my young kids are in the car. After all we live in a free society and its just a matter of personal choice

  • Banning doesn't work

    There is no evidence that banning anything causes it to stop happening. It is more like a coercive measure designed to fill prisons than a health measure designed to improve people's well-being. Making bad choices is part of the human condition. The best thing that government can do to prevent smoking is to ensure that people have good job security and good housing (i.E. The opposite of austerity and the deliberate policies of impoverishment that they seem to be pursuing at present) as it is clear that smoking is associated with poverty on population levels. Beyond that, leave it alone.

  • The Debate About Smoking Is Not About Smoking

    The debate about whether or not cigarettes are bad ended years ago. The debate isn't about smoking, it's about our personal freedoms and the extent to which the government is entitled to regulate them.

    Smoking is an easy target, and the taxpayers' refusal to look beyond the results of the above-mentioned debate is lazy and narcissistic but not surprising. I noticed that one deluded poster on this site labeled a restaurant as "...A public place." What? Restaurants have owners. They are private enterprises. If the owner wishes to allow smoking on his private property, the government has no business inserting itself between the restaurateur and his policy. Patrons are free to decide if eating there suits their lifestyles. Employees are free to decide whether or not working there suits their lifestyles. If the ban defines a privately-owned restaurant as public, then that definition includes your home or condo, and yes - in some places these bans are on local ballots. It will not stop until the taxpayers realize that the power they're granting the government will come back to haunt them in ways they [obviously] can't imagine.

    The original California smoking ban opened to door to an array of dangerous legislation with even more restrictive, expensive and precedent-setting legislation on the way. Two eye-popping examples from Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City: He has wangled onto the ballot ordinances that would restrict the size of sugary sodas and ban E-cigarettes. Not that it should matter and it doesn't, but the soda law neglects to mention that many of the so-called and self-labeled "healthy" drinks sold alongside the sodas have a higher sugar and carbohydrate content than the targeted soft drinks. The insanity of banning E-cigarettes is self-evident. Or at least it should be.

    I'm not a federalist but enough is enough.

  • No government should not ban smoking.

    Its matter of individual rights. In the conditions of stress or frustration people need some relaxation and smoking had provided the option. Also many people are addicted to it and even in case of ban, illegal means of fulfilling desire will rise and also smuggling. Which again will be headache for government agencies to tackle with in addition of plethora of social evils. Instead of using legislative methods spreading aawareness about health consequences may help in reducing magnitude of smoking.

  • We have a choice

    1: We are all individuals 2: we all have our own brains 3: we all have a choice. I chose to smoke so I smoke. Why people decide to dictate what we should / should not do is beyond me. Yes; smoking does cause more deaths each year than any other factor but again it all comes down to a persons own individual choice. Ive known people to die at 20 who never smoked and ive known people who smoke live past 80. Its all down to choice and when your times up... It is up. Stop telling us what to do and how to live and stary focussing on more pressing issues and start sorting your mistakes out firsts

  • Matter of Individual Rights

    It should not be up to the government to restrict consenting persons from smoking. A normal adult can make that choice for themselves and if others do not wish to smoke 'passively', they should avoid these individuals, and not look to the government and pressure it into introducing sweeping laws that harm the rights of smokers. Furthermore in privately owned places it should be up to the owner whether he allows his customers to smoke (or he could set up a non smoking area as well).

  • It helps the economy

    On average in 2010 taxing cigarettes put 25 million dollars into the economy. And also put 10 million dollars on average into each state. Even though the people who smoke are putting dangerous toxins in their body it their choice and the government doesn't have the right to take it away, but they are helping the already bad economy. If the government does take it away it would just end up like the Prohibition.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.