The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Should Tobacco be Banned??

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/16/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,478 times Debate No: 40671
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)




First round for acceptance only, and then we get on with the debate! Good luck to anyone who accepts!


I am equipped with reasons to stand by the fact that TOBACCO SHOULD NOT BE BANNED:
1. Napoleon once said - bring me one virtue that brings as much as taxes as this(tobacco) vice and I am ready to ban it. The country gains huge amount of taxes from tobacco sale and there is always the provision to increase the taxes to earn more from tobacco sale and invest it in developmental issues.

2. Using tobacco in any form is a personal choice. When a person uses tobacco, he/she voluntary does so , having in mind its vicious consequences and hence he/she should be allowed to continue with his choice. A democracy cannot curb this right of its citizen.
Debate Round No. 1


"The country gains huge amount of taxes from tobacco sale and there is always the provision to increase the taxes to earn more from tobacco sale and invest it in developmental issues."
So you're saying that we need tobacco for money? So you can put a price on someone's life?!?! Seriously? The human life is a very precious thing, and you, therefore, think that we need to keep killing people to keep this country alive? Tobacco can put people out on the streets, make them broke, give them cancer, pollute, and kill them. All that for five bucks a pack? Tobacco really should be banned.

"Using tobacco in any form is a personal choice."
That is actually wrong. The tobacco industry lies to people about smoking and says that it is not addictive. This is shown by a brave, deceased woman [1] who was lied to about smoking. She led 100,000 to quit smoking, while others just simply can't. What I'm saying here is that tobacco robs the choice of you to not smoke because it is so addictive.

I am too armed with many reasons tobacco should be banned.

Argument One: "Over a 4 year span, 440,000 died of smoking." [2]
From the start of the century (2000) to 2004, tobacco smoking and second hand smoke killed a confirmed amount of 443,000 people... in the U.S alone! Here's the scary part: that is just from smoking and none of it's major side effects like cancer. Another 300,000 died smoking-related deaths such as cancer and cardiovascular and breathing problems. And that's just per a year. You want to know the scariest part? 18.3% of deaths in the U.S have died from smoking. Wow.

Argument two: "Severe health problems." [3]
Smoking is listed as the biggest preventable cause of death. Smokers can also undermine the health of other people in some environments. Studies show that smokers usually die TEN YEARS SOONER than non-smokers. That's ten golden years taken away from your life because of an addictive drug that should be banned. 90% of lung cancer, a deadly type of cancer, is caused by smoking. Smokers also have a very high risk of developing other types of cancer, such as bladder cancer, for one.

Argument three: "What's in the cigarette?" [3]
Why are all of the diseases being caused? Because these three elements are in there:
1. Nicotine
2. Carbon Monoxide
3. Tar
That is a deadly list of chemicals right there and a big reason that smoking should be banned.





1. We need not quote figures and website links to prove tobacco is harmful. Everybody knows that. Every child who took a 6th standard moral science class, can also say the same. Google takes the credit.
3/4th of the cover of a tobacco selling packet vividly displays the unfortunate consequences of tobacco smoking. And the duty of the government ends here. It has done enough to warn people of tobacco. If a person still use tobacco , its his/her own "informed decision". Barring him/her from doing that is infringement of personal rights. After all we are living in a free world.

2. If addiction has been raised as an issue here, I would like to question alcohol is addictive :Does it mean we should ban it ?And would it ever be possible? and even if this unthinkable is possible half of the European population would die of cold !
And just like drinking and driving has been banned , smoking in public places is banned across nations around the world and rightfully so :passive smoking has been dealt with ; non-smoking people have been safeguarded.

3. Everything that causes a disease or damage cannot be banned. Take for example , HIV/AIDS : unprotected sex MAY cause HIV/AIDS. That does not mean unprotected sex should be banned! The duty of the authorities is to educate people and let them take "informed decisions" as I had already mentioned before.

4. Statistics has been used to prove tobacco is responsible for many a deaths. I agree research has proved that the probability of suffering from COPD or Lung CA increases with smoking. But the catch here is "probability". There are hundreds of thousands of smokers in the world who haven't had the aforesaid diseases and there are millions of non-smokers suffering from those diseases!

5. Lastly , my friend has already admitted doing "wrong to the title"!!
Debate Round No. 2


Oh, that is weak. I did the title wrong. So what?
Due to the fact that you are a sewn out jack*ss, I'm not going to debate you. Please don't ever work on my debates again and feel free to block me. Also, the debate doesn't matter because from the comments I've gotten, they're just going to vote you no matter how good of a debate I do. So bye, hope we never talk again.


Abuse has ever done anyone any good.
Good luck buddy.
Take care.
God bless!
Debate Round No. 3


I am sorry for last night, I got a bit overwhelmed. God bless you too!


take care.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by dtaylor971 5 years ago
Posted by dtaylor971 5 years ago
Me too. Sorry.
Posted by luv2deb8 5 years ago
Sorry DTaylor, it just overwhelms me, debating does, I just found this site and got carried away. I was a bit harsh and I apologize.
Posted by luv2deb8 5 years ago
Dtaylor, you are quoting a bunch of statistics put out by medical journals, insurance co.s, and your uneducated opinions, That is what they want people to do is believe in all that, they get paid to put that info. which is not accurate, for people like you to trust it.
I have known people who have died of lung cancer and never smoked and refused to be around anyone who did and those people died young, one of the reasons is because their lungs do not build up an immunity and become weak. One friend I had decided to smoke to help her asthma, it did stop her asthma, however, she did not like smoking, but she said I would rather smoke than have the asthma.
Posted by dtaylor971 5 years ago
Did you even READ my debate?!
To bash me like that is unhumanlike.
Posted by luv2deb8 5 years ago
It's absolutely the most ridiculous thing to do, this ban.
This country started on tobacco, billions lived and not diagnosed with cancer. Why was SHS not even used until the 80's, How can they open up a body and say, this person died from SHS, it's impossible. How come people stop having asthma when they begin to smoke. The medical industry is making a mint on trying to get people to stop smoking. How can a body be examined from a heart attack & determine smoking was the cause. People get paid everywhere to SAY that's what killed this person. Presidents smoke, celebrities, politicians, everyday good people smoke and should not be insulted by you do good, illiterate non smokers. I am going to start my own thread about smoking.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
You believe it should be banned?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by SloppyJoe6412 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Although Pro should be deducted points for losing his cool, his position is essentially correct. Con made many good points but failed to properly value the addictiveness of tobacco, which undermines the "free choice" argument.
Vote Placed by 19debater19 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:43 
Reasons for voting decision: That was very entertaining.