New smoking ban for anyone born after 2009

[Volbeat]

Hey all, just wondering what people's thoughts are on the smoking ban that will come into force which mean anyone born after 2009 will never legally be able to buy cigarettes.

My opinion is that it will be good for public health in general and I say this as a smoker. But what about all the tax etc generated from cigarette and vape sales?

Apologies if this is already being discussed, I've not seen it anywhere on here yet.

Thread here. Live and active now. Still no harm to discuss it on this thread you have started here though. 😃

Page 2 | Smoking ban | Mumsnet

Oops sorry, I even entered smoking ban in the advanced search section and this thread never came up for me 😳

I will copy and paste my post from that thread... @Volbeat

................................................................................................................................................................

I'm not really against the ban, but I don't know what good it will do. People born after 2009, will just get someone born before 2009 to buy their smokes! And eventually people will turn to the black market. I am not sure it will stop people smoking if they really want to smoke.

It seems a bit draconian and controlling. I loathe smoking and the stinky stench it makes, but something about this 'ban' and trying to stop people born after 2009 buying cigarettes isn't sitting well with me. I can't explain why.

Hey it's OK. As I said, it doesn't hurt to discuss it on CHAT too. It's on the Politics Board, so will likely drop off trending a bit by tomorrow. Less likely to do that when it's in CHAT.

I get what you mean about it being controlling. On the one hand I do think it's a positive move forward. On the other hand, like you said, it will probably create more problems down the line, the same way other illegal substances do.

Also I do wonder why do this with cigarettes and not say, with alcohol.

Good points!

I think there would be a massive outroar with alcohol. Rationed perhaps.

Also curious where the govt will recuperate cigarette tax.

People smoke, people drink alcohol, people take illegal substances. Cigarette companies aren’t allowed to advertise now but it’s ok to advertise alcohol. You only need to look at the culture around alcohol “It’s always 5pm somewhere” type mindsets. Social media plays a huge part in alcohol sales and to a point is normalising it, “have a drink feel great, kick back on a Friday having a huge glass of whatever.”

Alcohol is no way near as addictive as nicotine... some people struggle with alcoholism of course... but for the most part if you have a couple of beers one evening you will not end up having a beer every few hours for the rest of your life.
It's also the case that if you have a beer you aren't forcing everyone stood anywhere near you to have some of that beer too.
So I do actually think smoking is a much bigger health risk than Alcohol and should really be banned.
I tend to be quite Liberal about these things... I think there are some recreational drugs that should probably be legalised tbh.. but smoking is so antisocial and so addictive that I have to think this is a good step actually.

About bloody time it got banned. The harm it does to the lungs and people unable to breathe properly is awful. Raising the prices every budget or having the graphic warnings on the packages, or hiding them in closed cupboards hasn't stopped new people from taking it up so this is the best way to do it imo.

I don't see how it would be enforceable in the long run unless they make it a legal requirement to check ID for everyone buying cigarettes / tobacco.
In the short to medium term = fine the current think 25 policies work but what about after that?

@Volbeat you reference the tax generated. Currently the cost of treating smoking related illnesses far outweighs the tax generated by cigarettes and tobacco. So, while the tax generated will be lower after this ban, the strategy is that smoking related illnesses will fall and the cost of treating such illnesses will drop in parallel.

I get the theory, I'm just not sure how quickly it will be possible to see results.

I also wondered this. WHO statistics:

• 3 million people die worldwide each year from alcohol related deaths

• 8 million people die worldwide each year from tobacco related deaths

Smoking rates are high in Japan and apparently they don’t have the massive amounts of lung cancer that would be expected. And out of the people I know who got lung cancer none were smokers. I would rather the govt widened it’s safety net and tackled anxiety and mental health issues instead

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/16/house-of-commons-votes-in-favour-of-smoking-ban-despite-opposition-from-dozens-of-tories

Alcohol’s pretty lethal to others as well. It’s often a factor in violent crime, domestic abuse and road traffic accidents.

I honestly don't know how i feel about this. I suppose it makes sense but i dislike the principle of the government legislating what we can and cannot have access too based on whether or not its bad for us.
Its already illegal for children, they need implement the exisiting rules on underage smoking rather than making things illegal for adults who are capable of making decisions for themselves even if they are damaging.

It's a brilliant idea

I was quite a heavy smoker until it was banned everywhere

It made a huge difference to my mindset and finally giving up

Alcohol doesn’t have the same externalities as cigarettes and vaping.

A person can have a drink and not impact anyone around them in any way. They only will negatively impact people if they overindulge or drink and engage in prohibited behaviors like driving. As long as people follow the rules, the health risk for alcohol consumption is entirely on the consumer.

cigarettes are entirely different. The way they are consumed spreads the health risk to other people, who may not even be present at the time of consumption.

I think a ban that accepts that some addicts have already been made but no more should ever be created is very smart.

As long as people follow the rules, the health risk for alcohol consumption is entirely on the consumer.

But people don’t follow the rules.

I'm not sure it will work in practice. Fines of £100 are not enough of an enforcement deterrent.

I would prefer targeting of vape sales (close down vape shops which are alleged in many cases to be money laundering fronts) and raising the minimum age of selling cigarettes say to 21.

i agree with the idea
cant see why not

i was smoking at 15, never stopped, until i started vaping.
i support the ban

I think its a good thing. Its a shame its not an all out ban on any sales imo. Smoking damages health, nothing good comes from it. Vaping also needs banning.

Im For it. I used to smoke and almost of my friends through teens and 20s. Now with my teens hardly any of their friends do, due to the restrictions. There’s been a huge culture shift around smoking. Yes if someone who is currently 15 desperately wanted to smoke they could get someone older to buy them, but it would be extreme. As for the black market idea, older people will still be able to buy them from a shop so what would be the need for that?

I also think alcohol sales could be restricted by times like it used to be.

Humans don’t tend to make great decisions for themselves!

vaping for children, designed with fruit flavours, in pink packages, are just wrong imo