Smoking ban

[OnHerSolidFoundations]

Why would you not support this?

Almost everyone I know who ever smoked started long before they were the legal age to buy cigarettes, so making it illegal won't work for those who want to access cigarettes

By that logic we may as well do away with the under 18 restriction on buying them as well. People under 18 can get older people to buy them if they want to, it doesn't completely stop under 18s smoking, so why bother.

I didn't catch who was speaking, but there was a great bit on LBC yesterday about how the law is intended to work. It's about a cultural shift, they know to some extent people will find a way to smoke, but the hope is over time attitudes will change.
Personally I think it's taken far too long, should have been done decades ago.

I think there's an argument that prohibition didn't work, cannabis is being legalised and yet at some point in the future potentially you'll have 60 year olds buying cigarettes for 59 year olds and that would be illegal, or 40 and 39. You could get one person in a relationship allowed to smoke and one not. Not sure if the proposal is the best way to make a ban work

My DD was born in Feb 2009 so is banned. Her friends born on Dec 2008 can buy cigarettes when 18. So they can blow smoke rings in her face when they are 18.
Also are they really going to ID my 45 year old daughter in 30 years time?
Also the wider point is that shouldn't an adult get to decide what they do? It's ok for some people but not others? Alcohol causes issues too so why not ban that?
I hate smoking by the way, never smoked but what new laws will they bring in like this.....

It's already underground, people buy them illegally now as they are cheaper but with a ban the illegal ones will be sold at the higher price, it's a win for the criminal gangs

Exactly. Effectively the age to buy cigarettes will just keep going up a year. You'll have to be 19 to buy cigarettes in 2027, 20 years old in 2028 and so on.

This, to be honest I don't agree with smoking, drugs or heavy alcohol use. But banning it just fuels the criminal element in society. If you make these things legal but difficult to use, ie total ban on smoking in any public place then it's the individuals responsibility and they should also have to deal with the effects by paying for health care related to the use of these substances.

After all we have know for decades that smoking kills, this message was being trotted out in the 80's and 90's. No one has an excuse not to know this.

Making it illegal can make it more dangerous as you don't even know what you could be taking. Prohibition worked so well in America in the 1920's, more people died of moonshine then beforehand.

Asymmetric. I would happily support it, if they also ban cannabis, sugar, fat and alcohol. Parks in Cheltenham stink of cannabis and lots of fat people waddling around town last time I was there.

I think it will be unenforceable and so don't support it for that reason. I do think we should ban smoking immediately in all public places - it should only be allowed in private homes.

People know it kills yet still choose to do it. Bacon is apparently just as carcinogenic as cigarettes. Would those in support of the smoking ban also support a banning bacon?

I think it's a slippery slope. People know the dangers. If they're stupid enough to do something that will kill them then let them crack on. Drugs are banned and a huge chunk of the population do them anyway. There are lots of things that are bad for us. You have to let people make choices for their own lives whether they be good or bad.

It won't be a police matter. It will be a trading standards and licensing matter - just like underage cigarette sales are now.

My dad made it to 86 after smoking from age 9

@Illpickthatup "People know it kills yet still choose to do it. Bacon is apparently just as carcinogenic as cigarettes. Would those in support of the smoking ban also support a banning bacon?"

Can you point out the research backing this up? Or maybe just tell me how many bacon-related cancers the NHS has to deal with every year? Or maybe just stop making up utter rubbish.

It's definitely a good thing, anything that discourages young people from starting to become addicted to such a vile habit has to be a good thing. Surprised at how many people seem against it.
Lost both grandparents in their 60s to lung cancer and I just think we have to start banning this for future generations. An outright ban wouldn't work due to how many addicted people there are.

I'm a smoker and I'm good with the ban.

It might fuel an underground trade while it's still available to those who have access to purchase, but let's face it, we're gonna die off! And then the day will come when it's no longer available. And so the underground trade will become harder and harder, and I expect most people won't bother for a smoke.

I imagine it would have a large effect.

I'm not against a ban but I think it's very naive to think that kids just wont smoke anymore. Far better to spend money on educating everyone on what an awful idea it is.

I'm generally against being told what I can and cannot do however with smoking I think there is strong argument to ban completely given how totally awful it is for one's health. Different to say sugar, alcohol, red meat etc which are not unharmful in moderation.

The whole HoC just tinkers around the edges whilst ignoring the important issues.
What a waste of parliamentary time- the ban will be completely ineffective in any case.

MPs from all sides emulating Nero

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(15)00444-1/abstract

Your daughter can smoke now if she wants to. There's no legal age limit for smoking - the limit is on purchasing tobacco which is currently 18 but will rise by a year every year. It's really not that difficult to understand.

Yes, I agree. If children are being harmed, that's even more of a reason to clamp down on it.

There are various things where people who have that right get to keep it for the rest of their life, but younger people will never have that right - and thus will never have to get used to it/addicted to it and then suddenly lose it.

Should I be outraged because I could not legally drive without passing a driving test to prove my competence, just because my Grandad applied for and received his licence in the post before 1935 - and then got to keep that entitlement until he died?!

The only way that tobacco companies can continue is to recruit a new group of addicts. They have set out to trap children. Adults do not choose to smoke.
Children do. If they could not rely on a new cohort of 13 yr olds every year they would have to close their industries.
We need to save our children from this most unhealthy pursuit.
Already we save them from injury or reduce the risks where we can. Helmets for cycling. Special designed seats in cars. buoyancy aids on or near water. You will think of many other instances of how we care for our children.
Let us stop tobacco and vape industries and reduce risk further.

@Illpickthatup Well, I just went to the trouble of registering for the Lancet and reading the article - which I guess you didn't do as it doesn't support your assertion at all. It states that 50g of processed meat a day is associated with an 18% increased risk of colorectal cancer. Compare this with smoking which increases the risk of lung cancer by 2600% (not a typo). Not really comparable are they?

I don’t think it will work, hard to police as well

i would rather a complete ban on cigarettes from a certain date maybe 2030 or something

Yep I mean it’s not like there’s anything else to think about is there. The world is imploding and they’re titting about thinking of shit to ban

It will be up to trading standard to ensure that traders are properly checking ID, just as it is now. Not much changes in reality.