What do you think about banning cigarettes for good?

t.v ads and in some places smoking is alreddy banned

Answer #1

in response to your statement “it has to not proven that second hand smoke kills other people it is a suggested fact which cannot and will never be proven neither has it or will it ever be proven that smoking cause cancer “

In early 1993, EPA released a report (Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders; EPA/600/6-90/006 F) that evaluated the respiratory health effects from breathing secondhand smoke (also called environmental tobacco smoke (ETS)). In that report, EPA concluded that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer in adult nonsmokers and impairs the respiratory health of children. These findings are very similar to ones made previously by the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Surgeon General.

The EPA report classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen, a designation which means that there is sufficient evidence that the substance causes cancer in humans. The Group A designation has been used by EPA for only 15 other pollutants, including asbestos, radon, and benzene. Only secondhand smoke has actually been shown in studies to cause cancer at typical environmental levels. EPA estimates that approximately 3,000 American nonsmokers die each year from lung cancer caused by secondhand smoke.

Every year, an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 children under 18 months of age get pneumonia or bronchitis from breathing secondhand tobacco smoke. Secondhand smoke is a risk factor for the development of asthma in children and worsens the condition of up to one million asthmatic children.

EPA has clear authority to inform the public about indoor air pollution health risks and what can be done to reduce those risks. EPA has a particular responsibility to do everything possible to warn of risks to the health of children.

A recent high profile advertising and public relations campaign by the tobacco industry may confuse the American public about the risks of secondhand smoke. EPA believes it’s time to set the record straight about an indisputable fact: secondhand smoke is a real and preventable health risk.

EPA absolutely stands by its scientific and well documented report. The report was the subject of an extensive open review both by the public and by EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a panel of independent scientific experts. Virtually every one of the arguments about lung cancer advanced by the tobacco industry and its consultants was addressed by the SAB. The panel concurred in the methodology and unanimously endorsed the conclusions of the final report.

The report has also been endorsed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the National Cancer Institute, the Surgeon General, and many major health organizations.

Answer #2

You’d all better pray to God (or whatever) that smoking remains legal because if it doesn’t, all the tax burden us smokers have been carrying will be passed on to you. If smoking becomes illegal, all the smokers will still get their cigarettes and cigars, but the nonsmokers will pay by sucking up more of the tax burden. Yay! Let’s outlaw cigarettes today! =)

PS: y’all would deserve it, ya prigs.

Answer #3

I don’t like the idea of the government banning cigs at all and I wish that restaurants and such had the foresight to set up good smoking and nonsmoking areas to begin with so we wouldn’t have this mess. It’s no good having to walk through a smoking section to get to the nonsmoking section. A little common sense could have gone a long way.

Answer #4

I think people should be allowed to have 100% control over what they put into their bodies, to the extent it does not cause risk to me.

So, I’m all for banning smoking in public , as well as advertising it, but I’m not in favor of banning the purchase, sale, manufacture or consumption of smokes.

Answer #5

yeah I agree with toadaly, I think it would be a good idea to ban smoking in public areas like parks and on the sidewalks, but in the privacy of our own home we should be able to do whatever we want.

Answer #6

“Secondhand tobacco smoke is a health risk - proven to cause cancer in adults. Infants and children are particularly vulnerable to tobacco smoke because their lungs and respiratory tracts are still growing. “


also taxes are going up on helth care and most deaths are caused by smoking leading to cancer

Answer #7

people are going to do things whether you like it or not… when they tried to ban alcohol, the mob was formed (and now they cant get rid of it…) push too hard, and people will just push back… if people want to kill themselves, then there’s nothing the government can do…

Answer #8

The banning of smoking in public places would be good. In my country you cannot smoke indoors in public places, restaurants, etc, but you can go outside the place and smoke. Suddenly the thick smell of cigarette smoke was gone from inside clubs - and replaced by the smell of body odour which had been masked by the cigarette smoke. But at least BO can’t cause cancer. I personally would be in favour to extending it to all public places, but any further than that become thorny - people should be able to do whatever they want in their own home, but is it right to subject young children to the smoke of their parents in the home?

Answer #9

People have the right to choice surely and can I say it has to not proven that second hand smoke kills other people it is a suggested fact which cannot and will never be proven neither has it or will it ever be proven that smoking cause cancer

Another thing if everyone was to stop smoking and nobody bought cigarettes then the government would have to find the tax some where else like wages or council tax etc because at least 3 pound off of one packet of cigarettes goes to the governemt its one of the highest incomes of tax along with oil!!

Give people the choice

Answer #10

Stellaapplemoor, you are right when you say smoking in public is a completely different matter to the issue of smoking in general. What muddies the line for me, is when you children, who are unable to choose for themselves, are exposed to the passive smoking of their Parents in their own home. Studies show that passive smoke at a young age is much worse for you than when you are grown. How do you stop youngsters from being affected by passive smoke in the home environment, while retaining a person’s right to smoke in general, especially in their own home? I can’t see a way of having both, and it’s bugging me.

Answer #11

I think dey should b banned 4 gd ho ever created dem are assholes cause just think if these were never created your family and even you would live atleast another 3 years longer…I mean there grose and why smoke dem dey dont look cool…u needa look after your bodys not feed it with nicortine but den agen I dont fink itll ever b banned cause over 70% of da world smoke now adays xx

Answer #12

Smoking in public is a completely different matter to smoking in general. Smoking in public allows passive smokin which is an effect on other people who may not want to smoke. Smoking in general is what people choose do to themselves. I don’t think the government can really control what people do their own bodies…people are still always smoking cannabis…even though it may limit it. If they made smoking illegal then people would start going to dealers…whom may be a gateway to other drugs such as cannabis and maybe even higher classed drugs.

Answer #13

smokers dont seem to get much of a say on things these days ,but what ever happened to FREEWILL and to making our own choices…places like pubs should advertise on there pubs smokers welcome or non smokers only that way pepople get a choice to go inside or not then all parties are happy.people are to quick to judge others on everything thing in life and it should be down to the indevidual to have that choice to say yes or no

Answer #14

At the most, I could see the government regulating that behavior (smoking) only as far as it impacts other people. For example, no smoking in public areas due to secondary smoke, in a house or car with children, etc…

Otherwise, smoking is an individuals choice. I am firmly opposed to the government dictating ANY choices - unless that choice may impact other people negatively.

Is there really a need to go as far as to ban a new father from sharing a cigar with friends after a son or daughter is born? Is there really a need to ban a person from smoking a cigarette every once in awhile if they want to?

Not to sound like an alarmist, but honestly - freedoms of choice and action are a hallmark of being an American. How far do we want to go to tell our government to regulate individual thinking, behavior, and action?

[By the way, accidentally sent a friend request =P]

Answer #15

but theres kids at parks

Answer #16

good question

Answer #17

all public smoking should be banned. but also the chemicals in tobacco should be regulated, as they cause the most damage.

Answer #18

much better!

Answer #19

any restaurant, fine. But parks and bars, hell no.

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!

Morgan Legal Group PC

Legal Services, Law Firms, Attorneys