Enhanced Cigarette Warning Labels...

[Dries van Tonder]

Don't smoke when breastfeeding. You might burn your mum's tits

[mistermack]

So is alcohol, but we saw where making that illegal got us in the 20's, at least here in the U.S.

Actually, it is getting more and more illegal.
Perhaps there are already "smokeasies" run by the mafia, that we just haven't heard of yet.
I'd go.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm waiting for there to be mandatory two inch bands on cigars with similar images....

But, I guess cigars "ought to be illegal" because they are bad for you.

After that, we'll make bonfires illegal, because they give off unnecessary smoke. Then we should make skydiving illegal, because it's dangerous and the airplanes give off fumes and smoke. And, we should also have a government prescribed official daily diet, and make it a misdemeanor to deviate from it - and require that all meals served at all restaurants adhere to specific dietary specifications. Then our televisions should pop on in the morning directing us to do our daily exercises, and instructing us on proper Party discipline... it's for our own good....

[mistermack]

Yep. I smoke cigars, but I'd prefer it if they were illegal. It would take the temptation away.
People do need protection against themselves. Especially the young.
America has no objection to that principle. Your drink laws are far more strict than ours, or most european countries.
Smoking is dangerous at any level. Moderate drinking is harmless.
Even though I smoke, I would vote for it to be banned.

I'm not saying it's practical, or stands a chance of happening. But if it did, I'd vote for it.

[Coito ergo sum]

Yep. I smoke cigars, but I'd prefer it if they were illegal. It would take the temptation away.

Why not just smoke them if you want to, and don't if you don't.

People do need protection against themselves. Especially the young.

That's why we make smoking illegal for kids. But, plenty of modern, first world nations don't, and their kids are just fine.

America has no objection to that principle. Your drink laws are far more strict than ours, or most european countries.

Plenty of Americans do have an objection to that, including me. However, just because we have some nanny laws doesn't mean that all of them are just as reasonable as any other. At some point, sand needs to be thrown on the slippery slope to slow down the slippage.

Smoking is dangerous at any level. Moderate drinking is harmless.

Depends who you listen to at both counts. The "dangerous at any level" folks are like the "Reefer Madness" crowd.

Even though I smoke, I would vote for it to be banned.

Take some responsibility. Quit the damn things. Grow a pair.

I'm not saying it's practical, or stands a chance of happening. But if it did, I'd vote for it.

Not me. I'd vote for legalizing alcohol at any age, cigarettes too, and legal drugs dispensed at pharmacies, like coke, heroin, etc. Regulated - taxed, etc. The substance abuse issue would be decriminalized, and we could end the DEA and the ATF and all drug enforcement activities, saving something like $100 billion in the US a year, and if we took 10% of that and dedicated it to education, regulation and reasonable time, place and manner controls, there wouldn't be a problem and we'd end most drug-related violent crime.

[mistermack]

Yeh right. Not enough education.
That's a good idea. Tell kids that drugs are bad for you.
I don't understand why nobody's thought of that. I think you might be onto something.
Or on something.

[Coito ergo sum]

Yeh right. Not enough education.
That's a good idea. Tell kids that drugs are bad for you.
I don't understand why nobody's thought of that. I think you might be onto something.
Or on something.

It's the education part that has actually worked to reduce smoking and drug use.

It's also worked quite well in places where it's not illegal for children to smoke. If it can work there, then there's no reason it can't work here.

Making booze illegal didn't keep people from drinking. Making ciggies illegal will just make people go underground for it and pay exhorbitant rates for ciggies. Then an underground market will grow, causing people to kill and die for the profits of the illegal trade. Your alternative is to start another "war on drugs" - a "war on tobacco." Good luck with that.

[surreptitious57]

Education is only for the ignorant. Most adults in Europe and North America are fully aware of the effects of regular smoking. But some still persist in spite of all the health warnings. But why this assumption that we always give due consideration to our health ? Unless you are a professional athlete, most of us are not going to be obsessive compulsive about it. You would be hard pressed to find a regular joe who doesn't drink, smoke, drug take and / or eat junk food. And here is where the health lobby gets it wrong. People do these aforementioned things because they provide them with pleasure in spite of, or even because of, the risk. And as long as there is that level of excitement, then there will always be those who indulge in it. Knowing that something is wrong doesn't necessarily stop you from wanting to do it. If you truly want to stop human beings taking substances that are detrimental to their health, then the way to do it is to remove the desire in the first place. And given how we have been taking chemicals both legal and illegal since we first walked this Earth, I would suggest that that option is nigh on impossible to implement. By all means educate the population. Absolutely. But as long as everyone is fully aware of the consequences, they should be allowed to make a decision for themselves about what they wish to put into their bodies, as long as they are not harming anyone else.

[Coito ergo sum]

Education is only for the ignorant. Most adults in Europe and North America are fully aware of the effects of regular smoking.

Adults can benefit from quitting smoking programs (which would be part of the education). The point is that the amount of money spent on drug, alcohol and even tobacco enforcement is is astronomical, and a fraction of that could be spent on educating children not to start in the first place, advertising against smoking and other substances, and funding addiction related programs.

The war on drugs failed. Prohibition failed. What in the world makes anyone think that wars on tobacco will have any greater success?

Plus, there are countries who don't even have minimum smoking ages, and they are getting along just fine. And, I'm not talking third world holes - I'm talking "western European" countries.

But some still persist in spite of all the health warnings.

So what? I persist in smoking cigars from time to time in spite of all the health warnings. Fuck anyone who says I shouldn't. I like it. I know the risk, and everyone can fuck right off. A glass of scotch and a cigar is a pleasure. Yes there is risk. But, there is risk in swimming, and jogging and other daily pursuits, too.

But why this assumption that we always give due consideration to our health ? Unless you are a professional athlete, most of us are not going to be obsessive compulsive about it. You would be hard pressed to find a regular joe who doesn't drink, smoke, drug take and / or eat junk food.

All of which are up to them, no?

And here is where the health lobby gets it wrong. People do these aforementioned things because they provide them with pleasure in spite of, or even because of, the risk. And as long as there is that level of excitement, then there will always be those who indulge in it. Knowing that something is wrong doesn't necessarily stop you from wanting to do it. If you truly want to stop human beings taking substances that are detrimental to their health, then the way to do it is to remove the desire in the first place.

That's impossible. Prohibition tried to do that, and failed miserably. The war on drugs tries to do that, and fails miserably. If you banned ciggies altogether, then secret distribution networks would pop up, and a criminal industry would supply people who wanted the ciggies.

And given how we have been taking chemicals both legal and illegal since we first walked this Earth, I would suggest that that option is nigh on impossible to implement. By all means educate the population. Absolutely. But as long as everyone is fully aware of the consequences, they should be allowed to make a decision for themselves about what they wish to put into their bodies, as long as they are not harming anyone else.

Bingo!

[Robert_S]

I'm with CES on the criminalization part. People, especially young people, really especially adolescent youths seem to like rebelling against authority. Making things illegal makes them cool, which counteracts the de-cooling of the proposed packaging.


AS for the rights of tobacco companies, fuck them. As far as I'm concerned, they can just go right out of business and their execs can dig ditches.

[mistermack]

Why not just smoke them if you want to, and don't if you don't.

That's your dumbest yet !! That's EXACTLY what I do do. You silly fucker. I would just prefer not to want to.

That's why we make smoking illegal for kids. But, plenty of modern, first world nations don't, and their kids are just fine.

It's illegal for shops to sell tobacco and alcohol to kids here. I don't think it's illegal for kids to smoke, or to drink. There are laws about drinking in public places, but not in private.

Take some responsibility. Quit the damn things. Grow a pair.

You really haven't got a clue what you're talking about, have you?
You seem to live in a very simple world. It's no wonder you have all the answers.

Not me. I'd vote for legalizing alcohol at any age, cigarettes too, and legal drugs dispensed at pharmacies, like coke, heroin, etc. Regulated - taxed, etc. The substance abuse issue would be decriminalized, and we could end the DEA and the ATF and all drug enforcement activities, saving something like $100 billion in the US a year, and if we took 10% of that and dedicated it to education, regulation and reasonable time, place and manner controls, there wouldn't be a problem and we'd end most drug-related violent crime.

And there is no chance whatsoever that it would all go wrong, no chance of a huge increase in drug addiction, alcoholism, smoking and cancer?
Not in your simple world.

Isn't it funny, that so many americans are overweight? Surely someone should tell them that food addiction is bad for you? Or maybe, when people have free unfettered access to addictive substances, they get addicted! Has that not occurred to you? But after you've vastly increased addiction rates, they could get you to go on tv and tell all those people to "grow a pair" and give up. I'm sure that would do the trick. In your simple world.

[Coito ergo sum]

Why not just smoke them if you want to, and don't if you don't.

That's your dumbest yet !! That's EXACTLY what I do do. You silly fucker. I would just prefer not to want to.

So, don't. A mindset that you're not in control of yourself is self-fulfilling. You act like a child. "I smoke and I want to quit, but it's hard, so someone do it for me."

That's why we make smoking illegal for kids. But, plenty of modern, first world nations don't, and their kids are just fine.

It's illegal for shops to sell tobacco and alcohol to kids here. I don't think it's illegal for kids to smoke, or to drink. There are laws about drinking in public places, but not in private.

Here it's illegal for kids to smoke until they are 18 - used to be 16. Hasn't had much of an effect on anything.

Take some responsibility. Quit the damn things. Grow a pair.

You really haven't got a clue what you're talking about, have you?
You seem to live in a very simple world. It's no wonder you have all the answers.

Of course I do. I used to smoke cigarettes. I quit. I know exactly how difficult it is.

I don't have all the answers, but I certainly don't capitulate to silly notions like yours.

Not me. I'd vote for legalizing alcohol at any age, cigarettes too, and legal drugs dispensed at pharmacies, like coke, heroin, etc. Regulated - taxed, etc. The substance abuse issue would be decriminalized, and we could end the DEA and the ATF and all drug enforcement activities, saving something like $100 billion in the US a year, and if we took 10% of that and dedicated it to education, regulation and reasonable time, place and manner controls, there wouldn't be a problem and we'd end most drug-related violent crime.

And there is no chance whatsoever that it would all go wrong, no chance of a huge increase in drug addiction, alcoholism, smoking and cancer?
Not in your simple world.

There was a war on drugs, and an increase in addiction, etc. That actually happened. You want to adopt that same model to deal with smoking. What's the chance that there will be an increase in addiction to ciggies when that policy is followed?

Isn't it funny, that so many americans are overweight?

Brits aren't too far behind.

Surely someone should tell them that food addiction is bad for you?

The vast majority of people who are overweight are not "addicted" to food. They eat too much.

Or maybe, when people have free unfettered access to addictive substances, they get addicted!

When people had free, unfettered access to coke, heroin and LSD, a smaller percentage of the population was addicted.

Has that not occurred to you? But after you've vastly increased addiction rates, they could get you to go on tv and tell all those people to "grow a pair" and give up. I'm sure that would do the trick. In your simple world.

Has it not occurred to you that the war on drugs was the cause of more addiction than it solved, and created - like alcohol prohibition before it - a massive glut of organized and unorganized crime that has killed far more people than were ever saved by it? Has it not occurred to you that your solution is the simplistic one? "Make it illegal, so people can't do it." How many times has that been tried and failed? How many times has it succeeded? The answer to the former is "every time," and the answer to the latter is "never." But, you want to do it again. What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

[laklak]

Folks I know up in North Carolina can't wait for tobacco to be illegal, gives them a whole new cash crop.

Fucking idiot government. Fucking idiot consumers. Fucking idiots, full stop, goddamn world is full of fucking whining baby pussy idiots.

[mistermack]

Why not just smoke them if you want to, and don't if you don't.

Of course I do. I used to smoke cigarettes. I quit. I know exactly how difficult it is.

You have a severe case of Morton's Demon. You actually only see what you want to see. That's why you end up contradicting yourself in this ridiculous fashion.

And Morton's demon is so cunning, I do believe you don't even know that it's there. I'm sure it will help you worm out of this silly contradiction. (in your own head).

[tattuchu]

This new labeling actually makes me want to start smoking! I need to collect all the pictures! It's like Pokemon. Gotta get 'em all