• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the US government ban tobacco?

Should the US government ban tobacco?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Maybe


Results are only viewable after voting.

Josie

*probably reading smut*
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
56,759
Reaction score
30,961
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?
 
No, it will just create a black market.

However, it should absolutely regulate cigarettes for safety (stuff like a maximum amount of tar or carcinogens.) Even if that product will never be safe (its literally a poison), it can at least minimize risks as is feasible.
 

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?

Well, on one hand it would help with preventable disease caused by smoking.

On the other hand, banning things like drugs, alcohol, and other "vices" often pushes them underground, and criminalizing them only puts more people in jail without stopping the vice.

I think education and free choice should remain the policy.
 

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?
Has Al Gore chimed in on this?

As late as 1988, Al Gore was bragging in a speech to tobacco farmers in North Carolina, ``Throughout most of my life, I raised tobacco. I want you to know that with my own hands, all of my life, I put it in the plant beds and transferred it. I've hoed it. I've dug in it. I've sprayed it, I've chopped it, I've shredded it, spiked it, put it in the barn and stripped it and sold it.' And made money growing a carcinogen that killed other people's loved ones. Gore made this speech, remember, four years after his sister's death. And 24 years after the surgeon general's report.


At a luncheon the day after his speech, Gore was challenged by Morton M. Kondracke of Roll Call to explain this jarring inconsistency. Here is his answer: " The truth is, Mort, I myself was still an example of the phenomena that I've described a moment ago. In spite of having suffered the loss, I still felt a numbness that prevented me from integrating into all aspects of my life the implications of what that tragedy really meant. And I, uh, it's a natural human failing that we all have. It's a time to fully accept the most important lessons in life. A time for a new awareness, a new way of thinking again, slowly and you grow into it. A few years after that, I surrendered the annual check that I received from . . . my tobacco . . . but I continued to receive it for several years even after her death. My father and mother continued to grow tobacco on our farm for several years after her death . . . . We experienced that numbness characteristic of loss. And sometimes you never fully face up to things that you ought to face up to. You never fully learn the lessons that life has to teach you. But part of the cause I was constantly, um, tried to think about these questions due to my career in public service. I was blessed with opportunities to come back to it and examine it over a year again. And as I did, I grew into a greater awareness of the fact that this, this same tragedy that hit my family was hitting 400, 000 families a year."

 
They will never ban it! Never! There is so much tax money there us no way they will ban smoking. All the states need the money!
 
I voted No. If people want to smoke, that is their choice. Most know that it isn't healthy and can make their own decisions about their own health. If they did that, they would have to ban alcohol, because it is harmful to the user. They would have to ban sweets and fast foods, etc.
 
I quit smoking 5-6 years ago. At the end I was smoking American Spirit, which are supposedly all natural, organic, no chemicals...who knows. Anyways, they were a very clean smoke. After only a few weeks, if I smoked any other cigarette it tasted like chemicals. American Spirit was the only cigarette I smoked for about 7 years. Still I'm glad I quit, but ti this day I still use nicotine gum. LOL
 
I quit smoking 5-6 years ago. At the end I was smoking American Spirit, which are supposedly all natural, organic, no chemicals...who knows. Anyways, they were a very clean smoke. After only a few weeks, if I smoked any other cigarette it tasted like chemicals. American Spirit was the only cigarette I smoked for about 7 years. Still I'm glad I quit, but ti this day I still use nicotine gum. LOL
Yes, I would say if anything, ban the chemical processing. I quit more than 20 years ago, but I think it was Winston that also had a nautural, that I smoked before I quit. I think that made it easier as well to quit.
 
You're right. We need to give the cartels more money, power, and influence.

What could possibly go wrong?

Should we remove the ban on the substances that are illegal now?
 
Because bans don't work.

Question...

Are you sure you're a libertarian?

Yes, I'm sure I lean libertarian. I didn't say I was for the banning of substances......
 
I don't think tobacco should be banned, but I also don't want to pay for their long-term healthcare.

There should be a limit to coverage.
 

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?
or cocaine?
 
Should we remove the ban on the substances that are illegal now?
Bans on historical common usage items will never work. Have you read the history when prohibition occurred? There will be too big of a black market surge, along with throwing oversight out the window. This is a reason to legalize marijuana across the US. There is a huge unsafe underground distributing it. Regulate and tax it. Here in Oregon, weed is tested. You know what you are getting. It's now cheaper than when it was illegal, and the state makes a boatload of tax revenue on it.

And good edibles are available:

1651202475476.png


Maybe they could make an edible nicotine?
 

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?
I used to smoke, even in the 70's we knew it was a leading cause of cancer related deaths. The tobacco industry begged to differ but we knew.

Perhaps an approach could be to not give the tobacco industry a low tax rate, smokers sign a release so tax dollars don't go to their treatment, insurance companies can refuse to pay for smoking related illness. Mean I know but by now we all know the truth to tobacco... ✌️
 

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States.​


tobacco-health-statistics.png


With hundreds of thousands of people dying every year, should the government ban tobacco?

I did vote YES although I harbor serious doubts it would ever succeed.
So you can only really count my vote as symbolic.
All that having been said, it would be helpful if there was a major chunk of funding to figure out ways to help get
people off cigs, some kind of "antidote" or some sort of treatment that would SHUT OFF a person's desire for nicotine.
 
Back
Top Bottom