• warm@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    Good on the UK… for once…

    It seems the minimum age will slowly increase, basically meaning anyone under 18 now and anyone born in the future will be unable to smoke cigarettes.

    There will be the classic “black market hurr durr” people like when other drugs were banned, but evidence always shows it’s better overall.

    • UnspecificGravity@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      So the idea is that we want to legalize marijuana because its totally unreasonable for the government to tell us what we can put in our body, but also ban tobacco because “its bad.” Is that about the size of it?

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Both are bad for you. Ideally the UK would spend on education and people would just choose themselves not to smoke, but I guess they would rather ban it and keep the population dumb.

      • PugJesus@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Tobacco is considerably worse.

        In any case, this doesn’t appear to criminalize possession, which is the usual sticking point for people against drug prohibition.

            • UnspecificGravity@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Not a single source in that article actually quantifies the difference that you just described as “significant”. Want to try again? Or do you just want to admit that you said a thing that seemed like it was true and then googled it for the first time when I asked you to?

              I think the main point here is: why does this matter even if its true?

              Either the state is in charge of forcing you not to buy things that are unhealthy or it isn’t. If it is then there is no reason not to also ban Marijuana for the same reason even if it is “less bad” than tobacco. No one is arguing that its good for you. Why not bad refined sugar and caffein and thousands of other things that are bad for you?

              • PugJesus@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Not a single source in that article actually quantifies the difference that you just described as “significant”. Want to try again? Or do you just want to admit that you said a thing that seemed like it was true and then googled it for the first time when I asked you to?

                Holy fucking shit, did you not read even the first three paragraphs of the link

                For example, federally funded research at the University of California, Los Angeles compared the lifetime risk of lung cancer among more than 2,000 long-term marijuana smokers, tobacco smokers, and non-smokers.

                Investigators determined that those who regularly smoked cigarettes possessed a 20-fold higher lung cancer risk than non-smokers. Those who only smoked marijuana had no elevated risk.

                Either the state is in charge of forcing you not to buy things that are unhealthy or it isn’t. If it is then there is no reason not to also ban Marijuana for the same reason even if it is “less bad” than tobacco. No one is arguing that its good for you. Why not bad refined sugar and caffein and thousands of other things that are bad for you?

                You’re absolutely right, time to abolish the FDA and go back to heroin cough syrup over-the-counter.

                Imagine having such a childishly boolean view of the world.

                • UnspecificGravity@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Holy fucking shit, did you not read even the first three paragraphs of the link

                  Do you know what the word “quantify” means? Maybe look it up before you reply?

                  You’re absolutely right, time to abolish the FDA and go back to heroin cough syrup over-the-counter.

                  You know that the UK doesn’t have the “FDA” right?

                  Imagine having such a childishly boolean view of the world.

                  Hilarious perspective from a person that forgot what country we are talking about.

    • FireXtol@piefed.socialBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      *unable to legally purchase

      They will continue to smoke and vape. I guarantee it. Their activity will simply be criminalized. Which isn’t good for anyone.

      The evidence shows people will find a way and prohibitions aren’t effect and mostly results in inferior and sometimes dangerous product being sold in place of what should be highly regulated and consistent.

      • warm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Existing people will, but making something harder to get will reduce smokers. It will also fade out of culture through the generations.

        Why do people always think it has to be immediate benefits or none at all?

  • Lantsu@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Is the ban also on vapes, e-cigs, snus and nicotine pouches etc? Or only for cigarettes? Either way, the black market will work out for the people who want to use these products.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I just keep thinking about like two friends with birthdays on either side of the line. Sure the one will buy for the other but not without giving him shit every time.