Rishi Sunak considers banning cigarettes for next generation

Rishi Sunak is considering introducing some of the world’s toughest anti-smoking measures that would in effect ban the next generation from ever being able to buy cigarettes, the Guardian has learned.

Whitehall sources said the prime minister was looking at measures similar to those brought in by New Zealand last December. They involved steadily increasing the legal smoking age so tobacco would end up never being sold to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009.

DeathsEmbrace,

Ban alcohol too or it’s hypocrisy once again.

umbrella,

ban every single drug and watch how wrong its gonna go

they simply cannot stop repeating the mistakes of the past can they

aceshigh,
@aceshigh@lemmy.world avatar

banning is never the answer. people will migrate to a different dissociative substance and it’ll increase bootlegs and criminal activity.

jasory,

This doesn’t matter. The question is whether a ban constitutes a greater social harm than legalisation. The fact that people can evade the ban doesn’t matter, after all murder is illegal but people still do it (at a much lower rate).

force,

Yea the one reason I’m against flat out legalization of every drug (only wanting decriminalization) is because people who shouldn’t have access to the drug would have significantly easier access to the drug (just having someone buy it for them). Primarily kids, since they practically constantly do that with cigarettes and alcohol and have started especially doing it recently with vapes and weed as weed has become less and less banned. I’m pretty confident a majority of high schoolers vape and that’s because they’re very easy to legally get and therefore they usually have someone buy them for them, and also a lot just get sold vapes by the vendors anyways and neither the vendor nor the buyer really stand a chance of getting caught just because of how little you can do to actually control that (without relying on a bunch of kids just going and telling cops “this place sold us vapes”)

Kids obviously aren’t immune to doing crack or heroin now but if it were just legalized it’d make sense that the amount of them abusing it illegally would become wayyyy higher. And that really IS a (big) problem, unlike shit like books that don’t follow a certain agenda or drag queen story hour. It could screw up a large portion of the population for their young life. Best you could do to prevent such effects is teach how to be safe with drugs and how to prevent/reduce certain bad things from happening (already good idea anyways), and to implement draconian (and expensive & time/resource consuming) measures that would make monitoring all the children & drug stores extremely closely at almost all times a possibility so you could nip the bud of any absurdities like adults giving/selling drugs to students early on.

I see just decriminalization as not much of a risk because you aren’t basically enabling businesses everywhere to (legally) sell these drugs, which would generally make it more accessible to kids, you’re just making it so doing drugs won’t get you fucked by the authorities and destroy your life in an unnecessary way through prison “rehabilitation” (slavery aimed not to rehabilitate but just to make money off the prisoners with little regard for their rehabilitation or their life), or just getting shot/falsely arrested by cops, or maybe stopping false searches too.

jasory,

I agree to a point. However I think that decriminalisation fails to recognise that drug courts are quite effective at rehabilitation. It’s important to minimise the effects of imprisonment and criminal record for drug offences that way individuals always have an opportunity to higher income careers. (Although from my experience, competitive jobs markets ignore drug felonies and sometimes even violent felonies). The solution isn’t to completely defang the state and just hope that people decide to quit drugs while dealing with all the problems they cause along the way. States need to have some ability to pressure individuals to rehabilitation.

The latter part of your comment is just leftist conspiracism. The percentage of false arrests is heavily out weighed by guilty parties getting away. You can easily find this by both reading papers on it or just going to your local homeless shelter and talking to people. An encounter with police is much more likely to involve you getting away with a crime than falsely accused.

Prison labor is also not profitable, the majority of prisons are publicly run. The idea that high incarceration rates are because the state somehow makes money by enslaving people is completely false.

umbrella,

the problem is how that ban is evaded.

historically this creates drug lords and an illegal drug trade

loutr,
@loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

I’m very pro-legalization but honestly tobacco is a shit drug. No real high, very addictive and awful health effects. I don’t see many people going through the hassle of maintaining their addiction illegally if it was banned everywhere.

umbrella, (edited )

I don’t see many people going through the hassle of maintaining their addiction illegally

Tobacco addicts are on another level. I’ve met people who kicked cocaine but couldn’t quit cigs.

Shit, where I live cigarettes are expensive and there is already a gray market for untaxed tobacco.

MrScottyTay,

You could say its harder to quit cigs because it’s more publicly available though.

DogMuffins,

I think the reason tobacco is so hard to kick is just because there’s no immediate deleterious effects. Why quit this week when you could quit next week or next month?

loutr,
@loutr@sh.itjust.works avatar

I know, I am one :( But I also know that if I had to go to a dealer to buy cigarettes, I couldn’t smoke in public and it was as socially frowned upon as hard drugs I’d have a much easier time quitting.

ours,

Checks history

Wait a minute…

andthenthreemore,

How would that even work? You can easily make alcohol at home, can’t exactly do that with tobacco.

Psythik,

I’m sure you could just grow your own tobacco at home if you really wanted to. Like how people grow their own weed.

andthenthreemore,

True. I should have said it’s not something you could easily do.

GoodGrief_HowDareYou,

You can buy tobacco seeds off of Amazon, they just need daily watering, stable temps and good lighting if memory serves

anthoniix,

Good

spauldo,

I’ve been suggesting they do this in the states for a while now.

I smoke. I like smoking, and I don’t plan to quit. But it’s obvious that most people want smoking to go away. They keep increasing the price of cigarettes, they keep banning smoking in new areas, and every time they’ll tell you it’s to keep kids from smoking. It’s a lie - they want everyone to stop smoking.

So fine. Set a date, and make it illegal for anyone born after that date to smoke. Then leave us smokers alone. If it’s as bad for us as you say it is, we’ll all die soon anyway.

Will some people born after that date smoke? Sure. But the majority won’t. And it’ll be a constant annoyance for them that they can’t just go buy a carton at the store, which will encourage them to quit. I’d feel sorry for them, but I was told it was bad for me, not that I’d be standing outside in -50° weather puffing as fast as I can because I can’t smoke in my hotel room, or that I’d spend more on cigarettes than I do electricity. They at least know they’ll never be allowed to smoke.

Rouxibeau,

You don’t like smoking; you’re addicted to a harmful drug. You have nicotine induced Stockholm syndrome.

Gerula,

Are you sure about this?

spauldo,

Oh, you’re a mind reader now? You don’t know me, buddy.

DogMuffins,

they keep banning smoking in new areas, and every time they’ll tell you it’s to keep kids from smoking. It’s a lie - they want everyone to stop smoking.

That’s just not the case, at all. I’m a very recent ex-smoker and non-smoking areas absolutely helped me stop, but not for the reason you might think.

In Australia it’s the same - cigarettes getting more expensive and the number of places you can smoke reducing.

No one ever suggested that it’s to keep kids from smoking - the message has always been pretty clear: every cigarette is doing harm, so less places to smoke means less harm.

The main benefit of non-smoking areas is that it made me realise that withdrawals and cravings are really no big deal. About 5 years ago I was terrified of trying to stop because I had convinced myself that the withdrawals would be awful. Then I took a job at a place where it just wasn’t possible to smoke even on breaks. The most noticeable thing was that getting through the entire day without a smoke was actually no big deal - the symptoms were very manageable.

So, to say “they” want everyone to smoke is an odd take IMO. The assumption is that everyone want’s to stop - and non-smoking areas assist with that.

I don’t really believe that you do enjoy smoking. I mean, sitting with friends and having a few beers and smokes is certainly an enjoyable activity - but it’s not the smoking that makes it enjoyable. Anyhow, even if you did truly enjoy smoking, I guess you unfortunately just have to cater for the majority who do not.

teolan,
@teolan@lemmy.world avatar

Non-smoking area are also there so that the people around smokers don’t have to breathe cancer they never asked for.

A absolutely hate how every time I go eat on a restaurant terrace the experience is ruined by some guy next to me smoking…

DogMuffins,

Yeah. That is one of the purported reasons for non-smoking areas, all though your actual risk of cancer must be pretty minor surely.

If you worked in a bar then yeah - breathing the smoke-filled air all shift for many years might effect your risk profile.

Catching a whiff of tobacco not so much.

teolan,
@teolan@lemmy.world avatar

Passive smoking is health problem as soon it’s indoor, but even when it’s not a health issue, smoke fucking stinks.

drewofdoom,

I think this is a cultural difference. In the US it’s not uncommon for common sense health regulation to get ignored - such as the amount of sugar in soda - because people cause an uproar about freedoms being taken away.

But if you say it’s about the health of sweet, innocent children… well then suddenly it’s a lot more palatable for the public.

So here in the US, you can want everyone to stop smoking, but make the case that it is for the benefit of children in order to help achieve that goal.

spauldo,

Maybe things are different down under, but here in the states they very much do use the “keep kids from smoking” excuse. Every. Single. Time.

I don’t mind going outside or whatever so much. That wasn’t the point I was making. When I started smoking, you could still smoke in restaurants, airplanes, offices, etc. They still had ashtrays at the end of every aisle at the supermarket when I was a kid. Picking up smoking wasn’t a radical thing to do.

They’ve pushed us out to the fringes, but that’s fine. But their goal is to eliminate smoking. What I’m saying is that enough is enough. Let us smoke off away from everyone and die out.

Syldon,
@Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

You did that with alcohol. Prohibition does not work. It isn’t working with drugs; it will never work with cigarettes either.

spauldo, (edited )

Prohibition works most of the time. Do you know where to get your hands on some black tar heroin? I don’t, nor do most people.

Prohibition of alcohol took something that was popular and made it illegal. Of course it failed. Making tobacco illegal would fail if they did it for everyone. I’m suggesting they make it illegal for people who aren’t already addicted to it.

Edit: heroin, not heroine. Thanks, autocorrect.

Syldon,
@Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

I have no idea what black tar heroin is, but I am fairly sure I could find someone who sells drugs of any type locally. As I said the war on drugs has failed. Watch this video from an ex-UK policeman. This is what happens when you make things illegal.

spauldo,

The fact that you don’t know what it is is proof enough that the prohibition against it works. I have no interest in watching your video.

And besides, you’re missing the point. Prohibition of tobacco is coming. I’m not arguing in its favor. I’m suggesting that if they must prohibit tobacco, they phase it out instead of banning it outright.

Syldon,
@Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

Prohibition of tobacco is coming.

I have never seen Labour push this policy and Sunak has no time. I feel you are deluded on this one. I should add I am very much an anti smoking person. I just see this as a sensible option.

spauldo,

I would love to be wrong on that, but I don’t think I am.

Uncle_Bagel,

Kids are already not allowed to smoke or purchase nicotine products but millions of teenagers are still addicted to nicotine and vape like crazy. How can you enforce a ban for an entire age group? And how could you possibly justify an arbitrary ban that allows half the population to purchase and consume something and prohibits the ither half? A law that bans women from purchasing tobacco because it is harmful for a fetus would be struck down by every court in the nation, so why would a ban that discriminates against adults based kn age be any different?

spauldo,

Well, I guess we’ll just make it illegal for everyone and the old timers like me just have to deal with it. Thanks, I hate it.

qwerty,

How about we let adults make their own decisions. My body my choice.

Huschke,

Generally I agree with you, but with cigarettes you are not making the choice only for yourself. Every time you walk down the street with a cigarette in hand you are forcing other people to inhale it.

I was born in a world without a cigarette ban in restaurants and clubs and the current situation is 1000 time more preferable imo.

qwerty,

Then ban smoking in public.

Rouxibeau,

Addictive psychoactive substances strip you of choice. Everyone has the same chance and opportunity to start; but many have little to no opportunity to stop.

qwerty,

Alcohol, weed, porn, gambling, sex, gaming, candy… can be addictive. Let’s ban or strictly limit all of that coz people are too stupid to make their own decisions. Addictive psychoactive substances strip you of choice, so instead we’ll have politicians strip you of choice and make decisions for you.

Huschke,

What’s funny is that where I live a lot of the examples you mentioned ARE heavly mandated and limited.

Rouxibeau,

Many of those don’t harm another person. If you do it to yourself have fun. Public smoking/alcoholism should be prohibited.

FleetingTit,
@FleetingTit@feddit.de avatar

When people smoke at home with a window open the disgusting smell wafts out into the windows of unsuspecting non-smokers. It can’t be helped, smoking needs to be banned.

qwerty,

Then mandate smokers to smoke in a way that doesn’t affect other people. There’s plenty of things that can be done so that non-smokers don’t have to breath in smoke and smokers can retain autonomy over their bodies. But it’s not realy about that, is it? In a world where you pass hundreds smoke spewing machines every time you walk down the street, and every city requires a huge smoke making facility running 24/7 that can turn the whole sky gray if the wind blows the wrong way, cigarette smoke is the least of your worries. What it realy is about is control over other people, taking away their choice and forcing them to conform to your way of life.

Huschke,

I have said it time and time again. Smokers should have to wear those old diving helmets, but made out of glass. That way they can smoke as much as they want and don’t bother anyone but themselves!10 years ago people called me crazy, but maybe now we are heading in that direction. :)

lightnsfw,

When people do all kinds of shit at their homes it affects the surrounding neighborhood. When someone barbecues you can smell it down the street, when someone mows their lawn you hear it down the street, my neighbors were doing a lot of painting last week and I could smell that for a few days. I hate smoking as much as anyone but at a certain point you just have to deal with it.

Psythik,

deleted_by_author

    •
    monke,
    @monke@kbin.social avatar

    I'm Rishi Sunak

    Psythik,

    Oh okay. Don’t just “consider it”. Fucking do it.

    MrScottyTay,

    British prime minister

    Psythik,

    Thanks. What happened to Boris Johnson? Is he gone already? Am I seriously this out of touch?

    MrScottyTay,

    He got caught up in a scandal, finally, then we got liz truss for a few weeks that caused an economic and energy crisis. A head of lettuce lasted longer than her. Then rishi took over from her.

    Gerula,

    Legalise weed but ban tobacco!

    Just saying.

    Cabunach, (edited )

    I remember when they had the same idea around 2014, to ban smoking for anyone born in the UK from 2000 onwards. That would have been easier to enforce.

    rainynight65,

    Smoking is one of the very few things everyone is better off not doing.

    KillAllPoorPeople,

    Same with alcohol, but I don’t think we’re allowed to say that yet. Maybe one day!

    HumanPenguin,
    @HumanPenguin@feddit.uk avatar

    Do not disagree it not good. But until you can indicate passive damage to non drinkers. You will find it hard to argue for the ban in society. Only actions of drinkers that may effect other will ever be considered an issue.

    huginn,

    Only actions of drinkers that may effect other will ever be considered an issue.

    Yeah and we should ban cars to get rid of drunk driving tbh

    HumanPenguin,
    @HumanPenguin@feddit.uk avatar

    If we ban oxygen all crimes would stop. And the planet would soon recover.

    Fortunately we are democratic enough not to listen to outright stupid ideas. Or to punish all for the stupidity of some.

    Wage_slave,
    @Wage_slave@lemmy.ml avatar

    In any context, this is the most infuriatingly fucking stupid argument there is.

    “well we should ban…”

    Instantly stupid. just add human.

    Uncle_Bagel,

    American prohibition and the war on drugs has shown that toal band like that really just make consumption worse while piling a whole new slew of problems onto an existing issue.

    Wage_slave,
    @Wage_slave@lemmy.ml avatar

    I wholeheartedly agree with ya there, but would smoking be carried on in the same fashions as drugs and booze?

    I quit years ago after thirty years of smoking and while it was hard as fuck, and i was nasty as a human for a while, I didn’t get the urge to find plug for smokes or off up ass for a pack of butts. Or kill anyone for that matter.

    Here in Canada the jump in price has reservation smokes selling like fucking crazy. My old Racist as fuck neighbor bent his morals just enough to say his buying them was justified. I am pretty sure old Dar would drop and blow a herpes staff for a smoke, so I am probably already wrong to question it.

    Uncle_Bagel,

    While people may not be willing to kill or rob someone to get a pack of smokes, there will absolutely be a black market for them that will be rife with unsavory characters that will. I live an hour away from a recreational marijuana state and it has destroyed the local black market for pot as anyone who wants to get high can just drive across the state line and get their own pot. No more sketchy drug dealers pushing other substances, no more police stings to catch teenagers buying dope.

    Buying controlled and reasonably dangerous substances from licensed retailers like a dispensary, grocery store, or even a gas station is a lot safer for everyone than trying to keep tabs on a black market. The danger of prohibition wasn’t alcoholics trying to find their next drink, it was mobsters like Capone trying to dominate the black market for popular goods.

    Edit since i misread what you meant: Sure tobacco is on it’s way out as is, but nicotine consumption is still skyrocketing. I dont see how banning tobacco sales for anyine born after a certain date like Sunak is proposing will help anything. People under 30 are already way less likely to smoke tobacco but consume unhealthy quantities of nicotine anyway.

    KillAllPoorPeople,

    This just isn’t true though. Other countries ban alcohol and it doesn’t turn into what happened during American alcohol prohibition. Nor does it mean banning needs to be done like it was done during that period either. You people gotta start thinking a bit deeper about stuff.

    PersnickityPenguin,

    What countries have successfully banned alcohol? Besides Muslim countries that employ capital punishment.

    KillAllPoorPeople,

    The Chiapas state of Mexico.

    PersnickityPenguin,

    Lol sure. The worst country in the world for narcotics trafficking?

    KillAllPoorPeople,

    Do you pick out Alabama when you talk about the entirety of the US? Or do you tend to be less xenophobic and less racist?

    jray4559,
    @jray4559@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

    Ban weed smoking too.

    Things like edibles, sure let 'em have it, but we’ve only just gotten to the point where life doesn’t smell like nicotine anymore, we shouldn’t be replacing that with everything smelling like weed.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • [email protected]
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • oklahoma
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • Ask_kbincafe
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines
    •