Ban Ban Ban?

dont ban anything, legalise everything !! let people do what they want, but there should be a catch, if you get lung cancer from smoking you dont get treated for lung cancers because it was your own fault.
 
Grummer said:
dont ban anything, legalise everything !! let people do what they want, but there should be a catch, if you get lung cancer from smoking you dont get treated for lung cancers because it was your own fault.
Click to expand...

Thats one possible good idea. Anyone who gets sick from the bad choices they made are on their own. If they can afford to be treated, fine. If not, insurance won't bail them out.

Pot No Longer Focus of Anti-Drug Campaigns - CBS News

Theres good reasons why the war on drugs is a failure. Google for other such sites. Soft drugs should be legal for those 21+ and regulated like alcohol. Hard drugs can be decriminalized for simple possession but illegal for the dealers and suppliers.
 
sallylou said:
Banning won't work. I have a problem with pregnant women who smoke or drink. Alcohol is a legal drug but even moderate use has a devastating effect on the developing fetus (even if the child looks normal). We would eliminate a lot of problems if there was successful program for keeping women off drugs. Their children will also be less likely to become drug users if the mothers do not use drugs. You've got to get to the root of the problem.[/QUOTE]

Very true.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Grummer said:
dont ban anything, legalise everything !! let people do what they want, but there should be a catch, if you get lung cancer from smoking you dont get treated for lung cancers because it was your own fault.
Click to expand...

What about those who have to live with pains a while after a surgery, and gets strong painkillers. Suddenly the doctor moves, and they have to wait for a new doctor, meanwhile they find out that street drugs can kill the pain. Volia, one more junkie on the street. It's suprising many junkies that have a story like this to tell. This is also something similar that seemed to happen with Michael Jackson. Their own fault? Why did no one help them with the addiction to pain killers, and only helped them to use addictive pain killers?
 
If smoking was illegal, then it would cause an influx of prisoners in prisons since smokers are addicted to cigarettes. They just can't quit cold turkey when it comes to smoking. It's the cancerous substances that causes these problems for a lot of people.
 
MoonDrifter said:
If smoking was illegal, then it would cause an influx of prisoners in prisons since smokers are addicted to cigarettes. They just can't quit cold turkey when it comes to smoking. It's the cancerous substances that causes these problems for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

That's why they are working on a "cure" for nicotine addiction. Supposedly there's a pill that blocks the pleasure one gets from smoking to make it easier to quit. Of course the patch is an old favorite to help you wean off the addiction.
 
deafdude1 said:
That's why they are working on a "cure" for nicotine addiction. Supposedly there's a pill that blocks the pleasure one gets from smoking to make it easier to quit. Of course the patch is an old favorite to help you wean off the addiction.
Click to expand...

there was, but it was pulled from pharmacy shelves. It was called Chantix.
 
hohDougRN said:
there was, but it was pulled from pharmacy shelves. It was called Chantix.
Click to expand...

Chantix was pulled? I know that there was some nasty side effects with it, but I didn't know it was pulled.


There is also Zyban aka Wellbutrin, too.

But, I wouldn't necessarily call these meds "cures".
 
The nictonie gums, patches, etc are very expensive than the cigarettes. If they ban the cigarettes, then how can they support others that they earned from the cigarette's taxes?

I believe in the personal choices and the cigarettes does not affect the job's scheludes, or causing emotionally violence, or anything. There are not much issues I've seen in the cigarettes except for the health issue, but the health issue go back to the personal choice as much as the fast foods and etc.

If they banned the cigarette, well thanks to them, I would just stick to the electronic cigarettes.
 
I think the best thing to do would be to phase smoking out. Increase taxes on smoking, increase the size of the surgeon general's warning sticker, and limit the amount of nicotine and other drugs put in.
 
With the economy, the so-called "sin taxes" are rising. Tobacco, cigarettes, gambling, etc. Next, we'll have a potty tax? I hope that it's not by visit! :eek3:
 
id refuse to call it 'sin taxes' even though i know what it means, but i dont like the way it refers to religious-attachments of meanings. By this I also means that it is directed to the poor masses, in so a way that its a rule for us but not for them. Being rich gives them an excuse for commiting so-called "sins".
 
sallylou said:
With the economy, the so-called "sin taxes" are rising. Tobacco, cigarettes, gambling, etc. Next, we'll have a potty tax? I hope that it's not by visit! :eek3:
Click to expand...

Already exists , as pay-per-toilet visit which an electronic controlled door locks, the money goes to the local council -that is a form of tax to a local governmental body
 
hohDougRN said:
I think thats why nicotine gum and patches are created to wean off nicotine until quit.
Click to expand...
You are correct but what I am proposing would be a weaning initiated by the tobacco companies designed to get to a point in the future where they stop manufacturing cigarettes once the levels of the addictive chemicals in cigarettes have been reduced to minimize the withdrawal effect. I know I am living in a dream world but ya never know :hmm:
 
I rather increase taxes on smoking than ban smoking. Smoking is impossible to get rid of like drinks.
 
Frisky Feline said:
Oh really. thats good. are there any reason why it was pulled off? were it all about hallucinating things?
Click to expand...

Chantix essentially stops people from feeling pleasure from nicotine. Unfortunately, it also stops many from experiencing pleasure from anything else. So has very nasty side effects, which can include blackouts, severe depression, increased risk of suicide, and aggressive behavior, including homicidal behavior.

It's actually still on the market, but with serious warnings. Here's an article about it: FDA requires Chantix, Zyban to have warning | Aiken Standard | Aiken, SC

Before all of the reports came out, I actually did use it to quit smoking. It did help -- I'd tried to quit several times before, but this time I succeeded. Luckily I didn't have any of the really bad side effects!
 
ms_redcat said:
Chantix essentially stops people from feeling pleasure from nicotine. Unfortunately, it also stops many from experiencing pleasure from anything else. So has very nasty side effects, which can include blackouts, severe depression, increased risk of suicide, and aggressive behavior, including homicidal behavior.

It's actually still on the market, but with serious warnings. Here's an article about it: FDA requires Chantix, Zyban to have warning | Aiken Standard | Aiken, SC

Before all of the reports came out, I actually did use it to quit smoking. It did help -- I'd tried to quit several times before, but this time I succeeded. Luckily I didn't have any of the really bad side effects!
Click to expand...

Ahh, thank you.

This explains why it's still on my insurance med formulary.
 
Personally, I don't think that smoking should be banned because it'd be like the prohibition all over again. I think people should be educated on the dangers of smoking.
 
Back
Top