deleted by creator
Well, banning it worked perfectly for cannabis so why not
Yeah let’s turn $5 packs of cigarettes into $20 packs of cigarettes. And then that extra $15 can go to fund things like human trafficking and hard drugs. Cool! Let’s fund human trafficking and hard drugs everybody!
5 dollar packs of cigarettes? Americans truly have it great there. It cost 18.90 euro per pack in Ireland.
idk where in america that person is located. a pack is $20 and a carton is about $100 here, but i’m also in tobacco row where fighting phillip morris is just something we grow up knowing we have to de
It’s not $5. More like $8-$10. Still, had no idea the EU was that expensive. With how much people smoke in the Balkans I wonder how they’re handling it. I haven’t been in several years.
If you smoke American Spirits it’s 20
Plenty of countries in Europe have cigarettes for ~€5.
It decreased cannabis usage, no? A measure doesn’t have to be 100% effective to be worth doing. That’s an argument an antivaxxer would make.
Also, it’s easy to go a couple of days without weed even when you’re heavily addicted. Now do that with nicotine.
No…no it didn’t. Prohibition has never worked. All it does is create black markets and violence that follows.
See war on drugs in the USA
See prohibition of alcohol in the USA.
the best solution if you want to reduce light and hard drug usage is to increase quality of life via parks, libraries, and education. to quote my all time favorite poster, @DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com , “seriously!”
it seems counter intuitive that you should address drugs through not the drugs, but when you’re dealing with drugs you have to take into consideration that the reason people use them is to address a chemical imbalance in their brain. drugs are a short term fix to a long term problem for the user. if you’re going to address the long term problems with drugs, you have to create long term solutions to the problems that create a need for them. if you set up short term impediments to drug acquisition all you’re doing is putting vulnerable people at greater risk
I actually have autism which is why I type like that mostly, but I DON’T always talk like that in real life.
Correct.
Education Safety nets Jobs Getting rid of the for profit prison systems And… making drugs legal
That’s how you solve the issue. Not by banning something. That just creates black markets.
and once those black markets are in place you have a rather thorny problem. growing drugs is not mainly an agricultural skill, it is primarily a networkiig skill. a grower or dealer won’t go straight because you’ve made the thing they do legal. they’ll pivot to something else you’ve made illegal. but the best way to erode the black market isn’t to target the cartel, it’s to target the street level dork engaging in dangerous behavior because they’re desperate.
the less desperation there is in the ecosystem, the less criminal behavior there will be
Using USA as a representative of the world is delusional.
- Bike lane failed in US, it didnt in Europe, it took over cars.
- EV failed in US, didn’t everywhere else
- Gun control worked everywhere else, not in USA.
- Health
- Education
- Democracy
- and so on…
Seems like a you problem
Using USA as a representative of the world is delusional.
Assuming that people are magically different is delusional.
- Bike lane failed in US, it didnt in Europe, it took over cars.
The USA is massive… literally a good chunk of the Western Europe fits into Texas.
- EV failed in US, didn’t everywhere else
Uhh what? We have EVs here, trump is trying his best to snuff them out but that’s not happening.
- Gun control worked everywhere else, not in USA.
Australia…had forced buyback in the 90s after the port shooting…60% turn in rate, 1mil owned arms by civs…today 3+Mil firearms owned by citizens in Australia…so did it really work? Or did society get less violent because of the education and safety nets that Australia has?
- Health
Yea…and that’s not a ban?
- Education
This is not just a USA problem. Kids are getting dumber everywhere because of tech.
- Democracy
???
Seems like a you problem
Seems more like you’re just projecting…
I’m sure this will go very well
Smoking is an anti-social behavior that harms others and every attempt to stamp it out has my support
ironically i meet less people after quitting smoking. it for sure has its social qualities too.
Just like alcohol and cars but we don’t ban those outright. At least smoking is confined mostly to certain areas. You have the option to avoid those, like some do with pubs
Depends on where you are. In some countries smoking is quite widespread and is done outdoors, so definitely not confined in this case.
Only to be replaced by vaping outside. I agree if the space is confined and shared it shouldn’t be mixed with smokers and non smokers but if you’re in a public street you have the option to avoid the smoking and be out of 3rd party smoke range. You’re always going to have problematic smokers/vapers just like anything else, no law is going to stop this
Some would argue they hate people drinking anywhere but licensed indoor spaces
Yes, I agree, but outright prohibition is not the solution. Ban public smoking fine but outright prohibition is just more social control under the guise of “protecting” people just like how this age verification bullshit is “protecting the kids”
It’s not protecting kids as you say. Look at the black market, it’s got worse, now it’s not just selling to kids, it’s using and grooming them. I thought the ‘war’ on drugs was meant to ‘protect’ kids in some way. As well as other things of course. It’s made it easier for kids, no finding a dodgy person to sell to you , they can now use dodgy shops. You needed reasonably good social skills to find a dealer but not so much anymore
Wasting money on more enforcements and laws, the taxes will just benefit the tobacco companies. They could be spending that money on providing communities and positive outlets for teens
100% education, harm reduction, support and regulation.
It would empower people to make smarter choices about what they consume and the safe ways and doses to consume and what effects to expect rather than scaremongering people with lies which causes experimentation.
Support people that have existing problems to make better choices with their life rather than turning them into “criminals” which then encourages further behaviour that damages society as a whole.
Regulate the substances so that people can know what they are buying is what it is meant to be so they aren’t buying stuff cut with brick dust or plaster board from people in situations that put them at further risk.
And finally tax it and use that tax money to fund public services. Fund things that benefit society as a whole and benefits everyone else who don’t choose to use these things.
Proper research that hasn’t been fabricated to support the lies that are constantly pedalled has proved that all of these things are true and most of these “hard drugs” are safer and less addictive when done properly than alcohol is and that shit is legal. You can’t just look at all the immediate effects either no one is taking MDMA and then going out and fighting or beating their significant other yet alcohol is the fuel for a very large percentage of anti social behaviour and domestic abuse. Women in particular suffer a massive amount at the hands of predominantly men under the influence of alcohol but I’m meant to believe these cunts when they tell me weed or MDMA is “bad”
But I digress, I could rant on this for ages!
Couldn’t agree more. Try something new, shit, years and years shown it’s not working. Fuck it, take the risk try a new carefully thought-out approach. There will be risks and mistakes but that’s like with everything but the media blows it out of proportion. The risks would be far less if people actually bought what they expected and know how that specific drug could interact, impossible when it’s cut or sold as something completely different. I wanna clean rave or explore not be forced into a heroin/meth addiction by accident cos it’s not controlled and often cut
We need facts not myths of drug education. Allow the controlled research of substances, to help better education. Humans are humans and we all have some desire to explore ourselves. We are dictated to what’s legal. time has only shown this isn’t going to stop
Let’s see if works first, AFAIK this hasn’t been attempted yet (New Zealand was about to but tobacco companies killed it)
Ah did they not do it in the end, I knew they were trying to but never heard any more about it so didn’t know if it went through.
We will see, as you say the problem is tobacco companies have a lot of money, I just don’t wish to see prohibition under the guise of public health, prohibition is always a tool of oppression and not in peoples interest. I’d rather see an outright ban in public places to actually benefit public health :)
I mean, is it? I’m happy to have stuff like asbestos prohibited. There’s a bunch of harmful stuff that is banned all the time and it’s a net positive in my opinion
Yeh that is fair, I concede that saying “always” is not accurate.
I think it’s better to significantly increase taxation on these things. Tax it at 1 pound per cigarette/gram/ml. Continuously increase the tax until the only way to get it is from someone who grows some in their garden.
Taxes tend to only stop new smokers, not current ones. This kinda skips the middleman.
People born after 07 are not yet 21. This bill is explicitly aiming at new smokers.
Increasing the tax will force people away from nicotine products. Making it illegal to purchase just creates a black market. It makes more sense to me to crush the market itself. People will smoke, but keeping smoke free zones and making it difficult to distribute tobacco products will reduce it significantly.
black market
Taxation also causes this.
Most studies found that raising cigarette prices through increased taxes is a highly effective measure for reducing smoking among youth, young adults, and persons of low socioeconomic status. However, there is a striking lack of evidence about the impact of increasing cigarette prices on smoking behavior in heavy/long-term smokers…
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/8/11/4118
Ideally multiple methods would be used together, but claiming taxing it more is the only good solution is a stance that lacks nuance.
It’s not that you don’t have a point. Any approach blindly will miss nuance. I had to reread the article to make sure I had not missed a conversation about existing smokers. I’m not sure where the policy addresses existing smokers. The article expressed hope that the government will provide cessation support, but not much else.
Not exactly worded as such, but my comment is saying that raising taxes will affect both new and existing users.
I think my biggest concern with making it illegal is brought on by the USA prohibition era. Taxing it into the ground without providing a direction for people to go will most likely do the same.
Maybe a more clear path would have been to both restrict access AND increase taxes. I have seen some places increase the smoking age further. Maybe increase the age every other year. Leave synthetic items alone for now, pushing people to zyn, vape, gum, mints and patches. Later, increase on items that are now for cessation.
The reason I bring up the taxation is because it can go directly to public health funding.
If only teenagers start smoking after their 18s.
They start smoking thinking they only need to wait until they’re 18 and there’s no hassle in procuring them anymore. Imagine signing up for always having to rely on someone else for nicotine.
I doubt most start smoking thinking it will be fine by they 18. They just need to bypass enforcements. Dodgy shops and drug dealers will provide it. This just creates a gateway for kids to have access to a black market and groomed
The statistics may show a decline in ‘legal’ smokers but that doesn’t include data on smokers using the black market. How do we truly know. I agree with the law and enforcements but it gets to a point where it makes it difficult for the legal adults , they are being forced dictated into what they can and not choose to do with our own selves
The smoking ban in the UK agreed… to do what exactly?
