it's an alright idea in theory, but given how popular and easy underage drinking is I really don't see how useful it's gonna be in practice.
I'm also a little confused by the bit of the article which claims the entertainment industry portrays smoking as "a cool thing to do", maybe I'm just watching the wrong TV/films/games but I haven't seen that much.
There've been weeks of heated discussions about this point at a local GLBT website. They whine about how they smoke bothers them. They whine about how they want to enjoy their cigarettes. Meanwhile, their civil rights are going down the drain. Bunch of bohemian assholes.
it's an alright idea in theory, but given how popular and easy underage drinking is I really don't see how useful it's gonna be in practice.
I think it'll work, there's a big difference in attitudes to smoking between 16 and 18 yr olds. If you're underage you could easily find a 16 year old friend to buy you cigarettes, but 18 yr olds would just laugh in your face. (and hopefully punch your friends)
A load of moralist trash.
Bollocks. Public health "trash" maybe but not moralist. On the whole I'd say it's probably a good thing as it would most likely slightly reduce the number of young people getting cigarettes. Not really bothered either way though, prohibition's not a good idea in principle.
A load of moralist trash. Only Jack would support such a doomed policy. I broadly accept the ban on smoking in pubs though.
Smoking has been banned in pubs and clubs here since Dec 1. It's nice to come home without reeking of smoke but a minor unpleasant side effect is that the Irish pub in the CBD turns out to have a rather peculiar smell that was previously masked by the cloud of smoke emanating from the pseudo-bohemians who frequent it.
Fucking idiotic. 16 is more than old enough to decide whether or not you want to smoke.
I can sympathise with banning smoking in pubs, it seems pretty reasonable to me, but come the fuck on, I think some people on here are taking the anti-hippy thing a little too far.
Fucking idiotic. 16 is more than old enough to decide whether or not you want to smoke.
Well more 16 year olds start than 18 year olds. It's such a bad habit with pretty much no benefits that there's no reason to defend it.
I can sympathise with banning smoking in pubs, it seems pretty reasonable to me, but come the fuck on, I think some people on here are taking the anti-hippy thing a little too far.
Anti-hippy?
Banning it in pubs and clubs seems pretty logical to me.
Well more 16 year olds start than 18 year olds. It's such a bad habit with pretty much no benefits that there's no reason to defend it.
Hows about because its not your decision? What business is it of yours of somebody else chooses to smoke in private?
Anti-hippy?
You know what I mean, this "Well, an individualist might say X, so as a communist, I should say the exact opposite".
Banning it in pubs and clubs seems pretty logical to me.
No arguments from me.
Hows about because its not your decision? What business is it of yours of somebody else chooses to smoke in private?
It's a bad thing and I don't see how protecting the right to do something stupid is in any way a good thing.
Also it is about protecting young people. Smoking is much more dangerous than booze so I think should at the least have similar restrictions. I'm surprised 16 year olds can afford fags tbh. I know I wouldn't have been able to.
It's a bad thing and I don't see how protecting the right to do something stupid is in any way a good thing.
I can't believe I'm seeing this kind of paternalistic crap on here. I happen to think side fringes and body piercing are fucking stupid, but I still wouldn't want them banned.
Also it is about protecting young people. Smoking is much more dangerous than booze so I think should at the least have similar restrictions. I'm surprised 16 year olds can afford fags tbh. I know I wouldn't have been able to.
16 is legally old enough to fuck, drive and join the army, I think that we can just about trust the ickle teenagers with the choice to smoke or not smoke. Prohibition is completely inneffective anyway, as with drinking, it just adds to the mystique.
I can't believe I'm seeing this kind of paternalistic crap on here. I happen to think side fringes and body piercing are fucking stupid, but I still wouldn't want them banned.
calm down dear, it's only a commercial.
Side fringes have never killed anyone, body piercings have.
One in two smokers will have a premature death as a result. These ill-effects disproportionately affect working class people. I think discouraging them is a good idea. I'd not let a 16 year old get a body piercing a tattoo or take acid. It's about informed decisions.
16 is legally old enough to fuck, drive and join the army, I think that we can just about trust the ickle teenagers with the choice to smoke or not smoke. Prohibition is completely inneffective anyway, as with drinking, it just adds to the mystique.
I don't think 16 year olds should be able to drive or join the army.
I'm not talking about prohibition, this is an age limit.
Although if you want to talk about prhibition you'll find friends here. MANY OF THEM USE CAPITALS TO HIGHLIGHT THE STRENGTH OF THEIR ARGUMENTS!
calm down dear, it's only a commercial.
Side fringes have never killed anyone, body piercings have.
One in two smokers will have a premature death as a result. I think discouraging them is a good idea. I'd not let a 16 year old get a body piercing a tattoo or take acid. It's about informed decisions.
That's not the point though. Everybody knows that smoking will kill you, a sixteen year old is perfectly capable of understanding that, they're hardly infants, are they?
These ill-effects disproportionately affect working class people.
Everything bad disproportionately affects working class people, that's not an argument for anything.
I'm not talking about prohibition, this is an age limit.
As far as sixteen year olds are concerned, it is prohibition, no?
Although if you want to talk about prhibition you'll find friends here. MANY OF THEM USE CAPITALS TO HIGHLIGHT THE STRENGTH OF THEIR ARGUMENTS!
Which has what to do with anything I've said?
Alan wrote:
A load of moralist trash.Bollocks. Public health "trash" maybe but not moralist.
Of course it's moralist, it's paternalistic as fuck. That's not to say that it's objectively a bad thing though.
And why is Jack trolling again? He needs to quit hanging out with morons. Is his understanding of the world really so crude that it's either uncritically supporting state bans or millions of children dying of cancer? Does he support Fair Trade or organic food then? Or perhaps his one-eyed liberal thing is just a seasonal thing caused by spending too long in Brighton?
That's not the point though. Everybody knows that smoking will kill you, a sixteen year old is perfectly capable of understanding that, they're hardly infants, are they?
Sixteen year-old kids do not understand the consequences properly. I'm not being paternalistic, I'm thinking about how me and my friends behaved at 16. With something like smoking which is entirely harmful I think we shouldn't let them harm themselves. I'd stop a 16 year old kid topping themselves because they'd be too young to understand what they were doing. I think raising the age limit is an acceptable way of doing this.
As far as sixteen year olds are concerned, it is prohibition, no?
In a sense, I did ask about existing smokers in the original post. We don't talk about prohibition of alcohol or sex, both of which also have age limits.
Which has what to do with anything I've said?
Well your use of the word prohibition made you sound like one of them and I thought it was funny.
pure paternalistic drivel and since when did this shite become somehow "political" in any meaningful sense. infact the only thing that is political about it is how it sums up the retarded social worker ethos that seems to pass for politics.
if 16 year olds are perfectly capable of fucking each other, if they can shag 35 year old saddo's who bought them a necklace from Argos, if they can have children, then they can have a fucking cigarette.
oh wait i forgot people must be protected from themselves all the time, all risk must be managed out of society, someone think about the children. My da had mates who were smoking since they were 9 ffs.
pure paternalistic drivel and since when did this shite become somehow "political" in any meaningful sense.
I posted it up in news cause I felt it was interesting.
if 16 year olds are perfectly capable of fucking each other, if they can shag 35 year old saddo's who bought them a necklace from Argos
Well I'd like it if they didn't do that actually.
My da had mates who were smoking since they were 9 ffs.
And?
I posted it up in news cause I felt it was interesting.
That wasn't aimed specifically at you, honestly your getting as bad as me in the ego stakes 
. I was kind of pointing towards how politics in general has been reduced to technocratic micro management of such shitty little issues. No more talk of princples and ideology, nope it's about small "pragmatic" thinking, politics reduced to pathetic Home Economics and just like in school, it's a haven for dim witted muppets.
Well I'd like it if they didn't do that actually.
Yes and i'd like it if Kate Beckinsale had kicked my door in last night, whisked me off to her vampire house and I didn't have to go to work this morning but life ain't fair. And just because we don't like something is not a reason for it to be banned or opposed on a legal/political level, part of living in the world is learning that people do shit you might not like but as long as they aren't harming anyone else or it's consenting then you've just got to accept it. Now to bring it back on point, would you support a government ban on 16 year olds fucking, would you make it illegal for silly lil 17 year olds to shag the 35 year old saddos?
And?
as in no one ever thought it was of pressing political concern and further more we seem to be sinking deeper into this paternilistic bollox and in which children step up the gap left by women when they fled the paternalistic nest.
Now to bring it back on point, would you support a government ban on 16 year olds fucking, would you make it illegal for silly lil 17 year olds to shag the 35 year old saddos?
No but I'd like to be able to give them some sense. It seems to be practically a rite of passage. (though the guy is usually a bit younger)
But generally shagging a weirdo is something you learn from and has no lasting consequences.
revol68 wrote:
Now to bring it back on point, would you support a government ban on 16 year olds fucking, would you make it illegal for silly lil 17 year olds to shag the 35 year old saddos?No but I'd like to be able to give them some sense. It seems to be practically a rite of passage. (though the guy is usually a bit younger)
But generally shagging a weirdo is something you learn from and has no lasting consequences.
I know alot of wee girls who'd have swapped teenage pregnancy for a cigarette.
The point is that you've just got to accept that people have the right to do stupid shit if it isn't harming anyone else but themselves, and if we accept that there should be no law against having sex, getting pregnant or contracting an STD then I think we should accept peoples right to smoke tobacco at the same age.
Raising the legal age won't do shit, while I think Jess kinda has a point with the different attitudes thing I still know people my age who hang out with people my sister's age and buy them alcohol and I'm sure people like that would also buy cigarettes for underage people. Plus a lot of underage people still manage to access restricted things like alcohol, nightclubs, 18-rated films and so on, I don't see why this would be any different.
If you're dumb enough to start smoking you're dumb enough to deserve death from lung cancer. There's plenty of help available for giving up smoking and plenty of warnings about - if you ever watch TV, read magazines or see a cigarette packet you'll know that smoking will damage your health, and they teach it in schools anyway - those who choose to ignore them and smoke regardless don't deserve any protection, however old they are. What I would support is a ban on smoking in pubs and clubs, or at least introducing more non-smoking pubs/clubs or separate smoking rooms, because bar staff and the rest of us who aren't idiots don't deserve cancer.
High School students struck and marched across Germany yesterday in protest against classroom overcrowding, lack of teachers, and the pressure of examinations.
A short history of the Barcelona general strike of 1919 which began after the sacking of eight workers, and ended up as one of the most successful working class actions in history.
BBC story
Do you reckon this is a good idea? I think it is but how will they phase it in? What will they do about current 'legal' smokers who will stop being able to smoke?
I reckon it's a step in the right direction. I can't wait for smoke free pubs and clubs.