Marijuana Vs Cigarrettes

[ApricotMilk]

@sway

The individual smoking tobacco, out of harms way of those not smoking, is harming society because;
1. They are apart of society and its harming them. Their happiness will be brought down long term compared with if they did not smoke (if they were educated and informed well and discouraged from smoking when young for example)

Absolutely ridiculous, a person being part of society does not make them society, much similar to how a slice of cake is not the whole cake. The definition of society is debated among sociologists of different schools of thought but I think they would all disagree with that. Also, their happiness will be brought down? Just because it is harmful doesn't mean it makes them unhappy, even if they have education and were informed well of the effects.

In regards to health care costs, I guess you would rather people smoke prohibited and adulterated tobacco, that would probably result in more severe hospital cases? And to mention again, making tobacco illegal will NOT make people stop smoking it.

Do you have any comments on anything else I said?

[manmat1]

Absolutely ridiculous, a person being part of society does not make them society, much similar to how a slice of cake is not the whole cake. The definition of society is debated among sociologists of different schools of thought but I think they would all disagree with that. Also, their happiness will be brought down? Just because it is harmful doesn't mean it makes them unhappy, even if they have education and were informed well of the effects.

In regards to health care costs, I guess you would rather people smoke prohibited and adulterated tobacco, that would probably result in more severe hospital cases? And to mention again, making tobacco illegal will NOT make people stop smoking it.

Do you have any comments on anything else I said?

Lung cancer = Less happy than no lung cancer
Any server illness = lower happiness than no server illness.

Not really a massive claim to say that the smoking related illnesses lower a persons happiness.
The overall happiness is made up of the individuals happiness.
Ergo, the overall happiness would be higher if no one smoked.

I never said anything about allowing methods of stopping people smoking that would cause a black market for tobacco or other detrimental effects.
I claimed that over a long period of addressing information failure and proper education and eventually illegality smoking could be almost completely eradicated and this would bring the overall happiness of the human race up.

[ApricotMilk]

Lung cancer = Less happy than no lung cancer
Any server illness = lower happiness than no server illness.

Smoking tobacco is not solely synonymous with lung cancer. People smoke to relieve themselves (contrary to what most believe, smoking does have some psychoactive effects that exist outside of feeding a craving). Not only that, not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer or dies of a similar illness.

Now, you say that severe illness is better than none, but I said there would be more severe if it were illegal, credited to how tobacco would STILL be consumed, but with adulterated product.

never said anything about allowing methods of stopping people smoking that would cause a black market for tobacco or other detrimental effects.
I claimed that over a long period of addressing information failure and proper education and eventually illegality smoking could be almost completely eradicated and this would bring the overall happiness of the human race up.

Tell me a drug, substance or activity that has been prohibited and educated about that has almost eradicated the subject in question and I'll tell you you're wrong. Half a million heroin users in Britain? Yeah I am sure they had no idea what they were injecting into themselves. Guess we need more education that tells them heroin will kill them instead of a failed system that has no concern to their well being. In the meantime lets keep heroin in the control of criminals shall we? Or maybe we could do something a bit more humane and passionate, such as prescribing pure, uncut diamorphine to addicts and give them the therapy and support needed to quit?

I don't know if you watched the video I posted, but I ask you to at least watch 28:30 to 34:50.

Now with that in mind, street heroin has much more of a bad reputation than tobacco, uet there are still a millions of users in Europe alone. So what do you think tobacco would be like? I would say you are foolish to think that making it illegal will reduce the numbers and the cost to healthcare. In fact, keeping it legal instead, with education of course, will reduce the numbers, as it has done so already in the past 30 years. But if you were to make it illega it is a huge huge huge step backwards, and an uncompassionate one towards smokers.

[TheRavenHouse]

Lung cancer = Less happy than no lung cancer
Any server illness = lower happiness than no server illness.

Not really a massive claim to say that the smoking related illnesses lower a persons happiness.
The overall happiness is made up of the individuals happiness.
Ergo, the overall happiness would be higher if no one smoked.

You know what really lowers the overall happiness? Overcrowded prisons full of innocent people who never did anything wrong but had their lives taken away because of people like you. So maybe over a long period of addressing information failure and proper education and eventually illegality, your way of thinking could be almost completely eradicated and this would bring the overall happiness of the human race up :3

[manmat1]

Smoking tobacco is not solely synonymous with lung cancer. People smoke to relieve themselves (contrary to what most believe, smoking does have some psychoactive effects that exist outside of feeding a craving). Not only that, not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer or dies of a similar illness.

Now, you say that severe illness is better than none, but I said there would be more severe if it were illegal, credited to how tobacco would STILL be consumed, but with adulterated product.




Tell me a drug, substance or activity that has been prohibited and educated about that has almost eradicated the subject in question and I'll tell you you're wrong. Half a million heroin users in Britain? Yeah I am sure they had no idea what they were injecting into themselves. Guess we need more education that tells them heroin will kill them instead of a failed system that has no concern to their well being. In the meantime lets keep heroin in the control of criminals shall we? Or maybe we could do something a bit more humane and passionate, such as prescribing pure, uncut diamorphine to addicts and give them the therapy and support needed to quit?

I don't know if you watched the video I posted, but I ask you to at least watch 28:30 to 34:50.

Now with that in mind, street heroin has much more of a bad reputation than tobacco, uet there are still a millions of users in Europe alone. So what do you think tobacco would be like? I would say you are foolish to think that making it illegal will reduce the numbers and the cost to healthcare. In fact, keeping it legal instead, with education of course, will reduce the numbers, as it has done so already in the past 30 years. But if you were to make it illega it is a huge huge huge step backwards, and an uncompassionate one towards smokers.

Smoking is extremely unhealthy and the relief it gives is far outweighed by the harm it does to the person.
I never said make it illegal now. You don't seem to be grasping this...


Most people now know that taking heroin is a very bad idea. That's because they have been educated over time to see this.
Most people now don't burn others to death for being witches, or being gay.
Black people are no longer being lynched regularly.
These are all behaviors which have been phased out of the norm via education about why they're bad.
Heroin being illegal is a good thing, NOW, it wouldn't be in the 1700's. The lack of help for addicts is NOT a good thing - I never spoke about that.

@The Raven house
Did you even read that?
When I say "long period of time" I am talking 100 fucking years. Not a ten year warning and then we lock all smokers in gulags...
If we educate people enough, people

WILL
NOT
WANT
TO
SMOKE.

Just as people now don't want to hang black people or burn witches.

After most of the people started not wanting to hang black people, it was made illegal.
When everyone doesn't want to smoke (most people) then it should be made illegal as its very very harmful.

The analogy with burning people is different of course, its directly harming someone else.

Now IF it is true that people can be made to not want to smoke.
And if the number of smokers goes down dramatically and its seen as socially bad.
THEN
1. It should be made illegal
2. The over all happiness, ceteris paribus, WILL be brought up as illness = down and health service cost = down.

Just as now, as slavery is illegal, the happiness is higher as black people enjoy much much more happiness by being free, the happiness of people in 200 years if no one smokes / wants to, will be happier as they're healthier, ceteris paribus

[TheRavenHouse]

@The Raven house
Did you even read that?
When I say "long period of time" I am talking 100 fucking years. Not a ten year warning and then we lock all smokers in gulags...
If we educate people enough, people

WILL
NOT
WANT
TO
SMOKE.

I was referring (reeferinglol) to marijuana, your beliefe is that it as well should be illegal, so what I'm saying is that they are innocent people who have never hurt anyone and yet are still put in prison, thus making them less happy as well as all their family and friends. The same would become true if cigarettes became illegal, therefore making them illegal would make people overall less happy.

Also, yeah, no people will still want to smoke even if you educate them, just because you don't want to smoke doesn't mean everyone will feel the same way.

[manmat1]

I was referring (reeferinglol) to marijuana, your beliefe is that it as well should be illegal, so what I'm saying is that they are innocent people who have never hurt anyone and yet are still put in prison, thus making them less happy as well as all their family and friends. The same would become true if cigarettes became illegal, therefore making them illegal would make people overall less happy.

Also, yeah, no people will still want to smoke even if you educate them, just because you don't want to smoke doesn't mean everyone will feel the same way.

Making cigarettes illegal WILL bring up the overall happiness when more people do not want to smoke.
I REPEAT. Not making it illegal now, nor when too many people smoke.

I didn't say "no people" I said "most" by which I mean a very large majority.
Making them not want to smoke by addressing information failure is a perfectly achievable goal.
It has been done with cocaine & heroin for example - Although not well enough.

Your claim is like saying "people will not stop being racist if you just educate them about why its wrong"
People believe what they're brought up to believe, that includes other variables than just parents & school - i.e. society's attitude via media for e.g.

If people are properly informed about the harmful affect of drugs, including tobacco, they're more likely not to smoke.
They will pass this on to there kids and to a lesser extent anyone they talk to it about.
Their kids will be less likely to smoke, meaning 1 person's changed attitude has passed it on to multiple people.
This effect, very very very roughly happens with religious / atheist beliefs.
It can do the same for any attitude which influences behaviors.

It's being done RIGHT NOW, in this country (UK), anti smoking adverts, FREE help for smokers to quit etc.
This sort of thing with better education & awareness will mean many less people want to smoke in the future.

[ApricotMilk]

Making cigarettes illegal WILL bring up the overall happiness when more people do not want to smoke.
I REPEAT. Not making it illegal now, nor when too many people smoke.

I didn't say "no people" I said "most" by which I mean a very large majority.
Making them not want to smoke by addressing information failure is a perfectly achievable goal.
It has been done with cocaine & heroin for example - Although not well enough.

Your claim is like saying "people will not stop being racist if you just educate them about why its wrong"
People believe what they're brought up to believe, that includes other variables than just parents & school - i.e. society's attitude via media for e.g.

If people are properly informed about the harmful affect of drugs, including tobacco, they're more likely not to smoke.
They will pass this on to there kids and to a lesser extent anyone they talk to it about.
Their kids will be less likely to smoke, meaning 1 person's changed attitude has passed it on to multiple people.
This effect, very very very roughly happens with religious / atheist beliefs.
It can do the same for any attitude which influences behaviors.

It's being done RIGHT NOW, in this country (UK), anti smoking adverts, FREE help for smokers to quit etc.
This sort of thing with better education & awareness will mean many less people want to smoke in the future.

Don't mistake me, I agree with everything here besides making it illegal after long term education UNLESS nobody or close to nobody is smoking it. Or at least, keep it legal to grow your own tobacco should you really want to. But if there are still over a million people smoking tobacco (half a million heroin users in the UK to put this into perspective), no way.