*DEBATE* Should public smoking be banned? Winner = Klock

[Jin]

I highly doubt people would go home to smoke, they would more likely break the law OR find alternative means of their nicotine fix eg, nicotine gum, patches, which all in all means that people are still smoking less.

and because corey, when it is a familly which smokes, no one in the house has a problem with smoking so they do it in the house.

[?WhyNot?]

This is a different story where I live. Marijuana is being legalized in Canada - so banning msoking in public areas won't even be brgouht up here.

In the province of Quebec (where I live), smoking in public spaces will be completely forbidden on January 2006.

[Corey777]

and because corey, when it is a familly which smokes, no one in the house has a problem with smoking so they do it in the house.

What are you basing that on? I would say quite the opposite and that people smoke in their backyards more often because a family member has a problem with it.

But then non-smokers might not care. Loads of people don't care if someone smokes. But im not saying Everyone doesnt care because there are people that do care, and get stressed, which is also bad.

Even if people don't care, I am all for cutting down on unnecessary deaths (passive smoking) - so why not ban public smoking and help the people that don't care so that they do not have to suffer the affects of passive smoking.

In the province of Quebec (where I live), smoking in public spaces will be completely forbidden on January 2006.

<< Very sorry

Quebec is very independant and separated in many areas from the rest of Canada - so I wouldn't be surprised if it was just there.

[BLuweesH]

As Jin said: 1 out of 5 are caused by smoking.

Well I understand accidents do happen. But some people must have not common sense at all.

I don't think a ban on smoking seems possible though.

If the government weren't generating enough revenue through the taxes of tobacco selling, I'm sure the Government would be urging the private companies to promote it more, or the price may even be reduced.

If the government is earning more and more each time from nicotine, what's gonna stop them from banning it? After all, they need that money, well not for just for their own selfish purpose, but for roads, schools, hospitals, and so on.

[Laura.]

I can see people are saying with what I said about before and the Going home to smoke. But some on previously said about going home to smoke.

Well I understand accidents do happen. But some people must have not common sense at all.

I don't think a ban on smoking seems possible though.

If the government weren't generating enough revenue through the taxes of tobacco selling, I'm sure the Government would be urging the private companies to promote it more, or the price may even be reduced.

If the government is earning more and more each time from nicotine, what's gonna stop them from banning it? After all, they need that money, well not for just for their own selfish purpose, but for roads, schools, hospitals, and so on.

That last point is brilliant and correct. While people are recking their lives nad spending their money. They are also helping people.

[BLuweesH]

In the province of Quebec (where I live), smoking in public spaces will be completely forbidden on January 2006.

I'm sure if this idea was established by each country's government a long time ago, smoking would have decreased by a very large amount now.

However your province's government, is making a wise decision, people will benefit from this.

[?WhyNot?]

Quebec is very independant and separated in many areas from the rest of Canada - so I wouldn't be surprised if it was just there.

Yep, I know, and that's why we want to be a country. By the way, you bad quoted me, look at your post.

[Corey777]

That last point is brilliant and correct. While people are recking their lives nad spending their money. They are also helping people.

From how I see it, that is the only good point about smoking. While someone is destroying their respiratory(sp?) system, they may be helping a low income family with welfare. That is why smoking should not be completely banned.

[Laura.]

You might all be against this BUT:

Dieing is a fact of life. We can't stop it. So why, reck some people's addictions for like one person who is annoyed at say 3 people. Its like saying "I'm addicted to Orange Squash" and I couldn't stop drinking it. Nobody could stop me except me.

The only people who can stop smokers. Is themselves.

[BLuweesH]

From how I see it, that is the only good point about smoking. While someone is destroying their respiratory(sp?) system, they may be helping a low income family with welfare. That is why smoking should not be completely banned.

My view is that, as long as you're either smoking and not bothering anyone, and that smoking is banned in places such as beaches, schools, children playgrounds, those kind of areas in general. Then I guess everyone is happy. Well, except the smoker in the future.

I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm kind of against smoking, but I don't mind if people smoke, as long as they don't smoke near me or as long as children aren't affected.