CreateDebate


Debate Info

56
50
Yes No
Debate Score:106
Arguments:53
Total Votes:114
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (29)
 
 No (23)

Debate Creator

debateleader(1350) pic



Smoking Should Be Banned

Yes

Side Score: 56
VS.

No

Side Score: 50

It would be best to get rid of everything that will cause harm to the body!

Side: Yes
BenWalters(1513) Disputed
4 points

When you exercise, you punish your body, and cause it pain, so it grows back stronger. With your logic, exercise should be banned: it causes harm to the body.

Do you not believe that people should have the right to not do what is best for them? Should people not be allowed to make bad decisions? Does anyone (exclude God in your answer) have the right to dictate what is good and bad for them, and prevent them from having any choice in the matter?

Side: No
3 points

Exercise is a bad example because smoking does nothing good for your body, but exercise will. It does not cause harm to the body it causes pain because of the acid produced in an anaerobic respiration.

Side: Yes
3 points

I am not talking about those things Ben it is really commonsense what the things I am talking about. Clearly other people on here know the things I really was talking about but you you must be just lost man. I don't have to explain myself here because like I said it is commonsense by what I mean by that everything I posted above.

Side: Yes
2 points

I think your parents, morals and people loved by the majority because of their good deeds combined can tell what is good and bad and you will probably agree.

Side: Yes
2 points

Living deteriorates the body...

Side: Yes
1 point

Oxygen has a very small amount of toxicity that can promote some kind of harm.

Side: Yes
1 point

Merely sitting or standing is putting pressure on parts of body which can crush and kill many cells which contribute harm.

Side: Yes
MisterB(31) Disputed
1 point

And it would be the best way to be a controlling prick. The less responsible you are for your own actions and choices the less free you are. It has nothing to do with what harms the body. This is about keeping and increasing freedom; in this case the freedom to choose if you smoke or not.

Side: No
2 points

Yes it should be banned because it does no good to our body when we smoke. I don't understand people who know smoking is wrong but they continue to smoke and slowly killing themselves as they continue to smoke.

Side: Yes
Apollo(1608) Disputed
2 points

Yes it should be banned because it does no good to our body when we smoke.

Should we ban EVERYTHING that is bad or harmful? Burgers? Fast Food? Christianity?

I don't understand people who know smoking is wrong but they continue to smoke and slowly killing themselves as they continue to smoke.

That's the definition of an addiction. Whether it's meat or smoking, people do it. Does that mean we should ban it? You eat meat. Therefore, you have an addition. But you aren't in favor of banning it, are you?

Side: No
Srom(12206) Disputed
3 points

Should we ban everything that is bad or harmful? Burgers? Fast Food? Christianity?

No not all things we should ban that is bad or harmful. Its the person's choice to choose what they think is bad or harmful for them.

That's the definition of an addiction. Whether it's meat or smoking, people do it. Does that mean we should ban it? You eat meat. Therefore, you have an addition. But you aren't in favor of banning it, are you?

I don't eat meat on a daily basis, so I am not addicted to it. I only eat it everyonce in awhile and I eat food that are healthy for me.

Side: Yes
2 points

Yes, its not good for your body. So why should it be allowed. My uncle almost dies because of smoking, but yet he still does it.

Side: Yes

He continues to do it because it is tempting and if we destroy all cigars, he will go crazy for two days but then forget it, I guess you could give him 3 cigars to use this week and he needs to use them wisely. It helped me.

Side: Yes
AskingAndy(80) Clarified
2 points

Dont they have those like fake cigars that have like steam come out of them? I think if they sold more of those it could help people stop. But thats just what i think.

Side: Yes
2 points

I suppose that smoking should be banned because first of al it is the high risk of lung cancer. People who smoke in the stree or in the other public places do not ponder that people around them also incur this poison of tobaco. If smoking person does not care about his health that I am worry about myself!!!

Side: Yes
2 points

Smoking in more ways than one is harmful to a persons body, but the worst effect that smoking can have is second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke has been proven to be more toxic than the cigarette itself. Smoking should be up to the individual to decide, but when u add in the factor of second hand smoke that can harm non-smokers, its is evident that this decision is no longer up to the individual. Also, if you deprive a person of cigarettes or tobacco, the body will start healing to the point where it will be fully healed in a couple of months. For these reasons, I personally believe that smoking should be banned.

Side: Yes
anachronist(889) Disputed
1 point

That's bullshit, if second hand smoke was worse, surely people wouldn't have to buy cigarettes, they could just stand near some smokers. You can't get a good fix off second hand. Try it.

Side: No
2 points

80% of people with lung cancer have smoked some time in their life. There are countless more statistics like this one that I could quote however the point is that smoking is overloading the NHS and they have already had massive cuts. Most ingredients of a cigarette are lethal poisons. Tar that goes on roads goes into cigarettes and countless other things.

However the worst thing about smoking is that cigarettes are legal, and therefore it is an 'open' catastrophe. So why don't the government ever talk about it? If I go to watch BBC Parliament I doubt that I will ever find them discussing smoking. It is because the government knows that it is wrong however they do nothing about it for the taxes they can gain are large. If someone has an addiction, price will not stop them and therefore all that is happening is that the government are making more profit. This is an issue that has to change and therefore I conclude that smoking should be banned.

Side: Yes
2 points

I think it should be banned, but only in public places. I feel that smoking can be harmful, but I don't think it should be banned completely.

Side: Yes
2 points

I suppose that arguments against smoking are stronger than arguments for smoking(i think it's obvious). Smoking has been shown to be dangerous to health. Heart disease, bronchitis and lung cancer have all been linked. A further issue is that smoking costs governments millions of pounds because of the large number of people who need treatment in hospitals for smoking related problems. There is also concern today about passive smoking. Recent research has shown that non-smokers can suffer health problems if they spend long periods of time among people who do smoke.

Side: Yes
Raven01(10) Disputed
1 point

Taxation on tobacco is a huge revenue stream for governments.

It does not "cost" us or governments a single cent.

Smokers also die earlier on average with a net result of costing less overall for that persons lifetime use of government social services.

Side: No
2 points

Also, being in a restaurant and having to smell that smoke while eating is not only disrepectful but also disturbing and once again not healthy. I respect those who smoke away.

Side: Yes
2 points

In my view, buying cigarettes is a waste of money. Also, that is important smoke pollutes the environment.

Side: Yes
2 points

They should care about surroundings! Children exposed to secondhand smoke have increased risks of sudden infant death syndrome, middle ear infection, asthma, pneumonia and bronchitis.

Side: Yes

I don't think the corporations care about us. Most smokers regret smoking so badly, and would agree to anything to help them. So right now, they under control from a stupid product that harms them but if we ban them, they will be safe and stable from something that doesn't harm them. The cigar itself tempts them, if their friends did not know about cigars would they have made them feel weak and nerdy it they did not smoke? The smokers themselves want cigars out of their lives, so they won't be so sad if we ban them.

Side: Yes

Smoking isn't just bad for you but it cause second-hand smoke, which kills many people EVERY YEAR. A lot of my famil smoke, and I hate being around them, I am so sick of smokeng it's not even funny.

Side: Yes
1 point

If you are for smoking you are an idiot. Smoking is like religion - pointless and extremely bad for people.

I, personally, have never even tried a single smoke and never will. I would literally rather die.

If you are a smoker. How much money do you waste a year on smoking?

Side: Yes
1 point

You remind me of Marx, "Religion is the opium of The people". Anyway, religion actually influenced history to the better.

Side: Yes
1 point

I'm smoking and I'm just as much an idiot as someone eating a McHeartattack. But I do insist on my right to do either of these activities if I so choose.

I waste about as much money on smoking I do other unnecessary consumables, junk food, recreational drugs, gas for scenic drives or roadtrips, etc. These things I spend money on leave me with nothing to show for it but satisfaction, good memories, and my body/car a little worse off, but more often than not I find this to be a fair trade, not a waste. Moderation and balance are the key. I've been smoking for years but i can still hold my breath for over 3 min on account of all the work I do. Balance. I take recreational drugs, but I do so infrequently and not in excess. Moderation.

I'm very much against religion, but I don't think religion should be banned because that would infringe on people's right to act like some degree of an idiot. Same story with smoking, except our government already restricts smoking and throws money into anti-smoking ads and education.

Side: No
1 point

In fact smoking - it's the same drug. Only rampant and the offering of harm to others (passive smoking). It would be nice to ban in the state level. In any case, there would be no bad examples of mass, which is very contagious.

Side: Yes
1 point

smoking should actually be banned as smoking leads to cancers such as mouth cancer, lip cancer etc., even passive smokers i.e., the one who inhale the smoke which is smoked by other smokers which is more harmful.the one smokes especially the reverse smokers not only harm others by their smoke but also harm their own body which makes their lungs turn black in colour and it leads to emphysema i.e., rupturing of blood vessels.

Side: Yes
5 points

No. We shouldn't be trying to legislate behavior. You don't like second-hand smoke? Don't eat/drink at bars and restaurants that allow smoking. It is your choice to expose yourself to said smoke.

Side: No
5 points

What people do with their bodies is their problem and shouldn't be up to the government to control that too.

Side: No
4 points

Even though someone may not agree with it doesn't mean others shouldn't be able to smoke if they want to. Telling them they can't is a violation of their liberty.

Side: No
3 points

Second hand smoke is a mostly myth, and the individual ought to be able to do to itself as it wishes.

Penn & Teller
Side: No
3 points

I try to avoid secondhand smoke just because it taste bad, and I don't remember ever being forced to breathe it.

Side: No
3 points

We shouldn't as it will just make illegal marketing of cigarettes and we don't want this. Also, people can't just suddenly stop smoking if they have smoked all their life and are addicted, it will just mean they will break the law to get cigarettes and it is better that they legally buy them.

Side: No
3 points

Why anyone would ever think there should be a law in existence to protect people from their own chioces, I really don't know.

Side: No
2 points

We already ban them in some public spaces but it's not our place to tell a person what they can or cannot do in the privacy of their homes.

Side: No
2 points

You're in your senses, you get pleasure, passive smoking is a far fetched idea.

Side: No
1 point

no it shouldn't be banned because if it is banned the smokers will turn to be criminals so they can smoke.further more it is very hard to stop smoking once u started.

Side: No
1 point

When have bans ever worked?

Bans are the go to solution of the mentally crippled.

Smoking, drugs, alcohol abuse are all MEDICAL issues. Bans only make them into legal issues and make actual progress harder to accomplish while enriching real criminals and dirty politicians.

Side: No
1 point

No because people should have the choice to smoke or not smoke.

Side: No

Wanna ban sex, crossing roads, driving cars, McDonald's, climbing frames etc. No? Then STFU.

Don't like second hand smoke? don't stand next to smokers.

Side: No