CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
It should be illegal for the reason that second-hand smoke causes damage to non-smokers should make public use illegal. And the old 'there are worse things to illegalize' argument is illogical. What if I said "rape isn't as bad as murder, therefore rape should be legal'.
if weed is illegal, then cigarettes should be illegal. I'm fucking sick of my dad smoking around me in the car. At least there have been no reported deaths from smoking weed. Fucking cigarettes kill thousands of people each year but that is legal. Hell no, that is the most fucking twisted thing ever. So yeah, i think that cigarettes should be illegal.
There are so many things that do more harm than good, illegalizing everything would make us a very very illiberal country.
As long as every smoker knows of the complications smoking can cause, I don't see the reason why one should deny them from doing it.
I think instead of denying people to do it, why not encourage people to quit with giving them free help, therapy, nicotine chewing gums or whatever it takes?
I personally dont smoke but I wonder why people do if they know it will kill them. It seems odd to me.
I think instead of denying people to do it, why not encourage people to quit with giving them free help, therapy, nicotine chewing gums or whatever it takes?
I see. We do have commercials, posters, warning labels, gum, etc. It still continues. Same thing for seatbelts. We have commercials and stuff but we still cant make them protect themselves.
Making it illegal it is not going to help
Well they cant manufacture it so it may help of it did. It isnt like hemp because you can grow it and use it as it is. Cigarettes are manufactured.
This is just about cigarettes. I only want to focus on cigarettes.
We can do that, as long as you consider for a while what actually is dangerous.
The milk in your refrigerator .. to take an example.
I almost see it as a drug. It does far too much harm. You are just paying for death.
I know you want to focus on .. cigarettes. But seriously .. almost anything you buy can result in death.
I personally dont smoke but I wonder why people do if they know it will kill them.
That's not true. It might kill them.
We have commercials and stuff but we still cant make them protect themselves.
A commercial is not going to do it. Would you ever show a commercial to a drug addict, with the hope that he is going to quit? If you are, then you are very .. stupid to be frank.
Well they cant manufacture it so it may help of it did. It isnt like hemp because you can grow it and use it as it is. Cigarettes are manufactured.
But there is no real reason why you would make it illegal.
Drugs are illegal because if you take in large amounts, or if kids get there hands on them you and they might die.
With cigarettes you will need a lot, and I mean a lot of cigarettes in a long time of period to be able to die from it.
I know you want to focus on .. cigarettes. But seriously .. almost anything you buy can result in death.
I am sure. But for example what do we use the things we buy for? Like a couch. You sit on it. A tv. You watch it. Cookies. You eat them. Cigarettes. You smoke them. The cigarette, when used for what it is made for, has a better change of ruining my health than many thing you buy and use for the purpose they were made for.
That's not true. It might kill them.
Yes. Sorry. I should have said it declines ones health into a terrible state.
A commercial is not going to do it. Would you ever show a commercial to a drug addict, with the hope that he is going to quit? If you are, then you are very .. stupid to be frank.
Well that example was for seatbelts. Commercials are aimed at everyone. Not just drug addicts.
But there is no real reason why you would make it illegal.
You are selling bodily pestilence in a stick.
Drugs are illegal because if you take in large amounts, or if kids get there hands on them you and they might die.
Then why is weed illegal? Tell me that. I understand how cigarettes take longer and drugs and quicker but your body will wreck itself. I dont think something like that should be in the market.
I am sure. But for example what do we use the things we buy for? Like a couch. You sit on it. A tv. You watch it. Cookies. You eat them. Cigarettes. You smoke them. The cigarette, when used for what it is made for, has a better change of ruining my health than many thing you buy and use for the purpose they were made for.
Sugar - you eat it. BAM diabetes - the biggest killer in the united states.
I should have said it declines ones health into a terrible state.
To be frank, that is not true either. Many people smoke their entire life, they die at an age of over 90 without health issues nonsmokers don't get themselves.
Well that example was for seatbelts. Commercials are aimed at everyone. Not just drug addicts.
Sorry, my point was just that commercials are not helping very much :)
You are selling bodily pestilence in a stick.
That's not only found in cigarettes.
Then why is weed illegal? Tell me that. I understand how cigarettes take longer and drugs and quicker but your body will wreck itself. I dont think something like that should be in the market.
People who use weed or other drugs in a longer period of time will almost 100% have complications from it. A disease, schizophrenia, brain damage .. the rate of how many people struggle with countless things after being addicted to drugs and weed for a long time is almost 100%.
But cigarettes? Sure the complications are harsh.. but they are only harsh for some. Actually they are harsh for a minority of the smokers. Probably less than half of the smokers will have major complications after smoking for a long time.
Many will not experience much more than extreme coughing.
To be frank, that is not true either. Many people smoke their entire life, they die at an age of over 90 without health issues nonsmokers don't get themselves.
May I see a statistic that supports this? Because here are a few statistic against that:
About a third of the male adult global population smokes.Smoking related-diseases kill one in 10 adults globally, or cause four million deaths. By 2030, if current trends continue, smoking will kill one in six people.
Every eight seconds, someone dies from tobacco use.
Smoking is on the rise in the developing world but falling in developed nations.
Among Americans, smoking rates shrunk by nearly half in three decades (from the mid-1960s to mid-1990s), falling to 23% of adults by 1997.
In the developing world, tobacco consumption is rising by 3.4% per year.About 15 billion cigarettes are sold daily - or 10 million every minute.About 12 times more British people have died from smoking than british people have who fought World War II.
Cigarettes cause more than one in five American deaths.
Sorry, my point was just that commercials are not helping very much :)
True. Which is why illegalizing them would be the best method.
That's not only found in cigarettes
True. Seems like we agree that it is though.
People who use weed or other drugs in a longer period of time will almost 100% have complications from it. A disease, schizophrenia, brain damage .. the rate of how many people struggle with countless things after being addicted to drugs and weed for a long time is almost 100%.
But cigarettes? Sure the complications are harsh.. but they are only harsh for some. Actually they are harsh for a minority of the smokers. Probably less than half of the smokers will have major complications after smoking for a long time.Manyill not experience much more than extreme coughing.
You should check the stats I listed above. They say otherwise.
Have you seen the stats for cigarettes? Compare this with your post.)
Diabetes is the top killer in the US.
In the developing world, tobacco consumption is rising by 3.4% per year.About 15 billion cigarettes are sold daily - or 10 million every minute
And do you have statistics showing that the people in the developing world have a higher death rate, as the consumption of tobacco is rising?
True. Seems like we agree that it is though.
I've never said cigarettes aren't dangerous. [I'm just saying a lot of things are dangerous.]
You should check the stats I listed above. They say otherwise.
Again, what I am interested in - you said the consumption of cigarettes in the developing world is rising, so I'm interested in if the rate of people killed by cigarettes is also rising.
Here's why.
I believe people in the developed world are very unhealthy compared to people in the developing world. What we eat is not very healthy, we don't exercise, our job is mostly in a chair behind a screen.
People in the developing world are constantly moving, working hard and they get their food from commodities, which is far healthier than fast food, canned food and other hormone poisoned food we buy at the grocery store.
I believe when you already are filling your body with chemicals from cigarettes, adding the hormones and chemicals from the food you eat it kinda.. overflows, making your chances of getting multiple diseases 10 times higher.
You get what I mean?
I don't think the cigarette is any more dangerous than the food they eat in the United States, actually I think the food is much much much worse.
I believe people in the developed world are very unhealthy compared to people in the developing world. What we eat is not very healthy, we don't exercise, our job is mostly in a chair behind a screen.
People in the developing world are constantly moving, working hard and they get their food from commodities, which is far healthier than fast food, canned food and other hormone poisoned food we buy at the grocery store.
Can you back that up with some evidence? Because I havent seen this.
I don't think the cigarette is any more dangerous than the food they eat in the United States, actually I think the food is much much much worse.
Can you back that up with some evidence? Because I havent seen this.
Do you want be to prove to you that people in the developing world work harder than people in the developed world?
Or do you want me to prove that the food you buy in the grocery store is .. trash, to be frank? I'm confused, sorry.
Again. Stats? Sources? Evidence?
Well the stats you gave me yourself. Heart diseases - obese people have 35% higher risk in getting heart diseases or attacks, while smokers are only 28% in higher risk of heart diseases.
Less than 10% of smokers will get lung cancer, while 43% of obese people will experience breathing problems.
The critical thing is that I have already provided you with multiple sources showing you the power of cigarettes. They kill many many people. It is the leading cause of preventable death.
A major of the heart diseases are motivated or caused by diabetes, or obesity
Oh no no no. Diabetes was recorded separately. If it was from diabetes it goes under diabetes.
I can't see anything regarding tobacco
Your argument tried to shift the burden from cigarettes to american food and how they are better off. I provided all of their problems to trump that.
Do you want be to prove to you that people in the developing world work harder than people in the developed world?Or do you want me to prove that the food you buy in the grocery store is .. trash, to be frank? I'm confused, sorry.
Honestly. This is for the legality of cigarettes. You are just comparing foods. Not cigarettes. Cancer was ranked above Diabetes. I trumped that already.
Well the stats you gave me yourself. Heart diseases - obese people have 35% higher risk in getting heart diseases or attacks, while smokers are only 28% in higher risk of heart diseases.Less than 10% of smokers will get lung cancer, while 43% of obese people will experience breathing problems.
Oh no no no. Diabetes was recorded separately. If it was from diabetes it goes under diabetes.
Let me put it this way. People eat themselves to death. This is a well known fact.
35% of all Americans are obese, and another 35% are overweight.
My point is, that food is the biggest killer, I should probably have said that before, instead of saying diabetes. Food, of course, doesn't only cause diabetes.
Your argument tried to shift the burden from cigarettes to american food and how they are better off. I provided all of their problems to trump that.
But nothing regarding tobacco? How did you trump me? Sorry, I'm confused.
Can we just end the debate? You win ;) I'm too confused, I don't really know where this went, haha :)
Let me put it this way. People eat themselves to death. This is a well known fact.35% of all Americans are obese, and another 35% are overweight.My point is, that food is the biggest killer, I should probably have said that before, instead of saying diabetes. Food, of course, doesn't only cause diabetes.
Again. Diabetes isnt the leading killer. Can I see a source for your stats though?
But nothing regarding tobacco? How did you trump me? Sorry, I'm confused.
You compared our food with tobacco. Then you compared it to the developing countries. I gave you a list of their problems to show you that they are in a worse state for us. I gave you the link that even stated another source for why smoking in developing countries increase. It is bad over there. You made a statement saying that they are better off without our food but thats is primarily what they want. They want our food. So I provided you with all of their challenges to show you just how well offf we are.
Can we just end the debate? You win ;) I'm too confused, I don't really know where this went, haha :)
._. If that is what you wish. Although your strong point in your argument is your diabetes bit.
Oh no no no. Diabetes was recorded separately. If it was from diabetes it goes under diabetes.
Let me put it this way. People eat themselves to death. This is a well known fact.
35% of all Americans are obese, and another 35% are overweight.
My point is, that food is the biggest killer, I should probably have said that before, instead of saying diabetes. Food, of course, doesn't only cause diabetes.
Your argument tried to shift the burden from cigarettes to american food and how they are better off. I provided all of their problems to trump that.
But nothing regarding tobacco? How did you trump me? Sorry, I'm confused.
Can we just end the debate? You win ;) I'm too confused, I don't really know where this went, haha :)
Everybody knows it is harmful. But people are adults and can do what they want with their bodies. It's probably too engrained in the human culture, so it won't go away. We don't need to say what they can and can not do. I don't really want to be their nanny. Now, there is absolutely no problem with anti-smoking campaigns.
The easiest way to stop smoking would be to illegalize it. Manufacturing cigarettes would stop which would prevent many from purchasing cigarettes. We have about 40+ million smokers in the US. This number would radically drop. This would also save more lives in the long run.
I am arguing for the illegality of manufactured cigarettes that are dangerous such as a typical Marlboro cigarette. If you stop manufacturing the problem pretty much helps more than solves. Alcohol is a depressant. However if these typical cigarettes are illegalized then electronic cigarettes would become more common. Cigarettes are not on the exact same plane as Alcohol when it comes to the effects if they become illegalized. There are alternatives that can give the user the stimulation they want which could be an electronic cigarette.
Honestly, making smoking illegal isn't going to make anyone quit. It's not going to eradicate smoking in any way. Cigarettes will just be sold illegally and our government would be able to punish more people, maybe even send them to jail, for a victimless crime. If someone is aware of the risks (as I'm sure everyone by now is) and still wants to smoke in the privacy of their own home, I say let them.
The manufacturing of cigarettes is much easier to monitor in today's society. That is what I am arguing for. The illegality of your typical cigarette. It is potential death in a stick.
If someone is aware of the risks (as I'm sure everyone by now is) and still wants to smoke in the privacy of their own home, I say let them.
With this logic all drugs should be legal. However they have negative effects. Cigarettes work the same way. I want to see the typical manufactured cigarette to be illegal and replace with electronic cigarettes. It would save many lives. Many. It would decrease the smoking population. By a good number. Some may even try the electronic cigarettes. However you raise an excellent question. It just comes down to personal views in the end.
I never once claimed to be for any drugs being illegal. I agree that having manufactured cigarettes replaced by electronic cigarettes would be very beneficial, but I don't think very many people would accept that sort of change for whatever reason. It's kind of a hard topic, but I don't think making it illegal is the right answer. Not everything needs to be dictated by law.
The thing is that if we just continue to do what we are doing we wont make any progress.
" Tobacco control policy,” Proctor says, “too often centers on educating the public, when it should be focused on fixing or eliminating the product.” He points out that we don’t just educate parents to keep toys painted with lead-based paints away from their children’s mouths; we ban the use of lead-based paint. Similarly, when thalidomide was found to cause major birth defects, we did not just educate women to avoid using the drug when pregnant." -
Robert Proctor, a historian of science at Stanford University and the author of a forthcoming blockbuster entitled Golden Holocaust: Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition
What this man is saying is that simply warning people wont do much.
Experience shows us that making drugs illegal doesn't stop people from using them. Since Plato it has been a virtual truism, that "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." I am not going to say that drug users are bad, I would actually argue strongly against such an idea.
What's important to remember is that if we make cigarettes illegal, people will smoke them anyway. The only effect illegalizing them would have, would be to make smokers criminals. Now the one thing we surely don't want in society is more criminals, for obvious reasons. It's also important to realize that a criminal industry of cigarette manufacture will start, were we to make it illegal. Such an industry is highly unfavorable, because it takes away all the control the government would otherwise have. If the government want to control consumption, the government has to control production. It thus makes no sense for the government to put production in criminals only interested in profit and/or their own addiction. Making cigarettes illegal, as far as my analysis takes me, is not only irrational, it actually makes the problem worse.
What it's important to remember is that if we make cigarettes illegal, people will smoke them anyway. The only effect illegalizing them would have, would be to make smokers criminals.
Actually we could just stop manufacturing them. That would make a critical difference. What will you smoke if you cigarette isnt made? Other drugs pretty mich come ready to use. Hemp comes ready for use. Cigarettes must be made.
Making cigarettes illegal, as far as my analysis takes me, is not only irrational, it actually makes the problem worse.
I have to disagree. If we stop production the problem must stop. This would also lower our cancer death rates in the United States. If production ceases the problem will eventually cease to exist as well.
Experience shows us that making drugs illegal doesn't stop people from using them.
Again. Cigarettes are manufactured. It isnt like coccaine or weed. It does come ready in seconds. You dont make it. Cigarettes however must be manufactured.
Actually cocaine takes a whole lot of time to extract from coca leaves. The whole process is tremendously ineffective - that's why cocaine is much more expensive compared to many other drugs. Also preparing cannabis products takes some effort as well. So yeah, the point I am trying to make is that all drugs take some effort to manufacture - it isn't just restricted to cigarettes.
Actually we could just stop manufacturing them.
If we stopped manufacturing drugs, we wouldn't deal with the real problem, and that is demand. And as long as there is demand, there will be profit for the ones willing to take a risk at making and distributing cigarettes. A criminal network dealing with cigarettes would probably quickly emerge. So if we just stop producing cigarettes legally, we won't have taken away the incentives people have to buy and produce them; there will still be demand, and if there's demand there will be supply.
Cigarettes must be made
Not necesarilly. Where I come from a lot of people smoke hand rolled cigarettes. The only thing that needs to be made then is the tobacco and the rolling paper.
Not necesarilly. Where I come from a lot of people smoke hand rolled cigarettes. The only thing that needs to be made then is the tobacco and the rolling paper.
Rolling tobacoo is different than a manufactured cigarette.
If we stopped manufacturing drugs, we wouldn't deal with the real problem, and that is demand. And as long as there is demand, there will be profit for the ones willing to take a risk at making and distributing cigarettes. A criminal network dealing with cigarettes would probably quickly emerge. So if we just stop producing cigarettes legally, we won't have taken away the incentives people have to buy and produce them; there will still be demand, and if there's demand there will be supply
Only the cigarettes manufactured would be illegal. They do far much more damage than just rolled up tobacco. This would save lives.
Actually cocaine takes a whole lot of time to extract from coca leaves. The whole process is tremendously ineffective - that's why cocaine is much more expensive compared to many other drugs. Also preparing cannabis products takes some effort as well. So yeah, the point I am trying to make is that all drugs take some effort to manufacture - it isn't just restricted to cigarettes.
I will give you the coccaine bit by hemp itself? What products? I am just talking about smoking the plant. Some people just take the plant, set it on fire, and feel the effects. Also cigarettes are of course added with other substances.
Actually the page you cited doesn't really talk about rolling tobacoo. It just describes the difference between cigarettes and the tobacoo plants. Rolling tobacoo is probably just as bad for you as normal cigarettes, especially given that I don't see a lot of rollers who use filters...
Anyway, what still think it's important that the problem is that people demand cigarettes. That's the issue that needs to be addressed and making cigarettes illegal will not affect demand in any signifcant way.
The link was just used to state the difference between the two seperately. Tobacco and a cigarette. Mostly because a cigarette has different substances in it.
That's the issue that needs to be addressed and making cigarettes illegal will not affect demand in any signifcant way.
Maybe we have our views a little messed up. Let me rephrase. I am arguing for the illegalization of manufactured cigarettes such as Camel's cigarettes or Marlboro's cigarettes. That is what I am arguing for. If these kind of cigarettes are illegalized and all that really remains are electronic cigarettes then we will have a major health improvement. Of course you can make your own but the way they make cigarettes endagers a lot of people.
Oh sorry, I assumed you meant all tobacoo/nicotine products in general. I think it would be possible if we slowly phase cigarettes out and replace them with more healthy alternatives. PS didn't mean to dispute =(
As much as I hate to say it, I have to disagree to this one, even though I know they're harmful. Making cigarettes illegal would not really improve anything, and people might smuggle cigarettes or just buy them from some other country which has even worse effects.
Making cigarettes illegal would not really improve anything,
I actually have to disagree with this. For multiple reasons. It would have radical changes.
An estimated 43.8 million people, or 19.0% of all adults (aged 18 years or older), in the United States smoke cigarettes.
Cigarette smoking is more common among men (21.6%) than women (16.5%). Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, accounting for more than 400,000 deaths, or one of every five deaths, in the United States each year.
Now only 22.5 million people in the US use illicit drugs. With these number most people will not go out of their way to achieve a smuggled cigarette because these 40+ million people are your typical everyday citizen. I will say that the drug usage may increase but for my second stat the death toll for cigarettes will drop significantly. It will save more lives in the long run.
I will allow that outlawing cigarettes would reduce the number of smokers. But there is another aspect of this question that you seem to be ignoring. What about the dangers of reducing people's personal liberty to make their own choices?
There has been ample dissemination of information about the dangers of smoking. People know it is harmful. If they choose to smoke anyway, how is that any of your or the governments business?
A lot of places have segregated smoking sections (see, you do agree with segregation) to keep non-smokers from being affected.
And before you say people can smoke around their kids; how people raise their children is, to an extent, an extension of their personal liberty to make their own choices.
If they choose to smoke anyway, how is that any of your or the governments business?
You raise an excellent point. I guess this personally reflects our views on the world. Politics practically. I like to see everybody feeling great but I want to ensure the health and survival for everybody. You question can be given to almost anything though such as drugs or explosives or hazardous chemicals and what not. Does that mean that the government should allow its population to suffer from the effects of cigarettes? It is almost like a poison. If drugs are illegal then why is such a dangerous object on the market? If that was the case there would be no need for government if we want everybody to be able to practically do everything? My views are more about the protection of the population. What are your views?
I like to see everybody feeling great but I want to ensure the health and survival for everybody.
I could argue that ensuring the health and survival for everybody will ultimately lead to the destruction of the human race. But we had best stay on topic.
If that was the case there would be no need for government if we want everybody to be able to practically do everything?
I'm not in favor everybody being able to do practically everything, or practically anything. I think the government has the responsibility to make it illegal for one man to infringe on the rights of another man. I would in this case consider the government to also be a 'man'. Outside of that, I think people should be allowed to make their own decisions and make their own mistakes.
