I’ve had to breathe enough cancer sticks waiting at a bus stop because I could not leave because of heavy rain, that I don’t care if it works or not to make people stop smoking, as long as it works enough to make people stop smoking in places where other people may be around.
I can drink a beer in a place full of people without bothering anyone, but no one can smoke without making those surrounding them breathe it.
As long as it reduces the chances of an obnoxious asshole spreading their toxic fumes to the grandma who has to sit at the bus stop and can’t move away because it’s raining, I’m fine with it.

Will there be a black market and other issues? Maybe. Not the best way to do it? Ok. Someone figure out a better way. In the meantime, ban it is.

Sometimes you have to go with the “this is why we can’t have nice things” method.

because the war on drugs has proven to be a great thing…

Going to get down voted to hell and back for this I expect, but hey, different opinions generate discussion right?

This is good legislation for the environment, for non-smokers, for the NHS, and has zero negative impact on smokers. The ONLY parties I see really hurt by this are tobacco companies, since retailers make minimal margins on tobacco.

The constant use of the word freedom in the thread comments just seems odd to me. This isn’t a question of freedom, and the comments mostly seem to ignore the paradox of tolerance as it applies to antisocial activity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance. Individual freedoms have limits and must end at the boundary of another persons personal space and freedoms. That’s why smoking is banned in confined public places.

Its all very well to say tax the shit out of it and fund the NHS, but that will feel pretty shit when your parent/partner/child has to wait for an operation because the queue is full of smokers who are entitled to that spot by having paid for it. Which also veers dangerously close to creating paid tracks within the public national health service.

This seems like an excuse to normalize age/ID checks even for people who are obviously over 18. Totalitarian Britain being totalitarian as usual.

I’m imagining the last person alive to be eligible to smoke going on a grand journey to the last place selling the last pack of smokes in the country. I think this law is so ass backwards and does nothing about addressing people’s concerns including the comments made in here.

Healthcare concern? Tax it, a single use isn’t going to put a strain on the healthcare system. Make sure lifetime smokers have paid in more than their fair share.

Age limit? What’s the current UK view on alcohol? You can’t just cherry-pick drugs and regulations if you’re trying to make sense.

Vape and smoke indistinguishable? Sure, but lets add additional tax onto ANYTHING that creates pollutants. It being illegal in cars is kinda ironic and hilarious. Especially from those living near industrial sites with bad water and smog effects, has the government made sure those companies are paying their fair share or restricting what they release because of the children?

I’m all for people’s opinions and ideas shared, I just don’t like governments that target civilian freedoms more than corporate profits when they’ve had the chance for the past hundred years. Let the people decide, local jurisdictions banning areas and businesses opting out are completely fine with me. Playing this weird game of “sorry you were born a day too late to be eligible” is weird. Ban it all or not, let the cards lay. Too much wiggle room/cost for enforcement for this to be anything useful and will probably just be thrown out at a later date wasting everyone’s time.

This is a stupid decision. Prohibition has never worked. Instead there will be more illegal, unsafe and unregulated cigarettes that the newer generations will smoke which will be more harmful while at the same time losing tax revenues and an increase in policing costs.

A better solution will be just to tax the shit out of these products and fund healthcare with it.

They would do anything but nationalise big tabacco. Nobody’s speaking about how natural tabacco is neither as harmful nor addictive as the shit they’re selling. But we gotta let them milk addicts a little more, am I right?

I think people should be allowed to harm themselves with drugs of they want. Maybe I’m a radical.

We all know that banning drugs means that people will stop using them. Or so.

Not including vaping is kinda… Odd.

How kind of the government to decide that people born after 2008 have fewer freedoms than those born before it!

Lemmites normally: smoking is bad and should be banned.

UK government: ok then.

Lemmites now: YO WHAT THE FUCK.

This law was originally implemented within New Zealand some years ago and I believe it is based on the same principles. I am all for it because it doesn’t affect those that already smoke, just the ones that would potentially get into it in the future. And it has a rolling eligibility year so every year it will move, stopping all future generations from potentially being able to try it legally. Eventually it would get to the point where the generations that currently smoke die off completely and then it would be most likely looked at from an antiquated perspective. Unfortunately, in our case, as soon as the latest conservative parliament got into power, they completely rolled it back. We never got to see the long term potential positive implications of it in practice.

This is one of the few bans that actually makes sense. Carcinogens are genuinely bad for a person’s future.

Prohibition is never good, removing individual freedom is never good. I can see the point for some of these restrictions, to provide a safe basis for other people around (because we can’t ask people to simply be nice), but more than that… meh.

I will not be up in arms to defend smoking rights, but that’s probably not the way to do it.