Tasmania proposes a ban of cigarette sales to people born after 2000
10 replies, posted
[quote]The Australian Retailers Association says politicians are threatening to turn Tasmania into a nanny state in light of efforts to phase out the sale of tobacco.
The Tasmanian Upper House is unanimously calling on the State Government to make it illegal for people born after 2000 to buy tobacco when they turn 18.
The move means there would be generations of people who would never legally be able to buy cigarettes.
The Cancer Council has welcomed the proposed law but says the Government should put the issue to the public.
Retailers Association executive director Russell Zimmerman says young people should make their own decisions.
"There needs to be awareness and education programs rather than throwing the book at today's youth," he said.
"Retailers do understand the importance of ensuring young people are able to live healthy lifestyles.
"My concern about this would be that it puts back to a nanny state rather than allowing consumers to make their own informed decisions."
Mr Zimmerman says young people would still smoke.
"We already have a problem with drugs now in the community. I'm talking about non-legal drugs and how they're then sold on the black market," he said.
"You could see exactly the same thing happening with tobacco. It would go to an underground market."
Jann Smith from the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs Council agrees it is unclear whether the move will help smokers to quit.
"If we're talking about changing this, we can also see consequences that we might not have thought through," she said.
"So there could be a black market that would emerge. There could be a range of other consequences that we need to think through."
Audio: Listen to Timothy McDonald's report (PM)
The University of Sydney's Professor Simon Chapman, a leading anti-smoking campaigner, says there should be a robust debate over whether or not the proposed ban does unfairly restrict the right of adults to make their own decisions.
But he told PM the idea is still worth considering:
[quote]The risks of smoking are just so off the table. One in two smokers who smoke for a long time will die prematurely from tobacco-caused disease and this is something that's really only been happening ... from about the 1930s.
So there is no inevitability that we should always have a society that a lot of people die from this product.
If tobacco were invented tomorrow, there wouldn't be any government in the world that would allow it to be sold if they knew what they know about it now.
I think as a society, we need to work out what we're going to try and do about that. Are we going to say it's inevitable, or are we going to try and act?
Professor Simon Chapman[/quote]
State Health Minister Michelle O'Byrne has welcomed the proposal.
"I'd be happy if no one in Tasmania smoked, I'd be happy if no one in Australia smoked," she said.
"There is no reason why somebody who is not smoking now should take smoking up."
Tasmania's Children's Commissioner has been asked to investigate the proposal, which comes a week after the tobacco industry lost a High Court challenge to stop the Commonwealth's introduction of plain packaging.[/quote]
[url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-22/tasmania-labelled-nanny-state-over-cigarette-plan/4215654[/url]
This is getting ridiculous. "Hurrr, banning something will get rid of the problem! Screw an individuals right to choose! Totally won't end up like weed!"
Seeing as this will inevitably turn into a smoking debate, I'll get the ball rolling:
So what if drugs are bad, adults have the right to choose what goes into their body (be it Macdonalds or heroin), if it causes harm then tax the item at a rate which recovers the cost
(i.e medical bills) to society. Doesn't harm society, preserves liberty. Going by their logic they should ban alcohol too, it causes a lot of harm, both medically and in terms of crime. But you won't see that on the table because everyone enjoys it too much
[QUOTE=J!NX;37355703][url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1207107[/url][/QUOTE]
Seems we posted it at the same time...
[QUOTE=download;37355711]Seems we posted it at the same time...[/QUOTE]
still, that one's gotten more posts at least.
[QUOTE=J!NX;37355717]still, that one's gotten more posts at least.[/QUOTE]
Quality not quantity. The other one doesn't even cite where it came from
His thread was first. ATM his says 20 minutes old and yours 18.
Tasmania is the biggest smoker state in Australia. Tobacco companies selling in Australia are really taking a hit lately.
Tobacco isn't like weed or MacDonalds, it's actually medically addictive on top of the mental effect because of the nicotine.
It's easily the most harmful drug in the world and should be the one that should be banned first off, it's that much of a health risk to the smokers and the people around them.
[QUOTE=eurocracy;37355807]Tobacco isn't like weed or MacDonalds, it's actually medically addictive on top of the mental effect because of the nicotine.
It's easily the most harmful drug in the world and should be the one that should be banned first off, it's that much of a health risk to the smokers and the people around them.[/QUOTE]
I see you're ignoring peoples right to choose
[QUOTE=download;37355834]I see you're ignoring peoples right to choose[/QUOTE]
It's an addictive drug. Their right to choose is skewed after they start taking it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
