Thread: Should Alcohol and Cigarettes be illigal?

Looking at the statistics around damage that can be done by these two harmful drugs I am very suprised they are not illigal. A large portion of public money is spent each year due to the effects they have on users. Users are at a much higher risk of devolping long term health problems and in this country that can be a massive strain on the NHS. Alcohol users can get confused and agressive and have to be policed on a daily basis. Cigarettes are scientifically proven to have detremental health effects on non-users in the vicinity of the user.

It could be argued that they are as bad, statisically, as illigal substances that are in wide use but this comparrison is not really valid as illigal drugs are not as widely used as cigarettes and alcohol. Use of illigal drugs often brings connection to an illigal element which can affect the circumstances of the user. Therefore, I feel it is irrelevant to bring comparison between legal and illigal drugs in this debate.

These two drugs notoriously cause negative effects on society yet are availble in every town and city.

So, do you think that alcohol and cigarettes should be banned?

Cigarrettes have negative effects on a person's health -- so they should be made illegal? Make deep fried Twinkies illegal while you're at it. I get your point, and it would not bother me a bit if they made ciggs illegal. But diet can be just as detrimental to the overall health of society, if not more so. So unless you are going to target KFC right along with Phillip Morris...

Alcohol: People will succeed in altering their state of consciousness regardless if it is made illegal or not. They have done it for thousands of years and will continue to do so for thousands more. This is why we have been losing the war on drugs since before I was even thought of. Stop the sale of beer and liquor, and the entrepeneurs will come out of the woodwork and seize the moment. I agree that alcohol is a big contributor to crime, but honestly, I think crime would increase and the jails and prisons would be even more overcrowed if alcohol were made illegal. Research crime during the prohibition years. There's no good solution any way you look at it. It's just part of life.

The UK makes a lot of money out of smoking and drinking. Of course, this has to be balanced up with how much the resulting detrimental effects cost the health service. But if you banned both ciggs and booze would people then live forever? People are now living longer (despite ciggs and booze) and are a huge financial problem for the country. Ultimately, teatotallers and non-smokers will die. I'm cynical enough to believe a government wants people who stop paying taxes and retire to die sooner rather than later.

On a more personal note. I smoke but would be quite happy to see it banned. Having 24 hr petrol stations make it so hard to stop. A lot of people would take drugs if they were as cheap, legal and available as booze. It would also be nice to share the financial load with non-smokers. For instance, if the government require £5B a year from us smokers, after banning it they would need to raise this ammount from our 24M taxpayers rather than just 1 or 2M.

The government are loath to stop anything that gives them income whether it's ciggs, booze, people buying too much crappy food, using too much petrol, whatever. Sometimes I wonder if they'll legalise drugs just to sell them to us.

On a more personal note. I smoke but would be quite happy to see it banned. Having 24 hr petrol stations make it so hard to stop. A lot of people would take drugs if they were as cheap, legal and available as booze.

When I smoked I would always tell people that I wished the government would make them 20 dollars a pack.

Originally Posted by Brock

When I smoked I would always tell people that I wished the government would make them 20 dollars a pack.

They know too many people would just stop and they want the money. So upping the price bit by bit, a a sort of stealth-tax, keeps us hooked. I'll be trying to stop in a couple of weeks (date set) because of the money. It's a bit like junk food. If you put on a pound of weight every day you ate it, people would stop. But it's a few ounces extra, here and there.

You must let people choose to be as dumb as they wanna be. Drink and smoke away. For that matter, decriminalize pot and repeal the helmet law.

The government can't fix stupid, nor can it regulate common sense. I'm not buying the "It's for the public good" lie. It's about government control. What we put in our bodies, what we see, eventually what we think.

I love that movie "Demolition Man" w/ Stallone and Bullock. For those of you that haven't seen it, it's a cute adaptation of Huxley's Brave New World. The recurrent theme is "X was deemed bad for you, it is therefore now illegal..." So all the future residents of San Angeles are a bunch of pajama wearing woosies. That movie is only fifteen years old, and it seems we're almost there already.

Me? I'm the Denis Leary character in that movie. **** the system and it's mind control. It's starts with taking smokes and booze, and ends with everyone being a weak, mind-numbed pawn. No thanks. I'll take the cancer and sclerosis.

Spider -

It would also be nice to share the financial load with non-smokers. For instance, if the government require £5B a year from us smokers, after banning it they would need to raise this ammount from our 24M taxpayers rather than just 1 or 2M.

Surely this deficit would be balanced out by the fact that less people would be smoking due to it's illigality and therefore there would be less health problems that would drain the NHS?

Winston -

The government can't fix stupid, nor can it regulate common sense.

I fully agree with you on this.

Me? I'm the Denis Leary character in that movie. **** the system and it's mind control.

I'd be more like Huxley, stuck in the 90's and having a thing for Stallone

I'll be trying to stop in a couple of weeks (date set) because of the money.

Good luck Spider8. I used Nicorette, and it worked... had to ween myself off the gum though.

Originally Posted by Amber Leaf

Spider -

Surely this deficit would be balanced out by the fact that less people would be smoking due to it's illigality and therefore there would be less health problems that would drain the NHS?

In the long term, maybe. But if we all stopped smoking today I might still get lung cancer next year. The government will still need the money to treat me, and others. Money it is no longer getting from the 1 or 2 million that smoke - hence the taxing of the 24 million. Also, the price of cigarrettes doesn't only pay for smokers, ex-smokers or otherwise, in hospital. It's like 'road tax' - it all goes into a big pot now when originally it was just meant for roads.

As I said, even in the long term people will still die of these things but if there was no smoking it would be one less thing to blame. Now obesity is the number one killer. Let's tax junk food. What about sunbathers aging? Let's tax solariums and beach resorts, etc.


Let's just tax people who age rather than look to pick on a few who are not breaking any laws. That sounds good to me

Originally Posted by Brock

Good luck Spider8. I used Nicorette, and it worked... had to ween myself off the gum though.

Thanks mate. I've tried everything except electric cigarrettes. When I've stopped for long periods (a year+) I've done it cold turkey. All the nicotine supplements just keep me hooked.

I believe that if they want it to be legal, then smokers & boozers (& druggies if legalised) should be made to pay for all medical expenses for any & all medical problems resulting from their willful choice to consume these products.

Originally Posted by Rustgold

I believe that if they want it to be legal, then smokers & boozers (& druggies if legalised) should be made to pay for all medical expenses for any & all medical problems resulting from their willful choice to consume these products.

Perhaps for the boozers. Alcohol is part of the nation's obesity problem (the No.1 killer in the UK). Maybe people who willingly drive motorbikes too because motorbikes are proven to be more dangerous than cars. I drive a car so why should I pay the medical bill of someone who willfully chooses to ride a bike?

I think this a selfish attitude Rusty, my lad. That doesn't mean you are selfish. Sometimes these opinions are taken on by people without much thought after others have sown the germ of this idea into the minds of society. One anti-smoking GP refused to give treatment to smokers for instance and then several were doing it. Since obesity overtook smoking in the death stakes I haven't read much about this sort of thing (maybe there's a lot of fat GPs about that drink after-hours).

Perhaps if smoking and boozing was illegal we could then seperate it from bikers.

No.
Once someone has invented/produced something, and where the public, the consumer has engaged in trading in them, then it is not possible to turn round years later and say actually I am going to make it illegal.
The idea is to think twice about the product that you are going to sell.
Once it is decided that it will go ahead then that is it. No turning around.
That is how I see it.

Well, we tried making alcohol illegal here, and as some of you may know -- that didn't exactly pan out. No reason to think it wouldn't go the same way if tried elsewhere. It would likely all be worse these days, as far as organized crime goes, considering how much more ruthless that element is now. In fact prohibition pretty much gave birth to organized crime as we know it. I would imagine that the same type of thing would happen if we made cigarettes illegal. And just look at the so called "war on drugs" and see how that's working. I think there's plenty of evidence to suggest making alcohol and tobacco illegal just wouldn't work, and that it would cause more problems than it would solve.

Originally Posted by Winston

You must let people choose to be as dumb as they wanna be. Drink and smoke away. For that matter, decriminalize pot and repeal the helmet law.

Hell yes. We all have to die of something.

There are safety labels on cigarettes and alcohol (unlike bleach) so the people using them understand the dangers. I don't think there's a single person reading this, puffing away on a camel, under the mistaken impression that it's a great source of vitamin C.

The fact that cigarettes and alcohol are illegal means that they are already as controlled as they can be. Making them illegal would just drive the manufacture and sales underground and there would be no more internationally accepted standards to make sure people weren't drinking raw ether.

I wont make comparison to other drugs as you've mentioned in your OP you'd rather not involve them, but look at the areas where prostitution is legal compared to where it's not. Where it is legal, brothels can operate freely, set their own rules, maintain a high hygiene standard and classically compete in a capitalist market place. Where it's not, girls get beaten up and killed, there are no hygiene standards or 'set price' for the men to compare. It's easier to control a business that has to go through with all the paperwork required to function in the formal economy than to outright ban it and then lose all control.*