Canada is a free country now

[Asher]

And if you really think that making cigarettes illegal would make it easier to quit, I guess you're just pretty weak willed.

Marijuana is ridiculously easy to obtain in Canada, I'd expect cigarettes would be even easier due to volume.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Asher
Are you for real?

Most people who are buying cigarettes now aren't just going to say "okay, I guess I'm not going to smoke anymore".

I think there's already a historical example for this behavior -- which a MUCH less addictive substance. Prohibition...?

Tobacco is not alcohol, sweetie.

You would expect opium dens of smokers seeking their fix?

Do you ever tire of banging on about things you have no clue about?

Nevermind, I already know the answer.

[Asher]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Tobacco is not alcohol, sweetie.

Absolutely -- the nicotine in cigarettes is MANY more times addictive than alcohol is.

Banning cigarettes today would lead to something worse than the prohibition.

[notyoueither]

You say all this based on your extensive expertise... in what exactly?

And the fact it might be hard to get the smokers to quit is a good reason to keep the things on store shelves for every 'kid' to be encouraged to try for what reason?

If it is a lethal substance, ban the sale and manufacture of it. Pretty simple. That is something that a government should be expected to do; protect the public from obvious harm, yes?

[Asher]

You say all this based on your extensive expertise... in what exactly?

Common sense, and a study of the addictiveness of nitoctine and how difficult it is to quit smoking in my psychology class.

[notyoueither]

Ohhh. You took a class! clap, clap.

Bwahahahahahaha.

[Asher]

There's no need to act so stupid.

Cigarettes are undeniably more addictive than alcohol.

Only a moron would think a prohibition on cigarettes would not create a massive black market on a larger scale than alcohol. In fact, I'm having a difficult time fathoming how anyone with a shred of intelligence or reasoning ability could think that would be the case.

[notyoueither]

It is extremely addictive, Asher, take it from me.

However, it is not the social drug that alcohol was/is. Nor does it have the power of opium to force smokers into dens for their fix.

Remove it from ready access and it would go away. The thing that makes it so hard to kick for some (have tried at least 25 times myself) is that it is in the faces of smokers whereever they turn. You are battling a very large monkey on your back, and his cousins are in your face when you buy gas, or a pop at the corner store.

If it is so bad, as has been reported, then the government has an obligation to take the appropriate step and finally ban it. If not for current smokers, then for kids who haven't yet taken it up.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Asher
There's no need to act so stupid.

Cigarettes are undeniably more addictive than alcohol.

Only a moron would think a prohibition on cigarettes would not create a massive black market on a larger scale than alcohol. In fact, I'm having a difficult time fathoming how anyone with a shred of intelligence or reasoning ability could think that would be the case.

I'm only laughing at the child, barely out of diapers, who is proclaiming 'the truf' for all of us to benefit from.

You are that moron who knows nothing about what you speak, but go banging on anyway.

[Asher]

Just because you were stupid enough to start smoking doesn't make you an expert on smoking economics.

Smoking is incredibly addictive. Smokers aren't just going to say "oh, time to quit" when they aren't available at the corner store. There is a physical dependence involved.

Just because I'm "young" at 22 years old doesn't make me a moron. By choosing to smoke, though, you are admitted to be a moron.

You were being stupid in the first thread, whining about the Charter and the judges being out of order, which was a joke. Now you're whining about "activist judges" and seem to think the black market for cigarettes would not grow if they were banned, which is also patently ridiculous. Now all you're doing is saying that because I'm "only" 22 I don't know anything.

And I'll tell you something else -- if you think 22 is "just out of diapers", that speaks volumes about your childhood.

[notyoueither]

You know ****, Asher. That I can say, so barely out of diapers fits.

Tell me, child, from your vast expertise with sociology, psychology, and statistics... what happens when a product is on every store shelf in colourful packages, and the role models of a great number of people are seen to use the product?

Do you think that any amount of being told it is bad for them will prevent some small number of people from taking it up?

Then we can talk about the people who took it up when it was promoted by doctors...

[notyoueither]

I should say... when tobacco companies used 'doctors' to promote their products.

[Asher]

You are right, what was I thinking?

- Consentual sex between adults is indecent to its core, especially if they do it in a place that promotes sex!
- The supreme court has no business interpreting laws set by the legislative branch!
- If cigarettes would banned, the black market would not change in size for cigarettes! Everyone would just quit!

[Ninot]

I share Asher's opinion on this matter.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Asher
- Consentual sex between adults is indecent to its core, especially if they do it in a place that promotes sex!

Prostitution, and whore houses have consensual sex. You think they are good ideas for businesses to promote?

- The supreme court has no business interpreting laws set by the legislative branch!

Enjoy your straw man.

- If cigarettes would banned, the black market would not change in size for cigarettes! Everyone would just quit!

Actually, it is my opinion the black market would go down, but then what do I know about the subject.