General Chat

Government are now looking at the branding on fag packets with a view to make the packets Blank?

They at the moment have a large add saying that smoking kills?
some say that smoking seriously harm you and others around you?

That has not worked so why do they think that a blank packet will?

Since the ban on smoking in enclosed spaces came in smoking in young people has actually increased

If government think that by hiding cigarettes behind cover in shops so they are not seen,

Banning smoking in public enclosed spaces,

Advertising on fag packets that smoking will kill you,

Why do they think that no add on the packet will make the difference?


After all having all of the above on illegal DRUGS ( is working a treat ) with drug addiction on the increase

So what is the answer bearing in mind that a total ban will not work either? Just as making drugs illegal has not.

I am a smoker myself and it will kill me i have no doubt of that,

I have never touched any type of illegal drug, I cannot even stand taking the ones that the doctor prescribed

Roy

how will anyone know which brand is which ...... :-D :-D :-S

If it is such a killer (which I believe) just ban it altogether.

Oh, sorry! So much revenue would be lost!

We are having the same argument in Australia at the moment :-(

Allan (an ex smoker)

Supermarkets already have them behind cabinet doors, if the floorage of the shop is over a certain size. Smaller shops will have to conform by 2014/15.
So you go to the supermarket, go to buy you usual brand, only to be told they have run out. How do you know which others to buy, if you cannot see them displayed.
Surely an infringement of a smoker's Human Rights.?????

Julia in Derbyshire

Just more nanny state. As for banning them, the lost taxation would probably be made up on the lower NHS costs, but so what. If people want to ingest anything into their bodies, who is anyone to say they shouldn't? Especially a government!

As long as Im not getting smoke blown into my face, I couldnt care less. Nor, I suspect, could the majority of people.

Smokers already contribute more to the tax system via the revenue charges on tobacco.

So one argument could be that they are already contributing more to help their future health costs

You coul dpose the same argument for provioding heroin then taxing it. Smoking, like heroin, is an addiction and it kills people, but if people want to smoke then they should have the freedom to do what they want with their own bodies, as long as it isnt to the detriment of others. Sending it underground isnt going to make the slightest difference and, in all probability, will encourage youngsters to take it up as it's 'forbidden' and thats what youngsters do with 'forbidden' things.

I dont want to breathe other peoples smoke in a bar or in a restaurant, so as long as everyone respects that, do what on earth they want. Who cares?

Totally agree, Eldrick.

I was merely pointing out that via the revenue system, smokers, drinkers etc do pay extra taxes which various goverments are happy to accept, but then accuse partkers of being a burden on the health system

As a smoker,

When i started smoking there was no mention of the health risks,

Children today are education and have all the info required to make a choice? and now smoking amongst the young has increased

Sex education in schools was brought in to tackle teenage pregnancy but as with smoking teenage pregnancy has has risen in the same way,

The Tax take including VAT last your for tobacco in the UK was 11.1 billion

Roy

I think using taxation revenue to justify smoking is a poor argument, though. Far better just to come clean and say I do it because I want to do it and nobody should be allowed to prevent me. Thats the truth and people should be up front about it. I speak as an ex smoker!

I also think there are many more factors to take into account in relation to teen pregnancies. I dont think its fair to implicate increases in education with an increase in a perceived problem.

As long as you have organisations shouting the opposing view, then people, especially younger people, will go in that direction. Its in the nature of young people to do the opposite of what they are told! Always has been, always will be. Rights and wrongs dont come into it.

I'm in Australia and the smokes I buy are $12.50 at Woolworths/Coles and $16.50 most other places...
I can also get them elsewhere without the Aussie tax for almost 1/2 the price..

I think the Govvy in Aussie goes with the feel,,,,,but they make soooo much money out of the tax on cigarettes that they will never ban them...

Should we have bans on fastfood outlets???


Kellie

As tax revenue seems to be the reason why people smoke, I wonder how many people would be prepared to smoke tax free ciggys if the NHS didnt cover treatment for people who smoked....?

Personally speaking, I would rather ban fast food outlets than smoking, but above all I would rather not ban anything and let people make up their own minds what they do with their bodies.

Just pondering, thats all. :-D :-D

Eldrick, Taxation is probably the only reason that their is not a total ban on smoking thats why i posted the figure from last year, and nothing to do with justifying smoking.

I have tried over the years to stop smoking but failed i no plenty who have successfully stopped smoking,

I have tried patches, acupuncture, hypnotherapy and hypnosis also the tablets from the doctor, the best i ever did was when i tried to go cold Turkey but gave in after 10 months of hell

As for education i think thats the way forward but if as it appears to be that education is not working then surely their is something wrong with how or what is being taught?

Yes youngsters will rebel against being told what to do but i would hope that as with most things that our young rebel over it would be just a case of them trying smoking out of curiosity? and then stopping before the addiction kicks in


Roy

I know smoking is bad for me, but I'm an addict. No amount of nagging is going to make me stop. I will when I want to.

I take the ciggies out of the packet and put them in a box that doesn't fall open........ so I don't end up with a handbag full of broken ciggies and shreds of tobacco, I don't look at the warning or photographs (as we have in Australia) on the packets.

I don't smoke in my house. I don't smoke in anyone else's house.

But I get annoyed that governments provide rooms for drug addicts to "shoot up"........while we smokers have to stand in the street (in restricted areas) because WE are breaking the law if we smoke inside!

I like a drink now and then...... but I don't see warnings on the labels saying I'll die of liver failure.

I like a hamburger now and again...... but I don't see warnings there either....... this product is full of fat, it will clog your arteries and you may have a heart attack.

Phew! I feel better after that little rant. I'll get off my soapbox now.......... and go outside for a ciggie

:-D

Theres nowt worse than an ex smoker! lol

I agree, education not bans is what works. But the message has to be clear and not subjective to the teacher. As far as sex education goes, we are so hung up, gullible, embarrased and naive about it that any teaching is going to be ineffective because the message is not reinforced outside of the classroom.

Same with smoking - if there was a way to reduce peer pressure that would help immensely. It has to be made unfashioable and uncool to smoke. At the moment, its cool beause its a rebel thing, Sending it underground will just make it worse.

As far as older smokers who should know better go (lol) I dont see anything wrong with having to stand outside if it means not inflicting smoke upon me. After all, its the smokers decision to smoke, Im not forcing it upon them and neither is anyone else. I never thought I would say this, but the more antisocial it becomes, the better for everyone. But if you really want to do it, go for it. By all means, smoke your head off! Stick needles in your bum, sniff glue, snort coke, do whatever you want. ut take the consequences. Just dont include me in the deal!

Scozzie, Smoking will also block your arteries, give you blood disease and copd not to mention cancer although they do make a point about cancer yet you are more likely to die from one of the other diseases before cancer gets you

Roy

I also think that if government was serious about stopping people smoking they should do more to help just as they do with drug addiction

Roy

I got on the tablets to stop smoking....(the tablets who make some ppl freak out and have nightmares etc) and nohing...
Gave up coffee and beer as well....slept like a baby and was working out most days....

Should we look at side effects??? and take them serious???

Should they refine them so thre are fewer side effects????

Kellie

Hmm, Im ambivalent about that. I dont see, in all honesty, why my tax should go towards weaning anyone off any addiction.

I see addictions as personal choices, conscious decisions to go down a particular route. To then expect the state to help you out once you realise that you've taken the wrong decision is open to debate.

Freedom to do things has a downside, in that you have to face up to the consequences and deal with them. Isit fair to expect other people to donate towards that? Im not sure it is but I could be persuaded, possibly.

i think they should just bring a blanket ban in, now iv packed in :-D