Smoking ban for people born after 2008 in the UK agreed

Post by joquarky » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:10 PM UTC

X0Refraction wrote: post #127

squigz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the government's perspective, this may (or may not) be silly. But putting that aside, if a citizen supports banning cigarettes for people born after a certain date, but not alcohol, that certainly seems hypocritical to me.

I think there is a reasonable argument to be made that they're a different degree of societal problem. I think there's quite a few people who drink on special occasions, but not every week or even every month (I'm one of them). I think it's very rare though for a smoker to not smoke several a day. A friend of mine was that rare breed and would buy a 10 pack occasionally - usually on a Friday and it'd be gone by Monda…

Post by ramesh31 » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:16 PM UTC

slibhb wrote: post #195

It's sad that the UK, which invented liberal philosophy, is increasingly accepting of paternalism. It's important that people have an inviolable personal sphere inside which they can live their lives as they see fit. That includes making decisions of which society disaproves. Moreover, essentially all behavior plausibly has "diffuse negative externalities". We should be very careful about adopting that ("harms others…

Post by mytailorisrich » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:20 PM UTC

lokar wrote: post #106

afavour wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see smoking as a separate category owing to the existence of second hand smoke. Smoking in a room with other people adversely affects those people. I think government is the correct body to be intervening in that scenario.

I think health costs are the bigger issue

Post by rcxdude » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:27 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #34

mytailorisrich wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is also part of a trend. More and more control over people's lives, more and more bans. Beyond whether something is "bad for you", the key aspect in a free society is whether the State should decide for you (we're entrusted with the right to vote, after all). Demolition Man has turned out to be the most accurate prediction of the future regarding those issues among all the 90s movies. Quite interesting.

I see smoking as a separate category owing to the existence of second hand smoke. Smoking in a room with other people adversely affects those people. I think government is the correct body to be intervening in that scenario.

Post by owlcompliance » Tue, Apr 21, 2026, 4:33 PM UTC

zbentley wrote: post #41

gcanyon wrote: post #16

There are two separate issues here: 1. will this work (will the UK stop smoking) 2. is this something the UK government should be doing Setting aside 1 and looking at 2, it seems silly to me to point out that other things (alcohol) that cause problems and are not being restricted. You take the wins where you find them, and the government isn't a magical force that can impose its will on the people arbitrarily. This i…

> other things (alcohol) that cause problems and are not being restricted Alcohol is heavily restricted, though. You can't sell it to minors, younger minors can't drink it in public, you can't sell/buy/make it above a certain proof, you can only resell it from authorized distributors, it is taxes, and so on. Sure, banning cigarettes for a specific generation is a much more stringent restriction, but plenty of other r…