Ok, Tobacco kills more people in the USA than guns do- but it is not regulated anywhere near as much as Guns are. Now, true- most of the deaths are caused by voluntary use of the demon weed- but then many gun deaths are suicides- and anitgunners count them anyway.
But Tobacco kills many non-users. We have our SHS deaths- 10’s of thousands. Then fires, and even accidents caused by smokers distracted in their driving. That still adds up to more deaths to “innocents” than guns cause “to innocents”.
So- why not regulate smoking like guns are? For example, in many CA counties- gun discharge is limited to a certain few outdoor areas & regulated shooting ranges. Thus, smoking could be allowed in a few large paved areas, and at some “smoking clubs”.
One has to wait 15 days to buy a gun, and your background & ID is checked- doing the same for tobacco sounds good to me- wil stop minors from buying, right?
One can only buy guns from a special licensed dealer- why not?
One can one buy so many guns a month- sure… say two cartons a month?
Leaving a gun out where minors can get ahold of it is a felony- same for cigs? righto. Stop smoking in kids, and you hugely cut back on those addicted to nictotine.
Carrying a gun concealed is illegal- OK, will stop smokers from lighting up in unauthorized areas.
Certain non- “PC” guns are deemed extra dangerous & made illegal- same for unfiltered cigs? Or especially “assault cigars” and “saturday night special cigs”.
Now, just to be clear, I am generally against anti-gun legislation, and against smoking.
The simple answer is that you can buy a gun and go out and kill someone immediately, but tobacco can take years, even decades, to kill someone.
Also, not everyone is convinced that tobacco = Death, whereas everyone is convinced that being shot with a gun = Death (quibbling about surviveable gunshot wounds aside).
Guns --> Instant results. General consensus of Deadly. Heavily regulated.
Tobacco --> Slow results. Not general consensus of Deadly. Not heavily regulated.
Cultural tradition too. It is only recently in history that we know how bad tobacco is but it has been accepted for centuries already. Kind of like alcohol.
Why not just put us all into equal sized cubicles and force us to provide sustenance to The State. Feed us nutritious gruel and attach waste bags to our asses. Extract our eggs and semen artificially to make more drones. That’s all we really need.
Well, Lib- you make a point. I agree that TOO many laws can be overly restrictive & bad. But my point was not nessesarily that more laws are needed- just that how can one support one set of laws “for the protection of the innocents”- without supporting the others?
I think elucidator is probably more correct than anyone. The government can tax the living hell out of cigarette smokers, and the general public doesn’t care, because most people don’t smoke. In addition, nobody likes to stick up for the smokers - they’re all the brainless pawns of evil death merchants, right?
My take on it is that the government wants to look like it’s anti-cigarette - take the moral high ground, so to speak - while quietly soaking the industry for all it’s worth. That’s partly why you see the government taking the money it gets from suing the tobacco industry, and investing it back into tobacco farms. Cigarettes are a cash-cow, and the government wants to continue to milk the hell out of that bad boy. If marijuana ever becomes legalized on a national level, expect the same insane level of taxation.
Jeff- Guns are pretty heavily taxed also. However, although I agree that may be a reason why there are not currently such anti-tobacco laws- why can’t we agree there SHOULD be?
This made me smile. Thank you. =)
Seriously, why aren’t we regulating alcohol like we regulate guns? Think about how many people are killed by drunk drivers or chirrosis(sp?) every year! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
While we’re at it… fast food is quickly becoming the new enemy. Going forward, I propose a 15 day waiting period on all Whoppers. Hyuk hyuk.
Why can’t we agree to such? Because a lot of us - too few of us, though, IMO - feel that if people want to smoke, they should be allowed to, without the government punishing them for doing so. Why should the government get to decide what’s good for us and bad for us? People know that smoking will harm them, yet they do it anyway. Are they dumb? Maybe. Should we stand in their way? No. Same thing with alcohol, fast food, bungie jumping, bull-riding, and anything else that does no real harm to anyone put the participant. The government should get the hell out of my way and let me jeopardize my life if I feel like it. It’s a free country, you know?
Yeah, what Azael said. Go back, do a real study on “second-hand smoke”, one that doesn’t use lousy methods and fabricated data to reach the conclusion they wanted. Do a fair and accurate one. Then come back and talk.
“Second-hand” smoke is just an invention of the anti-smoking cabal, who wanted to find a way to defeat the smokers’ personal liberties argument by concocting some mythical harm to others.
I don’t smoke anymore (I married a nurse:) ) but I think that second-hand smoke from a pack of cigarettes is nothing compared to the second-hand smoke coming of the tailpipe of any non-smoker’s SUV.
I would say the main reason is the green. And I’m not talking about that other smoking product.
I also understand that people smoke much more in other countries, esp. Europe. There isn’t a huge international campaign against smoking like there is for AIDS or the environment.
I suggest that tobacco is much more heavily regulated than guns, from a certain point of view.
$150 worth of guns & ammo can kill somebody. On the other hand, it takes five to ten thousand dollars worth of cigarettes (what are they now- $10 a pack?) to damage your health to the point where you stand a good chance of dropping dead from cancer or emphysema.
I don’t know about you, but I sure don’t have that kind of money. Can’t we attribute this to government imposed tax burden on cigarette smokers?
Stop smoking in kids, and you hugely cut back on those addicted to nictotine.
(I married a nurse:) ) but I think that second-hand smoke from a pack of cigarettes is nothing compared to the second-hand smoke coming of the tailpipe of any non-smoker’s SUV.