Because it's not the role of the government to protect us from ourselves. We're allowed to skydive, eat at McDonald's every day of our lives, and stay in bed until we get bedsores if that's what we want to do. We can get our tongue pierced with the same needle we just used on ten of our HIV infected friends and we can see how many different people we can sleep with in one night. We can do anything, as long as we don't infringe on the rights of others. At least that's what I believe.
And then there's money and control. The government makes huge amounts of money off of tobacco taxes and the tobacco lobby is a powerful one. Also states like Kentucky and areas such as southwester Virginia (look at Lee county) basically live on tobacco farming. The government can control who grows it since they control all the active seeds and can therefore ensure it all gets properly taxed. Even with the idea of not harming ourselves, I believe other drugs (especially pot) would be legal if the government could get control over it.
2007-01-14 16:25:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by govnathan 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
an excellent question and if posed as a political issue --what you say does make sense but not good politics. number one this is a free country and free economy to a certain degree -- so you consume or not consume it is all your business. true also there are some very heavy social costs involved --but those figures are hard to put together. we know they exist. last but not least look at the stats on how many people are employed in the tobacco industry and how much taxes are paid --figures amply provided by the tobacco lobbyists and you will begin to understand the enormity of the problem. not an easy one to solve --economics vs. moral issues. and of course you need the right politicians to stand up and be counted. they are rare. hope this much will help. the rest is details.
2007-01-14 16:28:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by s t 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I do not smoke, but no they should not. People are makinga choice to consume them even with the knowledge of what they do.
We went through the same thing with alcohol during the prohibition. If we were to outlaw everything bad for you, there wouldn't be much left to do in the world.
The movie Demolition Man from the 90's kind of shows what life would be like if the government tried to do stuff like this.
Be Well(funny to those who may remember the movie)
2007-01-14 16:22:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I just saw a special on the History channel about marijuana. They said that when they made it illegal in 1970, they realized that it was non-addictive, didn't cause cancer, etc. But yet, cigarettes are legal and marijuana is not. I don't smoke either one, I just thought it was odd. The government depends on the tax money, I guess.
2007-01-14 16:26:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by socialwork2010 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lobbyiests, they keep tabacco legal. They contribute to the gov't and have established companies. I guess it's really a matter of how far back thier roots go into the colonial times of america and how some states depend(ed) on tabacco for money.
(Funny though, if they are countless deaths then how do they get those stats on annual and daily death tolls?)
2007-01-14 16:22:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lupin_da_3rd 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Probably.. but won't happen. Governments -- federal, state, and local combined -- make more money, through taxes, on each pack of cigarettes sold in the US than the tobacco companies do.
2007-01-14 16:27:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
That makes sense to me. If they are made illegal though, people would still find a way to get them. And they would have to make divorces cheaper b/c my hubby would be mean if he had to give up smoking. LOL!! I have never smoked but I am addicted to caffeine and if smoking is like that, I feel for anyone who tries to quit. Good luck! I know you can do it!
2007-01-14 16:22:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by JACQUELINE T 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
You'd think they'd be illegal at this point, but the extra taxes that smokers pay basically funds any very limited public health care costs.
2007-01-14 16:19:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by zebj25 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Answer me this and you'll find the answer to your own question...
Why id the United States government paying subsidies to tobacco farmers?
2007-01-14 16:22:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Truth be Told 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
oh stop.
the government has no business legislating behavior, and you don't want them to start(in some areas already they have).
countless deaths?
cars crash every day, but there is no public outcry to ban vehicles.
if you want to stop smoking good for you, but leave the decision to smoke or not to the legally aged individual, not the gov't.
2007-01-14 17:00:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by atlas shrugged and so do i 5
·
2⤊
2⤋