English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-25 20:22:30 · 16 answers · asked by sfumato1002 3 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

16 answers

They'll have to outlaw alcohol first.
And that isn't going to happen.

2007-03-25 20:27:22 · answer #1 · answered by pepper 7 · 2 0

It is incerdibly unlikely that smoking will ever be completely outlawed due to economic reasons. Say that 75% of all smokers are addicted and wud not want to quit that would still leave a huge demand for cigarettes thus forming a black market, or illegal market for them. This in turn would hugely raise the price of cigarettes but wud not reduce the amount of people smoking by the % increase in price. This basically means that it wud not be worth it and all it would do is raise the price of cigarettes and make alot of people unhappy about the prices. It would also increase revenues for tobacco companies who the governtment are actually trying to restrict by implementing such high taxs on the goods. hope this answers in in some way

2007-03-25 20:31:33 · answer #2 · answered by matty b 1 · 0 0

With out a doubt ... NO! As long as tobacco lobbyists can make contributions to the re-election (or legal defense funds) of politicians (sorry about that "legal defense fund" crack ... what can I say? I'm from New York!)

And what good would banning tobacco do anyway? Except for a resurgance of the "ridge-runners" (illegal haulers of moonshine during the failed experiment with banning alcohol), what would we gain? A more competitive NASCAR like circuit?

The origins of stock car racing are heavily linked to the original ridge-runners! Once alcohol became legal to manufacture and haul, the old ridge-runners started to race for "bragging rights" and the sport grew from there! What would the original ridge-runners think of today's stock car racing? Not much I'm afraid! a pack of cars with nearly identical capabilities, running bumper to bumper? BORING!!!! If you developed a new "trick" that gave you an advantage, you would be banned!

2007-03-25 21:40:03 · answer #3 · answered by ornery and mean 7 · 0 0

Well we saw in the 20's that the prohibition of Alcohol doesn't work. Tobacco wouldn't be much different either, it is way too easy to grow. We shouldn't outlaw it anyway.

2007-03-25 20:27:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

JESUS CHRIST, could imagine how much stronger that would make the black market? Crime rates would SOAR! America would not survive that prohibition. If anything, I think passing that lawy would divide the nation on the issue of having the right to do what you want with your body. It could very well overturn all druglaws, assisted suicide laws and abortion laws all at once! No, this country will NEVER criminalize tobacco. NEVER! Besides, think of the taxes the feds make off it. We all know how they hate losing a source of income.

2007-03-25 20:59:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

Pot is illegal and its every where....drinking and driving is illegal but you can go to a bar and drink all night you just can't smoke while getting drunk now in certain places. Come on now.....the real issue is more government control. This myth about health issues, working in the health field we see as much caused by alcohol and drug abuse than smoking.
You really don't expect them to stop something they get taxes off of do you? Heck we can't even have border security....lol
thanks for the points though

2007-03-26 01:19:51 · answer #6 · answered by Gypsygrl 5 · 0 0

I think it will be banned in certain areas and laws made against the smoking in certain places like there are now. I don't think it's going to become illegal completely because there is too much profit involved. I think the only way we will combat it is through educating our youth about not smoking, while older smokers phase out and pass on there will be less smokers until smoking is extinct.

2007-03-25 21:40:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It would be possible if the government keeps on raising the tax and price on cigarettes, and also have campaigns to further educate the people on the effects of smoking, not just having campaigns alone, but also make it successful and not throwing all that money into the drain.

2007-03-25 20:32:07 · answer #8 · answered by Leone 2 · 0 1

relies upon on your state bc non-tobacco smoke isn't regulated via the FDA, or everyone in any respect. States have placed regulations on non-regulated smoking, e-cigarettes, nicotine transport gadgets, etc. At eleven, i could anticipate that each and one and all varieties of smoking are prohibitted.

2016-11-23 16:10:11 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

think of all the politicians,judges,nurses doctors, cabdrivers,social workers,teachers,prison guards,police officers and meantally ill people who smoke ......what a nightmare that first day would be. By the way I think the alcoholics need some attention to their alcohol taxes.

2007-03-26 01:39:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Not while the Government gets more benefit than loss. The government pays for all the people who get sick etc so it is a drain on society however the government gets bulk dollars in taxes so there fore they get more money than they pay out so it is more beneficial to them.

2007-03-25 21:56:09 · answer #11 · answered by Mick R 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers