I’m not saying I’m against the ban - I actually am for it. I’m just saying that if it was good enough for older people to make an informed decision, why are we denying only the younger ones that right.
If we truly wanted to fix things, we should ban it for everybody. Not at some arbitrary age cut-off.
Last I checked, secondary smoke does not respect age limits.
Honestly curious, why pro ban? I don’t smoke/condone smoking but I don’t think of it as so heinous an activity as to be made illegal.
I feel like gambling is a far greater issue and only seems to have it’s popularity on the rise recently.
Smoking falls in my “vices that don’t totally ruin your life” category. Alcohol seems an obvious and fair bit worse a vice so why is there not a call for change there?
I was living in Canada for the change in weed prohibition and all and all seemed like a somewhat positive change overall.
Folks are going to smoke regardless, why give up taxation to pay for the treatment? I only see making it illegal as means to create a criminal element. Once that is robust enough you loose any real ability to regulate as well.
Again, honest question curious if any of this resonates or if you have a completely different view of how the situation will play out.
I’m not saying I’m against the ban - I actually am for it. I’m just saying that if it was good enough for older people to make an informed decision, why are we denying only the younger ones that right.
If we truly wanted to fix things, we should ban it for everybody. Not at some arbitrary age cut-off.
Last I checked, secondary smoke does not respect age limits.
Honestly curious, why pro ban? I don’t smoke/condone smoking but I don’t think of it as so heinous an activity as to be made illegal.
I feel like gambling is a far greater issue and only seems to have it’s popularity on the rise recently.
Smoking falls in my “vices that don’t totally ruin your life” category. Alcohol seems an obvious and fair bit worse a vice so why is there not a call for change there?
I was living in Canada for the change in weed prohibition and all and all seemed like a somewhat positive change overall.
Folks are going to smoke regardless, why give up taxation to pay for the treatment? I only see making it illegal as means to create a criminal element. Once that is robust enough you loose any real ability to regulate as well.
Again, honest question curious if any of this resonates or if you have a completely different view of how the situation will play out.