Should smoking be legal?

[Vro]

Public transportation services wouldn't have that right; nothing that is a public good would, so energy, housing, sanitation, etc.

For the case of child pornography, the people who demand it aren't the same as the people whose rights are abridged/waived, like it is with the demand for smoking establishments, so obviously it's not allowed. Prostitution on the other hand should be legal, with the health caveats I've mentioned.

Duels I don't see why they should be illegal as long as both parties sign contracts absolving the other for whatever happens between them. They also would be restricted such that people who have nothing to do with them are prevented from being harmed, so a 'public place' would be off limits, while a warehouse wouldn't be.

Your views seem pretty libertarian. As optimistic as it sounds, empowering individuals with a minimalistic yet resolute government, I don't think our government could ever be libertarian. In a great world and society, where people are informed, intelligent, and internally motivated, libertarianism would be great. However, there are too many people who think the government should do the work for them. There are also too many people who think ignorant people will hurt themselves, such as in your dueling example. Altho there is consent from both parties, can't you see some dumb people using the system? This can be extended to other areas if we took a libertarian stance.

Don't get me wrong. I think that most intelligent people would take a libertarian stance, minimal yet effective government with emphasis on individual choices. However, most people would agree that it's not effective placed over a general population.

 

[GhostAnime]

even if it is libertarian, that doesn't make it any less effective since.. well, we've been doing it like that for quite awhile.

 

[BFDD]

I personally have no problem with other people smoking, as long as they don't do it near me. Whether or not its proven that second hand smoke is bad for you is irrelevant. Try sitting around the campfire, notice how everyone moves away from the smoke, you can even try sitting in the smoke and breathing it in, I can guarantee it won't be pleasant.
Second hand smoke is obviously in much smaller quantities but it has the same effect just not as bad. I don't care if it is going to kill me or not I shouldn't have to deal with the negative effects of someone else's habits.
So smoking shouldn't be illegal as long as you do it somewhere where it doesn't cause problems for other people.

 

[Vro]

well, we've been doing it like that for quite awhile.

Doing what, exactly?

 

[GhostAnime]

having the free market decide where smoking gets banned.

 

[Vro]

But is that a logical argument? Just because it's tradition, doesn't mean it's correct.

Again, I think libertarianism is a great perspective. However, I don't believe that with our nation's outlook, libertarianism is possible. There are too many people who want responsibility taken away from them and have the government control the situation. Perhaps that's bad, limiting your freedom. Or perhaps that's good, because it's looking out for the great population. It's simply a matter of personal freedom vs. public safety.

 

[Dark Hart]

I'm not for smoking, and I hate it personally. It's a complete turnoff, and I hate it when my friends who smoke do. I've gotten most of them to quit, and have given-up on the others because it's been years. That being said, my take on this is completely economical. Tobacco is a major Cash Crop in the South. Outlaw tobacco, and crash a major part of the economy.

 

[marthanoob]

Tobacco is a major Cash Crop in the South. Outlaw tobacco, and crash a major part of the economy.

Not to mention China's multi-billion dollar tobacco industry.

Public safety vs libertarianism is a difficult choice. I will have to side with libertarianism because it is slightly more logical.

 

[Vro]

It's interesting that you mention the complete outlaw of tobacco, because most of the discussion has been based around banning it in public. In that situation, libertarianism has its freedom to a degree.

 

[MojoMan]

Well, a little while ago, people didn't know smoking could kill you. Only in the last couple decades have we found that out. People who have been constant smokers since before the big reveal should be aloud to smoke. However, the government should say that all smoking is illegal from here on out, because we all know smoking is deadly, and it would be ruled suicide to smoke, which we all know is a crime to yourself and others around you.

 

[GhostAnime]

so you want to outlaw smoking simply because it's unhealthy? you want to start another failed prohibition act?

 

[AltF4]

Well, now, it shouldn't be outlawed because it's harmful to the smoker. You have the right to do activities which put yourself at harm. Obviously we're not going to outlaws skydiving or rock climbing. The real issue is the second hand smoke, the harming of unwilling passers by.

 

[Amide]

Well, now, it shouldn't be outlawed because it's harmful to the smoker. You have the right to do activities which put yourself at harm. Obviously we're not going to outlaws skydiving or rock climbing. The real issue is the second hand smoke, the harming of unwilling passers by.

I hate quoting people, but this is absolutely correct. People have the right to put themselves at harm, but hurting others is not right. Banning smoking would put a big hole in the economy too, but some places like restaurants, it really is a bother. Nothing annoys me more than walking past a smoker.

 

[Dark Hart]

However, the government should say that all smoking is illegal from here on out, because we all know smoking is deadly, and it would be ruled suicide to smoke, which we all know is a crime to yourself and others around you.

I'd have to disagree with you here. As bad as smoking is, there are people who smoke and don't think they will be affected by. There are people who beleive that they won't get any form of cancer. Not to mention that people aren't going to be thinking, "I hate my life, and I want to end it all. I'm going to pick up smoking."

 

[MojoMan]

I'd have to disagree with you here. As bad as smoking is, there are people who smoke and don't think they will be affected by. There are people who beleive that they won't get any form of cancer. Not to mention that people aren't going to be thinking, "I hate my life, and I want to end it all. I'm going to pick up smoking."

Many people say that gay marriage is right, but that hasn't stopped many places from illegalizing it. In short, the government has not hesitated from making laws just because of what people's mindsets may or may not be.

 

[pockyD]

The process to legalize something is generally a lot more convoluted than the process of banning something

 

[GhostAnime]

there's still no logical reason to actually ban all of smoking.

 

[Dark Hart]

Many people say that gay marriage is right, but that hasn't stopped many places from illegalizing it. In short, the government has not hesitated from making laws just because of what people's mindsets may or may not be.

True, but making gay marriage illegal doesn't affect the economy.

 

[MojoMan]

It might. You never know what it amy do to the economy. But let's bring this argument to the other thread.

 

[Dark Hart]

It might. You never know what it amy do to the economy. But let's bring this argument to the other thread.

Let's not go to the other thread because I was only going with your analogy. Banning smoking, or outlawing it, will affect the economy. And no, gay marriage doesn't affect the economy. Let's stop talking about gay marriage because there's another thread on it.