I thought this was pretty neat. For those of who don’t know, this is where Kris Holm’s movie “Into Thunder Dragon” was filmed. They are the first nation to ban tobacco. http://slate.msn.com/id/2112449/?GT1=6065
Hard to say what this will lead to.
Either people stop smoking.
Or people buys tabacco illegal
Or they use other illegal drugs.
I think thats a bad idea for the US. I am against somking, drugs, etc. but when the Gov’t starts banning substances, the crime, gang violence, and extra tax money for prevention outweighs the good. Its also infringing on your rights. I don’t know what Bhutanians are entitles to (their rights) but it might be a learning experiance for the rest of the world.
I can’t think of many things worse or more dangerous than governments banning objects, substances, or victimless actions and behavior. The only thing I can think of right off hand that would be worse is people thinking that it’s OK for governments to ban such things.
You’re a person. You have a choice. Make the choice yourself. If you don’t, all of your choices will eventually be gone.
Amen brotha!
What do you consider “victimless crimes”? What about prostitution and abuse of other substances like heroin?
I don’t smoke, but I think I’m against completely banning smoking. I think banning it in public places (as is being done here in Australia) is a better option.
Andrew
smoking has just been banned in public places where i live (lincoln, nebraska) and i have mixed feelings about it, i’m glad i won’t have to smell smoke anymore, but it does seem a bit hypocritcal of me to approve of the smoking ban, but be for the legalization of marijuana. so i suppose i am against smoking bans.
There are forms of prostitution that are actually slavery and, therefore, not victimless. Human trafficing exists worldwide and has throughout human history. Slave trade has never ended and it would be surprising if it ever did. There are other forms of prostitution that are individual choices.
The abuse of substances like herion (or alcohol, tobacco, bacon, sugar, television broadcasts, literature) is victimless in the sense that the abuser has a choice. My guess is your reference is to relatives of substance abusers (repeat my list) who suffer turmoil because of the behavior of the abuser. Spousal abuse and child neglect are certainly not victimless and may in many cases be a result of the substance abuse of another. These are, however, criminal events inacted by a person who had a choice, regardless of their altered state of mind or body. Criminal acts can and should be prosecuted.
After “big tobacco” was finally taken down by litigation, the firearms industry knew that they would be next. Incidentally, who ultimately benefited from the lengthy, expensive attack on tobacco? So far, the firearms industry has fared moderatrely well in the relentless attack upon it. Who’s next in line when the firearms industry is outspent by the limitless contributions from your income (and the productive income of all of us) to the agencies who bring litigation against them?
I am pro choice…of everything. I am anti-interference. I am very strongly for your choice to be very strongly against my choice. There are places in the world, Bhutan for example, where that is not possible.
I agree to an extent to what you are saying, but I think that we merely have an illusion of a choice in some matters. There are many outside influences on peoples “choices” and I think that a society does need to declare some normative crimes. However, I do not think that banning tobacco is a smart idea in the U.S. I think somewhere around 30 percent of adults smoke, and 90 percent use alcohol at least once a month. The U.S. likes its drugs, as a matter of fact the money we spend on the consumption of drugs each year is larger than the GDP of China! Either way, I am getting off topic, but I don’t think that Bhutan will serve as a model for other countries because as they said in the article only around 2-3 percent of their adult population smokes tobacco.
Badnarik should have won presidenecy…
But in China, you can buy a 1.25 L bottle of beer for 25 cents. In the US we have a higher cost to produce it and a lot of taxes which makes the price quite a bit higher (at least 10 times).
I’m against banning almost everything… there is, of course, justification for banning certain things in public places.
But I think that people should have freedom to do almost anything they want, as long as it doesn’t hurt others. If it has to do with hurting themselves, then so be it, it’s their own body to do anything they want with.