*DEBATE* Should the age of being allowed to buy cigarettes be raised from 16 to 18

[Dracolis]

Everything you say is right but this one statement is bugging me:

Yes you CAN die from smoking eventually. It DOES cause health problems but so does tanning, drinking, eating excessively, or really doing anything in excess... Your most likely not going to drop dead for taking a puff of a cigarette. And when people realise this then they start questioning the other smoking facts, It's dangerous, it causes a slow and painful death but not on the spot. Not right there, right then

Because what does it matter about the length of time that it takes to die from each of these things. The fact of the matter is that smoking causes a detrimental effect on the human body as does all the others.

[Sly]

Its not really the Age, most Young smokers get Adults to buy there **** anyways. or get people their age that look over 16. The goverment need to be alot more strict on ID

Even though people get Fake ID's, its hard to get one. If shop owners asked for ID more often then it should be Ok a little bit.

The law is 16+ to Smoke...If the police conviscate your **** in the street you dont get arrested or even a warning...Then whats the point in that Law if you dont get in truble?

[samuel]

i think it should have never been leagal
Ciggarettes and all other smoking is stupid.
It bugs me

[/Rossco\]

Smoking should be banned it public spaces.

It is as of next month, But I was hearing that public places means public buildings, In town outside etc people are still allowed to smoke. It is a move I think should be made to be on level terms with alcohol however I don't think it will have the impact that is neccessary. you'll still find 12 year olds smokeing down the back allys.

a point to note. The is a program on in the monrings during weekdays just now. "how to live longer" It calculates your biological age and compares it with your real age. concentrates mainly on drinkers and smokers. but one person had the lungs of a 84 year old i think it was. and she was only in her 50's, thats what 40 years of smoking done to her. Can have different effects on other people

i.e. worse.

that lung age though doesn't take into account the permanent damage that the smoking has caused though. Only on the ability of your breathing.

[Ellis.]

It should. MOST 18 year olds are more responsible than MOST 16 year olds. 18 years olds would know that they'd want to do it rather than 16 year olds being pressured by peers to be "cool"

Also, I think that smoking should be banned in enclosed public areas or public areas all together, Second hand smoking.

[Tyed]

When U Think About It If Ur Gonna Take **** From People Who Are Nicotine Addicts Ur Gonna Have 2 Talk Booze From Alcoholics There Is Just No Point Anyway When Ur 12-13 U Learn About The Effects Of Smoking So Its Ur Own Fault For Smoking And Getting Addictid In The First Place Its There Life If They Wanna Smoke And Die Let Them...... Also Nowadays Most Smokers In Schools Only Smoke Due 2 Peer Pressure

[Mentor]

Yes Im for the rase.

It was orgnaly Set at 16 when the health implications were not fully known about, In this ignorace they didnt think there would be little trouble or damage from it and the age was mainly set to stop children getting the hands on matches.
Now we KNOW its harmful, more so that Alchol and we rank them pretty equaly.
18 is now the accespted age for adualt hood and full choise, and therefor it would make sence to put the age there, this would be pretty easy to understand and be quite logical, sure people under the age would get them, but 12 year olds get them already, Its seen as far less cool now anyway so far less people would have the interest to start with, the legal issue would also stop many people becomeing full time smokers becuses of the added diffulty and by 18 they would defintly be sencible enogh to understand the ramifactions of smokeing and what it may do to there heath "/
I dont smoke, never have and never will. personaly id support banning it all together to make the compleat logica sence, nicotean is more adictive than herowin and more deadly the nearly all of the class C drugs.
But the govemnet rakes to much tax money in from it for this, same with alchol, but the rase in age limit seems like a step in the right direction. So yea im all for the rase.

Yes you CAN die from smoking eventually. It DOES cause health problems but so does tanning, drinking, eating excessively, or really doing anything in excess... Your most likely not going to drop dead for taking a puff of a cigarette. And when people realise this then they start questioning the other smoking facts, It's dangerous, it causes a slow and painful death but not on the spot. Not right there, right then

Drinkings already set at 18.
Plus one diffence between tanning and eating exseivly and smokeing is. Smokeing is MORE adictive than Herowin. The others arnt adictive at all... one cig can actaly get your hooked, a burger cant...

[-Sweex]

I Think It Should.It Would Stop More People From Smoking.Until There Have Left School

[Groovy]

I think it should, even though this won`t stop younger people getting hold of cigarettes. Its like alcohol, your not supposed to drink it till your 18 or buy it under 18 but there are loaadz of ways of getting hold of it.

[Tommy]

True i believe they should be focusing on a bigger problem and stop making the easy way out. ID should be made a bigger subject when buying.
But honestly no one really cares if some kids hate smoking because it wont change anyones mind at all. If the goverment wanted to cut down on people smoking they would make it available in less places and ban it in more places but they wont just erase it completely. It will be made more of a luxury and not a neccesary. The goverment has no rights to deprive people of cigerrettes, when they can easily be addicted as it is. I mean if people can drive at 17 what makes people cant be mature at 17?