Should cigarette smoking be banned by 2020?

Wake up, people! Banning public smoking, or banning smoking on any level is YET ANOTHER FREEDOM WE LOSE if the powers-that-be have their way. Under the guise of morality and goodness and health there are those who believe they know what's best for us. Most anyone who hasn't lived under a rock for the last 50 years already KNOWS that smoking has some serious negetive side effects. Forcing people to quit smoking "for their own good" is NOT the issue, here. Losing yet another freedom is. In the end it is totally no one's business what I do. Butt out!!!

Absolutely....and lets ban fanta and lemonade too....theres way too much sugar in them. (very bad for your teeth and may lead to diabetes)

yes smoking is bad for u but there r some upsides
weight loss and reducing stress



i dont agree with yvette about banning drinking for this reason

intoxacated people cant be served in a pub
but fat people can be served at fast food resturants.

i dont think the nz police force could cope with the riots smokers would make.


so in conclusion to this statement.
there are other things in the world slowly killing us LET IT BE.....

Yvette... Yes I agree with you.. I don't mind not being able too smoke in public but least give me the right too do it in my home or in my car... And your last point is very true too.. were will this stop... They have already started with Drinking alcohol. And I have a feeling that there is some part of Nana state All ready eyeing up the food we eat issue too...... Personally I enjoy food... And don't mind having the odd whiskey... Ill never live too 100.... hahaha

Yvette... Yes I agree with you.. I don't mind not being able too smoke in public but least give me the right too do it in my home or in my car... And your last point is very true too.. were will this stop... They have already started with Drinking alcohol. And I have a feeling that there is some part of Nana state All ready eyeing up the food we eat issue too...... Personally I enjoy food... And don't mind having the odd whiskey... Ill never live too 100.... hahaha

No they should not ban smoking as long as people smoke in their own backyards. But they should definitely ban smoking in public places. I don't like the pollution outside cafes, bars or seeing the but ends on the streets or on beaches. I think people should be allowed to smoke in their own private back yards only. Anyhow if they think they can ban smoking then they should ban drinking to help stop violence & sugar products for giving us diabetes.

No they should not ban smoking as long as people smoke in their own backyards. But they should definitely ban smoking in public places. I don't like the pollution outside cafes, bars or seeing the but ends on the streets or on beaches. I think people should be allowed to smoke in their own private back yards only. Anyhow if they think they can ban smoking then they should ban drinking to help stop violence & sugar products for giving us diabetes.

Well if they did... Id be first on the boat too a land were freedom of choice is a right... Not only is this a freedom of choice issue... It is also starting too impose restrictions on freedom of movement with in ones own country.. As there are certain public places we are not allowed too be seen doing a legal act.. At the moment it is not highly policed but if it was... It would be a borderline a human rights issue.. And make us no better than China and other country's.. Who restrict freedom of movement upon there citizens...

i am strongley against this statement for several reasons.

how are street corner shops suppose to make money when their most commonley purchased item is banned.

in some cases if you have been smoking for a while and suddenly quit the nicotne in youre body rebells and can kill you.

yes tobacco is a drug but the same people that claim that also state that coffey is too why dont we bann that olny half the world runs on it.

us smokers pay for our own health care
1 packet of talor mades cost 11$ the tobacco company olny sees 2.50$ of that the rest is just tax. considering the tobacco companies employes are under waged.


maybe not all of us want to dye of old age.

The Prime Minister last week (NZ Herald Feb 9) has now made it clear if some action like banning smoking by 2020 constitutes a "nanny state" action. According to the PM: 1) telling people absolutely how to run their lives in every form constitutes is nanny state except where: a) telling people how to run their lives "serves New Zealand's interests" as in banning over the counter sales of pseudoephedrine to stop people becoming addicted to methamphetamine, which is not nanny state. But reducing the level of addiction to nicotine among smokers by restricting where they can smoke and thereby helping to reduce some 5,000 deaths per year among our fellow citizens does not serve NZ's interests and therefore is a nanny state action; and b) there has got to be clear harm. So banning smoking at beaches is nanny state because there is no apparent harm in smoking at a beach. Although there may be some sort of harm when kids are present like in a park so banning smoking in parks may not be nanny state, but even if there are kids present at beaches it is still nanny state ; and b) whatever you do has got to work, and that's why alcohol prohibition would be nanny state because it doesn't work like in the US in the 1930s, although again apparently prohibition of smoking in the workplace and bars and restaurants as we have in NZ now might constitute an exception to the rule that banning smoking would not work. So its good that that's been cleared up.