I think it was the prime minister (or spokesperson) who made this very clever argument: (paraphrasing) “we are not taking away choice… cigarettes are designed to inherently take away your choice by trapping you in an addiction.”

I’m not picking sides here, just pointing out a great piece of rhetoric to spin the policy as taking away something that takes away your choice. Effectively putting forward the idea that you don’t have choice to begin with.

(sorry to say this rhetoric was not mentioned in the linked article; I just heard it on BBC World Service)

  • h_ramus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The efforts should be placed on the aspects that have greater impact on health. Focusing on cigarettes when alcohol has a much larger impact seems an odd prioritisation.

    Also, banning something doesn’t mean that the problem is solved. Drugs aren’t allowed but it’s easier and cheaper to pop a few happy pills on a night out than it is to drink until oblivion.

    This seems more a chest pumping measure to score cheap political points. There’s no political will to tackle the bigger and more important problem as it requires additional skill and likely to be less popular.

    I’m all for reducing smoking but this is unlikely to achieve any meaningful change. Happy to be proven wrong though.

    EDIT: https://feddit.uk/post/10757641