[fitzie]

Eric Garner was killed because of the policies that created the a huge black market for cigarettes in NYC. the absurdity is they are banning flavor which isn't the harmful element. at the same time they are legalizing marijuana including edibles across this country. in a free country you have to allow people the liberty to make poor choices. putting out health information and reasonable restrictions is as far as the govt should go.

[sangnoir]

> Eric Garner was killed because of the policies that created the a huge black market for cigarettes in NYC

I don't think that's why he was killed.

[Gatsky]

Two parts to this: - You are highlighting the negative consequences of a ban. There are of course negative consequences to a ban, the black market issue is far from the most important one. But as inidicated in the press release, smoking is a huge health problem causing untold suffering, loss of income, loss of productivity, unnecessary healthcare costs etc etc. These pros and cons of a ban need to be compared in a sane manner.

- The 'Whatabout' argument, whatabout alcohol, marijuana, gambling etc. This is not an argument which can guide us on what to do with tobacco. If the question is, why are we doing something about tobacco but not any other X problems, the basic answer is because tobacco causes a huge burden of problems, and there are only very small upsides to smoking for an individual, and very large downsides for the individual and almost everyone else.

I think there is a lot of research showing that 'putting out health information and reasonable restrictions' doesn't achieve much. If you are agreeing that something rather than nothing should be done, why do something that doesn't really work?

[hackinthebochs]

>the basic answer is because tobacco causes a huge burden of problems, and there are only very small upsides to smoking for an individual

Doubtful. The real answer is that public opinion on smoking has turned so strongly against it that these bans won't create enough vocal opposition. The anti-vice authoritarians only stop here because they would be eviscerated if they tried to ban something like alcohol. But we should be careful about emboldening the moral busybodies with national victories.

[bustin]

>The anti-vice authoritarians only stop here because they would be eviscerated if they tried to ban something like alcohol. But we should be careful about emboldening the moral busybodies with national victories.

Bingo. The state is dictating virtuousness for our own good.