It's easier to prevent a new generation from smoking than to stop an old one who already does. This might be a better compromise approach than an outright ban.

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Straight up prohibition never works, especially with something like nicotine. Doing it by age will create a populous where it was never an option.

New Zealand were going to do this before and honestly I thought it was a good way to phase out smoking for a population. They shelved it is I remember correctly.

[–] sik0fewl@piefed.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Doing it by age will create a populous where it was never an option.

Because nobody would smoke if they were underage!

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You don't think this will have no impact? Do you think it needs to be perfect to be worthwhile?

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The only impact it will have is it will make smoking more dangerous, by removing what few regulations there already are in regards to the production of tobacco products. Alcohol prohibition in the US didn't get rid of alcoholism, it just made drinking more dangerous as people turned to bathtub spirits that were made under questionable means. The amount of people who quit drinking directly because of prohibition is absolutely negligible.

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago

Are they getting rid of regulations on tobacco products? Article says there will be more oversight. And because there are still legitimate avenues for people who aren't impacted, there won't be much support for black markets to develop.

Some of the changes will prevent exposure of other people to smoke. That's going to overall reduce danger from tobacco products at the population level. Even if it makes smoking more dangerous for those that defy the law, the number of people overall exposed to both firsthand and secondhand smoke is going to be reduced. I'd take that trade-off, but I don't think the danger to would be smokers is going to increase.

The amount of people who quit drinking directly because of prohibition was about 70% of the population at first decreasing to about 40% as prohibition continued. That's not negligible. There are plenty of negative consequences that happened because of it, though. I don't, however, think the UK is going to get a vape mafia.

[–] sik0fewl@piefed.ca 1 points 4 months ago

I’m not sure if it will have much of an impact, but I think it’s worth a shot.

[–] bad1080@piefed.social 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

otherwise it's just blatant ageism

[–] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

It is a shitty law in a technical sense, but I can't think of another way to claw this cancerous rot from society (smoking)

[–] homes@piefed.world 1 points 4 months ago

It’s probably a step towards that