Smoking Cigarretes Should Be Illegal.

Smoker's Health My opponent continues to take facts out of context. 50% of smokers die from smoking. In every one of these cases the death was preventable. Many of the others quit before it's too late. Smoking alone may not cause certain diseases, but the Cyanide, Arsenic, Ammonia, Cadmium, Carbon Monoxide and Benzene (among others) in the smoke will. To say that 70% of cancer deaths aren't from smoking is simply to say that most people aren't smokers - only 14% of non-smokers die from cancer[1]. 90% of lung cancer patients smoke[2]. Smokers are sick 25% more than non-smokers[2]. Tobacco is known to cause at least five million deaths per year[3]. These are the facts. Smokers are much more likely to die young. We need to do something about it. Sure, certain diseases are less common in smokers. But that's because many of them are in hospitals battling other diseases. Non-smoker's Health Since when did smokers care about the health of non-smokers? Well, sure, there are a few who are polite, don't smoke around their kids, and so on. But the parents of 300,000 kids who got bronchitis and pneumonia from their parent's addiction didn't[3]. It's not just about kids, though. If my flatmate smokes I am exposed to the same risk. If my workmate smokes (just assume that my work didn't have a "no smoking indoors" policy) then again, I take on that risk. That's why it is so important for the government to step in. People are dying from second hand smoke - 3,400 annually in the United States die from lung cancer as a result of second-hand smoke exposure. Freedom of Choice My opponent claims that I contradict myself by saying we should stop people taking away their freedom of choice, because then we are removing their freedom to choose not to have freedom of choice. In many ways, this is a sneaky way for my opponent to ignore my other argument, that freedom of choice is not absolute. I'd like a response to that. Second, we do not allow people to forfeit their own freedoms. For instance, you cannot sell yourself into slavery. Well, unless you buy cigarettes of course! Therefore there is no inconsistency with the principle of freedom of choice to prevent people from forfeiting their freedom of choice. Prohibition I agree that this argument is not about drinking, which is why it is strange you brought prohibition up. Drinking has a known effect on people (getting drunk) but is not generally percieved as being dangerous in and of itself. It is the driving afterwards that makes it dangerous. Smoking can kill you even if you engage in no other risky activity. With alcohol, the perception is not as strong. I further agree that my statistics are just indications, but they are the best we have. And finally, I also agree that alcohol and cocaine seem cool among many youth. But that's not because they're illegal. That's because the kids enjoy the high of taking these drugs. Smoking will reach the youth perhaps, but smoking rates will steadily decrease just as smoking rates among youth decreased when smoking at public schools was banned. 90% compliance, even in the United States (where the figure comes from if you read my source), can extend even to the schoolyard. Model Sorry, it seems to me that your attack on my model is the same as your prohibition point. If not, please clarify. Sources 1 - http://dying.about.com... 2 - http://www.netdoctor.co.uk... 3 - http://www.cdc.gov... 4 - http://www.cdc.gov...