Cigarettes – now THIS takes political courage!
.
.
.
In a radical move that can only be described as extraordinarily bold, Tasmania has begun to address the problem of tobacco addiction, head-on. No faffing about; no tip-toeing around,
.
.
One of the constant whinges from some cigarette smokers; mis-guided libertarians, and their supporters, is that tobacco is a legal product and therefore it is unjust to target it with restrictions, higher taxes, control of advertising, availability, etc.
However, if the product is banned for people born after a certain time-period, then that product is illegal.
Problem solved?
I believe so.
Of course, there will be those rugged individualists who think it is unjust to discriminate between those who are born before and after 2000.
Nonsense.
We already discriminate on legal grounds.
For example, certain medicines are only available to certain individuals, for those in-need. Potentially addictive medicines are not available to everyone irrespective of medical circumstances.
Same for firearms; not all people can have automatic access to guns.
Emergency services are allowed to exceed government-imposed speed limits – the rest of us are not.
Sexual predators/paedophiles are permanently banned from working with children, even long after their court-imposed sentences have expired.
And tobacco is already a highly controlled substance.
So there is precedent for laws in our society which impose controls and conditions, based on circumstances.
If we can stop our children from taking up a habit that will end up killing many of them in horrible, painful circumstances – then our elected representatives should be mandated and supported to do so.
In this respect, every single politician who voted in favour of this proposal should be given a medal for service to their community. This is courage I would never have dreamed possible for politicians – people whom we often deride for evading difficult issues and avoiding making hard calls.
Outstanding!
.
*
.
Acknowledgement
Matthew
.
*
.
Meanwhile, back in New Zealand,
.
.
Mr Ryall – stand your ground!
And let no one in the Opposition deride National’s resoluteness as “nanny statism”. This is too important to play childish political games with.
Quite literally, the lives of our young people and future generations are at stake here.
.
.
= fs =
Sadly the Tasmanian Greens have dismissed it saying “prohibition” never works.
Well I would dob in every offender in an instant to protect the rest of us. If there is anything I’ve taken from the recent tobacco debate it is there is a huge percentage of the population that absolutely hates smoking. I’m glad we’re finding our voice.
I reckon prohibition will be self-policing in public.
I concur, Matthew.
On this issue, the Tasmanian Greens are wrong.
Even if a few individuals do happen to grow thweir own tobacco and smoke it at home, it still means the end of a billion dollars industry in Australia (and hopefullt NZ).
It’s the difference between people growing their own marijuana, and corporations peddling the stuff and promoting it in glamourous packing. I think there’s a world of difference.
And eventually, I think, even home grown tobacco will fade away from use, just as people stopped snorting snuff…
Good on ‘em
Good article, can we do the same with alcohol too! Quite literally, the lives of our young people and future generations are at stake here.
Sue, some blogposts I’ve made on the abuse of alcohol;
“Upper Hutt community concerns at increasing liquor stores”
“Booze – it’s time for some common sense”
“You’ll have a free market – even if it KILLS you!”
“A kronically inept government”
“Just what we need”
“Community Needs vs Business Demands”
“New Zealand 2011AD: Drunken Mayhem and a nice Family Day Out”
“Our ‘inalienable right’ to destroy communities through alcohol abuse”
With the release of National’s Alcohol Reform Bill, it is time to re-visit this issue and analyse their response to the growing problem of alcohol abuse and corporate culpability.
Thus far, from what I’ve been hearing, National has ducked the hard issues and instead opted for a “voluntary code” from the liquor industry and more “community responsibility”.
Which means the industry has the right to make huge profits – and the community has the responsibility to clean up the mess…
Thanks Frank for the links
Now if only the Nats had the same balls over liquor. Nah it’ll never happen. That where the Nats get their campaign dollars from. None of it declared of course.