The Prohibition of Cigarettes
I thought about the question, “Should the manufacture of cigarettes be prohibited” and I don’t really believe that saying “yes” to this question would be of benefit to those who are pro cigarettes or against cigarettes. The question basically appears to make out that the manufacture of cigarettes, and only cigarettes, should be prohibited. There are many campaigns against the usage of cigarettes as we can see television commercials clearly stating that smoking causes cancer or attempting to deglamorize cigarettes. Many people have seen the surgeon general warning on a pack of cigarettes claiming that cigarettes can cause “lung cancer” or “emphysema.” In a study performed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the study shows that between the year 2000 and 2004 that about 443,000 people in the USA died from a variety of illnesses due to cigarette smoking (citation 1). This would certainly be a motivation and a convincing reason to halt the production of cigarettes but we should analyze this proposition more in depth. I believe that the term “cigarettes” is too narrow to solve any problems, as not everybody smokes cigarettes nor would the halted production of cigarettes solve any public health problems. Tobacco is a better term as it is much more broad and would include cigars, snuff, dip, and other forms of tobacco that contain nicotine. Nicotine is the suspect found in cigarettes that causes an addiction but nicotine can be found in the other forms of tobacco. Stopping production of “only cigarettes” simply means that current cigarette users may, switch to another nicotine source, quit smoking, or choosing an alternative nicotine source such as nicotine gum or the patch. Having been a tobacco user in the past, I know most certainly that many people will not just outright and quit.
Prohibiting the manufacture of cigarettes means that it will be illegal to produce cigarettes but how about...