180
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
180 points (94.1% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26238 readers
2533 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That is threadbare justification for deregulation of something we know has basically entirely negative effects and absolutely is something that kids have historically done.
Kids' habits are fickle and unpredictable. Removing barriers to destructive behavior simply because they don't do that behavior as often anymore (the current regulations seem to work??) makes no sense.
The issue is they're not just leaving them in place, they're adding more regulations, while ignoring alcohol. More people are alcoholics now than ever, and everyone is completely fine with it, but smoking is taboo and "omg think of the children".
But... It's still not bad that those smoking regulations are being put in place.
It weakens the argument for additional alcohol regulation when you keep insisting that the regulations being put on another similar vice are pointless.
How do you figure? Those of us who enjoy cigars/pipe tobacco/snuff are basically seeing our vices disappear because "think of the children". Small makers are being forced to close because of the regulations on cigs. All while alcohol is completely allowed to do what it wants.
The argument works exactly the same the other way. Your rationale is based on your own preferences.
In a vacuum both tobacco and alcohol are destructive vices with no real discernible objective "benefits" to larger society. The argument against alcohol is exactly the same as the one against tobacco products. They harm the user and potentially those around them.
I'm not saying that tobacco should be further regulated while alcohol is not. But I am saying that the rationale for alcohol regulation is ultimately based on a desire to limit destructive behavior, which is the same rationale for limits on tobacco. You cannot effectively argue for deregulation of tobacco while arguing for increased regulation of alcohol. They are two sides of the same coin.
I think that's what you are missing here. I'm not arguing for more regulation on alcohol. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of it all. How alcohol is completely overlooked by society but tobacco is this taboo thing now.