Obviously there are economic and social factors that preclude an outright ban on cigarette smoking.  However, can you think of a plan to eliminate smoking over the course of many years?
132416
Propose bills that would allow landlords to NOT allow their tenants to smoke in the units.\nMake cigarettes SO expensive because of taxes that people would NOT buy them.\nAsk family members of people who passed from lung cancer or other smoking related deaths to allow the family member's images be used for a nationwide commerical, targeting smokers.\nInstitute fines for not disposing of cigarette butts properly.
335354
They don't have a choice.  The government forces them to. The idea is that it will put people off and frighten them into not smoking.\nThis is why cigarette manufacturers are now turning to the third world to sell their foul wares.
487849
The tobacco tax is more of a prohibitive act rather than a forced imposition from smokers.  This tax is term as the "power to destroy" a business because it levies a burdensome tax on the makers and users of cigarettes.
553601
I think smoking is a personal choice.  I used to smoke and I quit, but I still believe this is a free country and what people do in their homes/cars etc. is their business as long as it's not hurting anyone else.  Second hand smoke is annoying, however, if I don't want to experience it, I don't go into places where there is a lot of smokers or bad ventilation.  I don't think it's fair to try and regulate everything because this is still the United States.  Not to mention, what do you think they will move to next?
1655
I like FirstL's answer.  I found some tips:\nhttp://www.insuremylife.org/quitsmoking.html
497717
I am not a smoker, but have no problem with people smoking in designated areas in restaurants, or public places like hospitals, malls, etc. I expect people to be smoking in bars, clubs and such. I know there are people that are on oxygen, allergic to smoke, have lung problems and the smoke increases their difficulty to breath. However, everyone has the right to do what they want to as long as it does not hurt someone else. I believe their is a common ground and solution without totally banning smoking and coming down so hard on people who choose to smoke.\n\nAs for taxation, the government has that go in' on....They tax the vices they know people won't quit....gambling, Alcohol,......that's the way it goes.
549099
The problem is, the data isn't conclusive. While there are people who have died from lung cancer who never smoked, there are also people who work around smokers all the time (in a bar for example) who are perfectly healthy. So, the question is - were these non-smokers exposed to something else and/or simply, unfortunately, susceptable to developing cancer (because it ran in the family, for example)?
185834
i understand. my answer is simple. population control. after how many billions of dollars has Jerry's kids gotten and still not a cure ? why would the govt still allow tobacco to be sold even tho they know it will cause cancer ? i am sure we have the means to feed 5 billion people. but it falls back to money and control. but how did the poor get a gold ring if there poor ? awww yes more questions :)
192782
2 reasons:  1) History.  2) Momentum.\n\nIn regard to history, we already prohibited alcohol once in this country and it failed miserably.  For that reason, the prohibition was lifted.  Instead, we do have strict laws that greatly restrict when and how we can consume alcohol.  \nThose laws are designed to protect innocent people, even though people don't always follow the laws and people still get hurt.\n\n2)  The anti-tobacco campaign, however, is gaining huge political momentum.  The tobacco companies have lost big law suits because they lied about knowing of the harmful chemicals they were putting in cigarettes.  The tobacco industry had to shell out billions of dollars to states in a settlement and they have very little lobbying power right now to stop the local laws that are going into place.  The laws themselves don't prosecute a person for smoking per se, they only prosecute a person for smoking in a way that jeopardizes someone else's health.  So, if you are in public smoking a cigarette and someone else can breathe in your harmful smoke, you can be prosecuted... just like you can be prosecuted if you ram your car into someone when you are drunk.\n\nThe real question is... if we are holding people legally liable for polluting our air with cigarettes, why aren't we holding manufacturers strictly liable for dangerous smoke that they put into the air when there are things they can do, although more expensive, to lessen that degree of smoke?
239213
Think of pink pretty healthy lungs (and not black and filled with smoke). \nThink of white teeth (and not yellow, stained ugly smoker's teeth)\nThink of fresh breath, fresh clothes, fresh hair (and not that awful cigarette odor)\nThink of $1,277 dollars saved in a year by not smoking (and not buying a pack per day)\n\nDo you like to be controlled? if not.. then don't smoke. \n\nIf you smoke you are being manipulated by a lifeless cigarette. Pitiful!\n\nThink of the power you have over cigarette. Because my friend you DO HAVE THE POWER!.\n\nIf none of these thoughts work, go to bed.
352323
Actually, I don't think they should stop to prevent people from smoking. That should be a personal choice that the person should make on their own behalf. This is a free country and people jump down tobacco product companies throats for what reason? Because the smoking population spends their own money on cigs. So personally, I am no smoker but I am not tempted to buy cigarettes no matter what the commercial says. If that's what an individual wants to do w/ their then so be it. If that's the case then we should stop making alcohol, we should shut these fast foods joints down, etc.... so really, smoking and lung cancer is a matter of choice.
516680
I see no reason not to be able to open casinos, since the govnerment squandered the 50 billion dollars due the Native American population since they were all put on reservations. However, in my opinion of a smoker for 50 years, all tobacco and tobacco products should be banned from this country and be called an illegal drug. Tobacco has caused the deaths of more people in this and other countries than all of the so-called illegal drugs in the world combined. More power to you on the Casino thing though, you have my vote!
634567
Ban: cell phones, cars, cigarettes and television\n\nRequire: \n1. Every citizen, on their 18th birthday, has to live at least one year in another country-for example, every American must spend one year in a third world country.\n2.  All jobs, no matter whether a lawyer, an athlete, a bus driver, etc. would have the exact same salary. No work would be considered any more monetarily valuable than any other.\n3.  Every citizen would have full quality health care.
422368
Welcome to the world of us New Yorkers.  Puke-taki and Dumberg really FUBAR'D everything and killed the bars with the smoking ban.  We now go to indian reservations and Long Island, costing the city MILLIONS.  While NYC may be able to afford it, I doubt Ohio would.  Good Luck.\n\nTo those non-smokers who don't mind when their freedoms are curtailed, remember, tyranny always starts with the small stuff, and eventually moves on to the important things.  I'd been smoking since 12, and am now 28.  Quit for personal reasons (wife & kids).  Because I  no longer do it, should I not have the right to put into my body what I see fit?
53465
No. Instead can provide some area of them as smoking prohibited and those who wish to move that area can go.
215106
smoking has not been proven to take away any time from your life.  \n\nBesides......what if you never smoked so you could live as long as you wanted to.....then you step out in front of a city bus and get squashed......that city bus is much easier to measure thatn the 'smoking kills' farce.
585905
I think that many people are finally getting the message. Cigarettes are very expensive and it's very hard to smoke in most places. The restaurants and bars in my county have forbidden it. Cig. smoking costs everyone money because of the costs of the illnesses they cause. Ins. rates go up for everyone to cover it.