• Technically, the new law will raise the legal age requirement in the UK for buying cigarettes, cigars or tobacco, which is currently 18, by one year in every subsequent year, starting on January 1, 2027
  • This will effectively mean that people born on or after January 1, 2009 will never be eligible to buy them
  • Retailers will face financial penalties for selling the products to those not entitled to them
  • The government will also be empowered to impose a new registration system for smoking and vaping products entering the country, seeking to improve oversight
  • The bill will expand the UK’s indoor smoking ban to a series of outdoor public spaces, for instance in children’s playgrounds, outside schools and hospitals
  • Most indoor spaces that are designated smoke-free will become vape-free as well
  • Smoking in designated areas outside pubs and bars and other hospitality settings will remain permissible
  • Smoking and vaping will remain legal in people’s homes
  • Vaping will become illegal in cars if someone under the age of 18 is inside, to match existing rules on smoking
  • Advertising for smoking and vaping products will be banned
  • People aged 18 or older will remain eligible to purchase vaping products, but some items targeted at younger consumers like disposable vapes have already been outlawed as part of the program
  • Cytobit@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    15 hours ago

    A lot of people here are happy to see others lose a freedom that they themselves were never going to exercise.

      • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        13 hours ago

        No, they aren’t.

        I hate smoking. I hate the smell when assholes smoke near my house.

        Those people aren’t all smokers.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Why is my freedom to build bombs in my basement being overridden?

      Oh that’s right, because laws are ultimately created based on relative perceptions of risks and social acceptance of the populace (generally, in a democratic society, there are a lot of exceptions here).

      Note for my FBI agent : I’m not building bombs in my basement, I’m using that as an example of why we have laws at all.

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Well to be honest, there is an argument for letting you build bombs in your basement. A bullet is effectively a bomb. Plenty of people make their own bullets/shells. Should they be forced to buy those from a company?
        There is nuance to just about everything.
        Laws should be restricted to protecting people from other people, not from themselves.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Plenty of people make their own bullets/shells

          For very, very small definitions of “plenty”.

          • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            42 minutes ago

            Sure, in that example, plenty is small. But who decides how small a group has to be to be allowed to take their rights away when they have committed no crime.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Sure there is an argument for letting me do anything, but when you keep persuing and reducing the argument, it eventually boils down to “Why do we even have laws at all?”

          The answer to that question is “becuase we as a society decided to.” By their very nature, laws created by people are arbitrary and intangible, their only actual effect is derived from society’s willingness to actually enforce them.

          • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            36 minutes ago

            If the laws were actually agreed upon by the people… but they aren’t. And most are really to protect businesses, not people.

            But no, it doesn’t boil down to why have laws at all. Laws should protect people’s rights. Like the right to not get murdered. But that’s not what this is.

      • DisgruntledGorillaGang@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        But you’ve never had that freedom. Do you really not see the difference between taking away freedom that people have had for thousands of years and a hypothetical that nobody has ever had?

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          People who were not permitted to buy tobacco and vape products are not losing a freedom they had either.

          Regardless, laws are written and removed constantly throughout our lifetime. It’s not legal for me to park where I used to, it’s not legal for me to bring a big bottle of orange juice or a tube of toothpaste on a plane anymore. The fact that things can become illegal or legal is a necessary consequences of having laws that can be changed.

          Also, you could legally make your own explosives right up until there was a law passed that made it illegal. There isn’t some universal property that says humans aren’t allowed to make explodey shit.

          • DisgruntledGorillaGang@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Yes, they literally are losing that freedom. Just because it may come later in life, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

            Just remember that laws are not inherently moral or ethical. What people do in their own time in their own space is their own business, as long as they’re not doing it in a way that puts other people in danger. This is purely about control and you’re just wolfing that boot down.