Oh.

Well then here's a good solution - outlaw the sale and distribution of cigarettes, but don't outlaw smoking them. My reasoning is this - smokers craving a fix will be left with the following options: A) grow their own tobacco and smoke that B) black market C) quit smoking

Wheres the big benefit in this? Well, smoking natural tobacco isn't necessarily dangerous. The carcinogens and negative health effects stem from the additives put into cigarettes by corporations to improve flavor, to cultivate dependency via chemical addiction, to allow for specific burn times and a whole bunch of other related reasons. If we remove that factor, and place the ban on big money, there will be an instantly sharp decline in total users with more people gradually phasing out until what's left are the people who would otherwise go to great lengths to fulfill this urge anyway. That's a win for the general population, no penalty for those that want to continue with it, and it fucks over the nasty companies that take advantage of the human psyche (the same companies that low key market to children, thus starting the addiction at an early age where we are far far more impressionable and likely to develop our lifelong habits)

I agree. We need to stop both.

The one primary issue you may not be considering is: the authorities with the power to ban smoking have no intention or desire to do so-  They just want it to cost smokers and cig companies lots of money, most of which is paid to state and federal government s - many billions

In the South East US years ago many states did not want the lotterry as they felt it was gambling ie wrong and potentially harmful -  The way in which that changed was bordering states appooved that lottery and people in the "no lottery" states began spending millions on lottery which went to those bordering states-   So the "no lottery states" wanted to keep that money and said they would spend some or most of the lotto procedes on somethig people felt was good like schools-  Bam the lotto quickly became legal in the South East Us

smoking would be similar-  if a state banned cigs all that tax money woudl go to bordering states allowing smoking   (and no way the feds ban it as they get the most $ s from it)  

the primary reason Prohibition was repealed in the Us was due to money-  the govnmt needd money badly-  they repealed prohiition and they got theor millions/billions quickly in sin tax dollars-   same reason i think pot will be legalized across the US in the next 10+/- years-  the staes need mooney - the next ig financial meltdown that hits the state budgets and it will hasten legalization in the conservative states as well as the more liberal states

The question becomes what is next?  legal prostitutuon,  legal hard drugs -  those are prob a ways off in most states but eventually who knows

Yeah, I agree. That's the only way to go.

I think most countries are already doing what must be done, focusing on young people. In France, compared to when I started to smoke 20 years ago and get hooked as an heavy smoker :
- cigarettes are not cheap anymore
- starters like fruit flavored cigarettes, 10 cigarette packets have been banished
- you mostly don't see anymore cool people chain smoking in movies, or reports (singer, etc.)
- the cigarette companies have an image a lot worst, being Marlb*'s b*tch don't really makes you a rebel nowadays
- you have far less occasions to smoke. I was smoking at lunch, inside buildings at the university, in the train !
- you could buy cigarettes at 12. I did... peach flavored.

The problem is that anti-smokers want to solve the problem quickly and definitely, or thinking that any new law, including a prohibition could solve the problem. Most have been done, and young people are smoking less, their children will have non smoking parents, mostly non smoking environment, etc.

Recently we had a visiting US professor who talked about how over the cause of time smoking rates in western society has gone down ,and this has made the tobacco companies focus more and more on young smokers with young women being the largest group taking up the habit , his response to this was to break the cycle by setting a date like say 2020 and making it illegal for anyone not of legal smoking age before that date ,the people who are smokers aren't affected but has they give up or die they aren't being replaced .

I agree smoking is bad, but I'm always overwhelmed at how some people let themselves think about the most radical and incredible ideas when it comes to make people stop smoking. I mean, a discrimination for adults based on the year of birth ? It would not be by far the most terrible thing, but I believe that's a first... I've never heard about an equivalent law anywhere at any point of time on Earth.

When you think about it  there are plenty of laws that are based on your date of birth , where I come from 18 is the legal  drinking age in certain US states it's 21. 

What this is doing is saying from a point in time smoking is banned but those legal smokers before that date wont be affected , this has been done before when laws are enacted with provisions for those affected by said laws to be exempted.

Australia's solution: Ban all Smoking advertising, place graphic images and messages on the packets, improve education via TV, Radio and Billboard advertising.

And then finally... Tax the hell out of it so no one can afford it... And yet we still have Millions of smokers, but it is declining.

Australia has made cigarettes so expensive no one cam afford to smoke lol