Smoking ban rolled out across India - 1 Oct 08

[kindog101]

India and other third world countries STILL use asbestos - THIS is the cause of most lung cancers. They lie and blame the individual to prevent compensation claims and protect big business and their history of pollution.

[bwalasvegas]

cigarettes are cool. Remember Humphrey Bogart, those were the good ole days. We should be able to advertise again so the world can understand that "smoking helps you relax and work better" (Chinese College students 2009). Come on, have a smoke.

[kevin050780]

Horrible decision what the hell are they thinking.

[davidwilliams615]

very nice decision. I pray for saudi also. .

[7boon]

In Canada cigarettes cannot be displayed in the open, and then the packs have ugly and sick people on them.

[buddybleau]

India is no different than America when it comes to smoking. They want the people to quit smoking yet they allow the companies to keep manufacturing cigarettes. Does this make sense to you? Don't ban smoking, ban factories that make them! They don't ban factories because politicians are being paid off by tobacco companies. Politicians are slimy bottom feeders no matter where you are! Same shit...different country.

[disindiandislikcurry]

the anti tobacco ads in america have worked pretty well. i have seen people give stares at people who smoke and the amount of people who smoke have gone down.

banning tobacco will cause it to go underground like marijuana.

i think a public ban is a great idea.

more americans die from smoking related causes than do from terrorism and yet, the government does shit.

now they quit cigs and smoke hookahs in hookah bars.

[TomMarAlem1987]

Brothers and sisters:  In the US there are ad campaigns and lawsuits to keep kids from smoking. Consequence of that is the companies move to sell elsewhere. They find ripe markets in such countries as India, Turkey, Eastern European nations, African nations and where ever there are uneducated people that can become addicts.

[SaracenArrow]

"They do in fact have the right to harm themselves if that what they want to do."

nonsense.you wouldnt say this for your own family.

[sheepwshotguns]

with freedom and liberty comes risk and responsibility. if we allow the government to restrict us from certain things based on health RISKS, what else could that lead to?

what is more important? giving people the right to choose what risks they can take in their own lives, or forcing people to behave a certain way for their own good? its a touchy subject.

[d3adp001]

welcome to california, the nanny state from hell. How about we just ban cars too, they cause more problems than smoking ever could, they are injurous to people's health too. Its called peoples rights. They do in fact have the right to harm themselves if that what they want to do. Business owners have the right to operate their businesses the way they see fit, etc. People should take more responsibility for themselves, and not expect mommy and daddy to deal with their problems.

[SaracenArrow]

good! they should ban smoking altogether "smoking is injurious to health". eid mubarak!