• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Plain cigarette packaging

Mr Cat Dog

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
20
Years
220px-Plain_cigarette_packaging.jpg


Plain cigarette packaging, also known as generic, standardised or homogenous packaging, refers to packaging that requires the removal of all branding (colours, imagery, corporate logos and trademarks), permitting manufacturers to print only the brand name in a mandated size, font and place on the pack, in addition to the health warnings and any other legally mandated information such as toxic constituents and tax-paid stamps. The appearance of all tobacco packs is standardised including the colour of the pack.

(Thanks, Wikipedia, for doing my job for me!)

At the moment, Australia is the only country to have plain packaging laws in place. The picture above shows how all cigarettes must now be sold in that country. However, many consultations are happening all over the world to introduce similar measures in other countries. Most notably, Canada, New Zealand, India and the UK have all launched public inquiries into the subject. Many of these countries are waiting for data from Australia to come in before making any judgments, but other governments seem keen on rolling out the measures as soon as possible.

So: What are your opinions on this issue? Proponents of plain packaging argue that measures such as that of Australia will reduce young people from starting up smoking and serve as a social deterrent to those adults who already do. Opponents argue that competition will suffer as a result of tobacco companies losing the ability to use their trademarks, and that illegal smuggling will rise as a result of packs being much easier to replicate.

Decisions, decisions! :D
​
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
I'm fine with just the graphic imagery as a deterrent. Smoking is on the decline anyway.

I don't think the packaging entices new smokers to start smoking, but rather select one brand over another. And so long as cigarettes are legal, different brands still should be able to compete against each other appropriately. This generic packaging takes away that aspect. Otherwise, just have one brand.

Also it looks like it'd be easier to counterfeit.
 
Esper

Esper

10,769
Posts
14
Years
If they're easier to counterfeit then maybe that would be a disincentive to smoking, not knowing if you're getting "quality" cigarettes or not. I would hope that's the case, although I wouldn't know if it would actually have that affect since people who are addicted may not care what they're smoking.

I don't like smoking. I'm for anything which might make it harder for tobacco companies to stay in business because I think that until they go out of business smoking it going to be a stain on humanity, causing nothing but harm to people.
 
Zet

Zet

7,690
Posts
16
Years
Being an Australian, I can 100% confirm that this hasn't stopped sales at all in the slightest(actually it might have, I'm just being biased because my brother and dad are still buying them). I think people are just going to start smoking whichever brand since they all look the same now. I do think that some people will stop smoking, but there's always people who will take up smoking, so there isn't much of a loss.
 

von Weltschmerz

the first born unicorn
135
Posts
11
Years
  • Seen Feb 18, 2013
I can't see the benefit of this other than to deter the market. This largely eliminates competition, which eliminates the drive to strive, which in turn is noticed in our economy when nobody is stimulating the market with their ingenuity. So it might not slow sales... but no one is going to be pouring money out into the economy so that people choose them over others. It might have noble intentions, but the road to hell is paved with such deeds. Indeed, I could see such a turn of events causing more harm than good. Even if it did make people quit smoking... how many more of our liberties are we going to waste for this goddamned "civility?"

Yeah, this is only tobacco, but such things are a slippery slope...
 
twocows

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen
4,307
Posts
15
Years
It's silly. We already (rightfully) educate the youth on the dangers of smoking, and we have laws in place to restrict the sale of tobacco to those not old enough to make an informed decision about whether to start. We've also put limits on how they can advertise, preventing them from trying to lure in minors despite the age restrictions. Past that, there's no reason to restrict how these businesses choose to advertise further. If they're blatantly trying to draw in minors, then sure, penalize them for that, but just having "colorful packaging" hardly falls into that category. That's supposed to be eye-catching to ANYONE, which is the point of advertising: trying to get people to see your product.

Scarf said:
I don't like smoking. I'm for anything which might make it harder for tobacco companies to stay in business because I think that until they go out of business smoking it going to be a stain on humanity, causing nothing but harm to people.
Click to expand...
So you're suggesting that a group of businesses should be treated unfairly because you don't like their product?
 

Squidchan

The Lady Cthulhu
174
Posts
11
Years
The plain packages do nothing, and some of the graphic images that came with it are disrespectful in my opinion. The image of a dead guy on my husband's packet of smokes didn't deter him, and it's very disrespectful to the deceased. In any case, people that will smoke, will smoke, people that do smoke, will continue, and those that will quit, will quit, and plain packaging will do nothing to change that.

Besides, I've heard word of stickers and holders for packages that will make all this null and void.

If non- smokers health is the concern here, then ban it altogether, don't pander about with this nonsense. It may not stop smokers, but it will prevent it from being public, and non-smokers will get their fresh air.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top