Next, we must help parents protect their children from the gravest health threat that they face -- an epidemic of teen smoking, spread by multimillion dollar marketing campaigns. I challenge Congress -- let's pass bipartisan, comprehensive legislation that will improve public health, protect our tobacco farmers and change the way tobacco companies do business forever. Let's do what it takes to bring teen smoking down. Let's raise the price of cigarettes by up to $1.50 a pack over the next 10 years with penalties on the tobacco industry if it keeps marketing to our children.

If smoking were abolished it would be a benefit to mankind. It’s all nonsense about tobacco quieting the nerves. If the men did not use it they would not be nervous.

"Personally, if I were trying to discourage people from smoking, my sign would be a little different. In fact, I might even go too far in the opposite direction. My sign would say something like, "Smoke if you wish. But if you do, be prepared for the following series of events: First, we will confiscate your cigarette and extinguish it somewhere on the surface of your skin. We will then run you nicotine-stained fingers through a paper shredder and throw them into the street, where wild dogs will swallow them and then regurgitate them into the sewers, so that infected rats can further soil them before they're flushed out to sea with the rest of the city's filth. After such time, we will sysematically seek out your friends and loved one and destroy their lives."
Wouldn't you like to see a sign like that?"

The drug prohibitionists must have marijuana illegal, because without that, the raw numbers of the users of all other illegal drugs combined do not come even close to justifying the prison/industrial complex that has been spawned to "combat" this drug menace.

Tobacco is a communicated disease – communicated through marketing.

We can shut down immediately all subsidizing of the fossil fuel industry. We've got to shut down their ability to advertise, the way we did with tobacco.

I myself smoke, but my wife asked me to speak today on the harmfulness of tobacco, so what can I do? If it’s tobacco, then let it be tobacco.

Trying to separate cigarettes and alcohol, that's against God's will!

Put that bloody cigarette out!

Be warned, therefore, that one does not go to hell to light a cigarette.

What I do, and I know all smokers do this. You know how every cigarette pack has a different surgeon general's warning on it, how cool. Mine say, "Smoking may cause fetal injury or premature birth." ...fuck it. [laughs] I found my brand. Just don't get the ones that say, "Lung Cancer," ya know, shop around. Hell gimme a carton of them Low Birth Weights. What the fuck do I care? 'Why you so down Bill?' Low Birth Weight. Yeah, I'm smokin' way too many Low Birth Weights.

The most urgent reason for prohibition is the good of these depressed classes. No other single measure of reform can help these people, and at once raise them economically and socially as total prohibition can. The rich and the educated may be indifferent about this reform. It is most necessary for saving the poor and the lowly.

Telling teenagers about the health risks of smoking — It will make you wrinkled! It will make you impotent! It will make you dead! — is useless,” Harris concludes. “This is adult propaganda; these are adult arguments. It is because adults don’t approve of smoking — because there is something dangerous and disreputable about it — that teenagers want to do it.

If we continue on this path, there is no doubt where it will end. If the government has the responsibility of protecting us from dangerous substances, the logic surely calls for prohibiting alcohol and tobacco. If it is appropriate for the government to protect us from using dangerous bicycles and cap guns, the logic calls for prohibiting still more dangerous activities such as hang-gliding, motorcycling, and skiing. Even the people who administer the regulatory agencies are appalled at this prospect and withdraw from it. As for the rest of us, the reaction of the public to the more extreme attempts to control our behavior — to the requirement of an interlock system on automobiles or the proposed ban of saccharin — is ample evidence that we want no part of it. Insofar as the government has information not generally available about the merits or demerits of the items we ingest or the activities we engage in, let it give us the information. But let it leave us free to choose what chances we want to take with our own lives.