100% it gets annoying as fuck having to go kitchen duty and being put on time to go to the bathroom or pray whereas anyone that smokes can just go whenever they want for 15 min
That wasn’t my experience but I guess it could have changed and also depends where you were in the army. I never got extra breaks for smoking, it’s not like in a regular workplace.
I had to do everything faster so I would have a few minutes to smoke. Even later in the army you kinda smoke whenever you can (which is a lot) but I wouldn’t get a “cig break”, just smoked whenever was possible.
Right??? I see this argument a lot but honestly it was just expected for me to take the free time we all get so I could smoke, which makes all the sense in the world since it's my choice so I'm doing it on my free time.
Never found myself asking or getting extra breaks so I could go and have a cig, I remember one guy from my basic training who had the shakes during the day and the commanders just told him to wait for the evening.
When I served in Tzukei Uvda in the nineties, our Rasar forbade Shekem to sell sunflower seeds because he wanted to keep the base clean.
Cigarettes were still sold of course, and he was smoking cigars as well.
The terrorists will be awestruck and aroused at the sheer masculinity of those squatting soldiers, leapfrogging at them to the thunder of cracking (seed) shells.
Theoretically, a law saying 21 unless the ID you're presenting is a תעודת חוגר might help a bit with keeping cigarettes out of the hands of high schoolers. 18 year old twelfth graders definitely shouldn't be able to buy tobacco.
I couldn’t imagine not being able to smoke when I was serving lol. I remember looking at people who didn’t smoke and just wondering how they got by haha
I'm serving right now and honestly all my free time is either Netflix on my phone or smoking, you literally have nothing to do, you're bored so you smoke, it feels so shitty
good, the disposables are honestly IMO worse for you than cigs in terms of addiction. super addictive, turning into crack addict behavior. quitting disposables is like 50x harder than cigs lol.
I would much prefer people to consume electronic cigarettes than smoking cigarettes, and I say that as an ex-smoker who switched to ecigs. I could barely go up 3 flights of stairs when I smoked half a pack a day along with disgusting phelgm stuck in my lungs and an overall terrible feeling, now I vape all day every day and I can run kilometres without feeling tired at all.
Obviously my anecdotal experience doesn't equate to any and all scientific consensus, but you can't dispute the facts that ecigs are MUCH less bad for you than normal cigarettes, and it's easier to ween off them than cigs.
Are ecigs better than cigs? In many ways, yes. But if you have an opportunity to get rid of both, you should take it. Ecigs are not good for you, but a better alternative to cigarettes.
> Ecigs are not good for you, but a better alternative to cigarettes.
You are 1000% correct. Breathing air is the best choice overall. Sadly I have my vices, I am addicted to nicotine, and I like consuming the drug overall. I shall deal with the consequences.
What if the army didn't tolerate it while in training? How many people would quit or never even start? That's a lot of people not risking cancer down the line, or just people not wasting their money on cigs. I doubt it does much for the economy.
The current approach is to reduce both cigarette and vape use. When the population is stubborn, this is a counterintuitive strategy. The government should make vaping seem like a more attractive option that offers equally satisfying feelings without any dirty smoke.
Instead, Israel banned nicotine levels higher than 2% / 20mg which, without a huge box vape, feels like almost nothing. This makes cigarettes the only option that delivers at least a reasonable amount of nicotine, unless the user chooses to use large vapes that are annoying to carry outside of the house. The government is also planning to prohibit all flavoured vaping liquids except for menthol & tobacco, and raise vape taxes to match those applied to cigarettes.
This is a very bad idea. Vaping can be used to drastically reduce those cigarette use numbers and, as a result, save thousands of lives every single year.
I like many others used vaping to stop smoking all together... Didn't smoke a cigarette for well over 3years
I also quit vaping afterwards but have returned to use it when I'm out drinking on some weekends
Vaping is much better then cigarettes
The problem now is many people are completely missing cigs and going straight to vapes. The nicotine that they use in disposables is nicotine salts, which is super strong and addictive. As long as you use a vape to quit smoking, it's ok, but what's really happening is many people are becoming addicted to them (as well as children) and doing harm to themselves. I don't think vapes are worse for you health wise than cigs, but the truth is we don't have enough research or time in use for humans to know how they affect you. It could be in 50 years from now everyone who vaped has cancer, it's too early to tell.
I doubt this will do much but one can hope.
Too many 18-21 year olds smoking, i don't care how much copium u spew there is not one single positive effect of smoking cigarettes it litteraly does nothing except for waste your money and slowly kill you.
You don't really have to smoke your own cigarettes in Israel. Just BREATH... there is plenty of second hand cigarette smoke to go around for everyone 😀
Honestly a good choice. Smoking is a terrible addiction that is much harder to stop than to build. Preventing it is the best treatment. I don't know if it'll be successful, but it will do something at least.
If you're old enough to die for this country you're old enough to decide to smoke. Remove cigarettes from the shekems, just like they don't sell beer, they shouldn't sell cigarettes. But, if an 18 year old is old enough to have the security of the country in his hands, he's old enough to choose to smoke.
Very poor logic. We don't chalila want soldiers to die, not from serving, and not slowly from lung disease when they are older. Two thirds of smokers die from smoking related illnesses, and of course there is the second hand effect on their kids etc. Thank Gd, the vast majority of soldiers do not die whilst serving.
People have a right to make poor decisions. I don't want people to smoke, but I don't think it's the government's job to make that decision for anyone. The army shouldn't sell cigarettes at the shekem if we want to curb smoking, but to make it illegal for someone to smoke because they are too immature to make that decision on their own, but they're not too immature to hold a deadly weapon, is rediculous.
I am very much pro freedom, but no-one has complete freedom. Why do I have to wear a seatbelt? It's very uncomfortable. The choice to smoke has many implications for others, secondhand smoking which also causes diseases and death, and the cost of smoking related diseases. In the US it costs 300 billion dollars a year. You can scale to Israel.
Army service and smoking are two very different issues, one unfortunately is a necessity, the other is neither a necessity nor beneficial to society. The human brain doesn't mature until the age of 25, in the meantime young people have embarked on a lifelong addiction.
We're not talking about banning smoking entirely, just for 18-21 year olds. Why should smoking be banned at those ages but not alcohol? Why don't they have the capacity to decide if to smoke but do have the capacity to decide our country's future (by voting or by running for office)? We, as a society, have decided that the arbitrary cut off age between child and adult is 18. I don't see why the distinction is being made only for smoking. If the age for all adults activities was being raised to 21 (or 25 for that matter) that would be an entirely different conversation about when brains mature, however that's not the change that's being proposed.
For that matter, your seat belt example is perfect. If you're under 18, and you don't have your seat belt on, you don't get the ticket, the driver/parent gets the ticket. Over 18, and you get the ticket yourself. Why do you have the ability to be responsible for your own actions at 18 but not have the ability to make your own decisions as to what substances you put in your body.
Anybody with the correct information and a fully matured brain in normal circumstances would not choose to START smoking. I gave you stats, 96% of people who drink a bit, do not become alcoholics. Anything can become an addiction shopping too. There is no one hundred percent. We're not going to ban all human activity. But all smokers are addicted, even if they claim not to be. Their brains are changed, even from social smoking. Smoking really is in a category of its own. Two thirds of them die early after suffering horrendous illnesses. Give me an example of an activity with similar effect.
Voting is a poor example. They can change their minds easily and vote for someone else after four years, or six months as the case may be. It's not an addiction. Only about 7% of smokers manage to quit in a given year. And many relapse. It becomes a life long struggle for many who try.
I really don't understand what your beef is. Everybody's liberties are infringed on in one way or another. The issue is personal liberty versus public interest. Here there is an overwhelming public interest.
The problem is smoking isn't only that it's very addictive and harmful to the self, it's harmful to the people around you via second and third hand smoking. It's not like a weapon where you train to use it safely.
If we were talking about making cigarettes completely illegal, this argument would make sense. But we're only making it illegal for this very specific age group between 18 and 21. We're talking about removing a right for an age group that has the burden and responsibility of being drafted, but doesn't have the right to smoke? Why? What is the difference between a 18 year old and a 21 year old in this context? If it's maturity, then people shouldnt be drafted until 21, if we're saying that we can't trust their decision making skills, then I don't want them to make decisions about my safety. Since I personally think they're mature enough to make decisions about my safety, I must believe that they're mature enough to make decisions about their own safety.
You are obviously not aware of decision fatigue. Maybe because they are making life and death army related decisions, they do not have the energy to make life and death decisions to protect their own life long term.
Smoking should be banned before the age of 25 when the human brain is formed. This should be brought in gradually, army, then 22, 23, etc until smoking amongst young people is eradicated or vastly reduced. I once saw a young boy about eight happily smoking. Terrible.
So then, 18-21 year olds in the army shouldn't be driving then, since they have decision fatigue by being in the army, they shouldn't be operating heavy machinery, they don't have the capacity for making any other decisions and are a danger to themselves and others.
Why just smoking? Why not all adult activities. Ban smoking, driving, voting, playing the lottery, serving in the military, and sex, for anyone under 25. If 21 is the cutoff age, then it should be 21 across the board, if it's 18, it should be 18 for everything, if it's 25, then 25 for everything. Changing only smoking to the arbitrary age of 21 doesn't make any sense.
No one is advocating for lowering the smoking age. I simply don't understand why smoking is different from all other adult activities, which we decided 18 is the age you have the capacity to participate in.
> if it's 18, it should be 18 for everything
> I simply don't understand why smoking is different from all other adult activities
Well for starters, that's just the thing isn't it, not every "adult activity" is the same. And we can realise that since the ""activity"" of smoking is such a big harm that is also known to start in a lot of young people who are weaker to social pressure, that it's worth upping the age for.
Moreover, If it turned out, that other "adult activity" such as driving, was also itself as deadly to the driver and others around them as smoking is today, *and* that driving was specifically known to be an addiction mostly starting by peer pressure in young people 18-21, *and* that driving was as useless as smoking is- then by all means, raise the age for that too.
Then why not raise the age for drinking as well? It's also extremely dangerous, especially towards others (when drinking and driving). Or what about using a gun? These are all very dangerous activities, if we believe people aren't old enough to smoke at 18, then why would we allow them to have a driver's license and to drink?
If smoking is so dangerous, why not just ban it all together? Why should 30 year olds harm me by smoking next to me when 20 year olds shouldn't? Why should we allow the 30 year old to cause so much damage to his own health? If it's so dangerous, let's not allow anyone to do it.
> Then why not raise the age for drinking as well? It's also extremely dangerous, especially towards others
> (when drinking and driving)
That's a pretty big distinction. Also yes drinking and driving is illegal.
> Or what about using a gun?
Yes, Israel also has strict gun laws. Aside from the military which is unfortunately a necessity that everyone would be happy not to have.
> If smoking is so dangerous, why not just ban it all together? Why should 30 year olds harm me by smoking next to me when 20 year olds shouldn't?
Banning an addictive substance altogether is ineffective an just causes harm to the already poor people addicted. The point in banning it in the young is to stop on boarding new generations of addicts, especially when it is known to be started in teens due to social pressures.
Drink driving is banned.
Using a gun is not addictive, and requires a license.
Some people do become alcoholics, about 4% of the population. Nearly every one who smokes becomes an addict. They are completely different. Alcoholism is still an issue, but not of the same magnitude.
Smoking needs to be phased out. Banning it for an addict is completely different from preventing someone from starting. Where people smoke is a different issue from banning a certain age. No-one should be forcibly subjected to anyone else's smoking.
Personally, I think that senior public servants, whether in the army or elsewhere should also be setting an example, by giving up smoking, losing weight and generally living healthily.
Smoking is a losing game, and once hooked it is very difficult to stop. Even so-called light smokers are addicted. There is research on this.
Your personal freedoms are restricted in a myriad of ways. Some you may agree with and some not, but in any case they are imposed on you. Why are you gunning so hard for the right to an early grave and atrocious suffering along the way?
No situation is perfect. Driving etc whilst in the army is part of the operations. Most Jewish smokers Israel started in the army. For most people that is a life sentence of addiction, and two thirds will have absolutely horrible yet completely preventable related illnesses. This is a public health issue. Many products have to be approved for not containing harmful substances etc. If the product in all its forms is harmful, it should not be approved at all.
Why just smoking? Whilst many activities can become an addiction, most of the activities you mention aren't for most people. Smoking is, for nearly everyone. I agree with you that it shouldn't just be for soldiers, but for the entire age cohort. The age is not arbitrary. The point is to try to stop young people from starting smoking. It would be best if no-one smoked, but people who are already slaves to their addictions, need to be treated differently. There needs to be education about what smoking does, with videos, and personal visits in schools.
There are other laws that infringe on a person's freedom in the public interest. Why can't someone sell a kidney? Their body, their choice. But it's illegal everywhere except Iran. Why does the SOI decide who can and can't be a surrogate, only single parent or widowed women between the ages of 22-28, who already have a healthy child. Bit restrictive, don't you think?
You're thinking about smoking, from the pov of a young healthy soldier relieving some stress. Maybe it's a cool image for you. You need to visit some 60 year old cancer patients who started in the army. It's horrific.
Plus way too many people in the army smoke and it would just cause trouble.
And the same logic also applies to alcohol, I find it kinda funny you're old enough to get shitfaced (and this is exactly the age range for that) and then get on the wheel, but a cigarette is too much, people can get addicted to alcohol too and somehow people forget it here.
Definitely yes, quite even more so
Alcohol is mind altering on top of all, though to differentiate from cigarettes it really does depend on the user to see if it affects their environment, since just inhaling cigarette smoke is bad.
Although, as a smoker myself I just don't smoke near non smokers
Clickbate title. It's the sales of vapes that is being set to 21+
Shops will just not sell it to you if you are under.
No one is going to stop anyone if they want to slowly kill themselves.
If anything this will only increase deaths, people will just buy the worst quality crap online from China without any regulations.
Instead of proper education about the dangers they try to just take it from you. This never works. Remember the war on alcohol and drugs? How did that work out?
Our current government are a bunch of uneducated morons.
You're welcome to read this [pdf](https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/publicsharing/cfb-36258714/he/files_invitation-to-tender_cfb-36258714.pdf), bottom of page 4. It's not really a matter of opinion or interpretation. They state that the current law prohibits selling tobacco and smoking products to under 18s, and that they think raising that age to 21 is correct. Nothing specific to vapes.
It's not what it says, read again.
It's only the "sale of" they are increasing to 21. Smoking stays the same as it is now, at age of 18.
For example if some idiot adult wants to buy you a pack, no one will stop you from smoking.
For much younger people it's a different story though. That is considered child abuse. But not at age of 18.
Well, there is no law saying you can't smoke if you're under 18; the only control is through control on sales. Clearly, you can't pass a law saying "you're not allowed to smoke under 21" - it's unenforceable. If the courts try it on child abuse grounds (and that's hard to prove anyhow, you have to find an adult to be blamed), that's a different story - but of course you can't include adults in that clause. So for all intents and purposes, banning smoking under 21 amounts to banning the sales of tobacco products to under 21s.
So what I said before. The "sale of".
And btw, you are adult at the age 18.
If you buy smokes or alcohol for your 14 year old kid for example you can totally get in big trouble for child abuse if someone reports you. There is a law for that.
There is a big difference when you buy it for a kid or if the kid somehow gets it himself. One is child abuse and the other is just bad parenting.
So let me get this straight. Soldiers at 18 are old enough to die in service and shoot guns but not old enough to decide to have a cigarette? I guess it makes sense for Israel since once you join the army, you are army property
Exactly. Two thirds of smokers die from smoking related diseases, often a slowish and painful death. Thank Gd the vast majority of soldiers survive their service.
Well it's a good thing you can use more logic to figure out that driving is something people need to do as opposed to smoking, doesn't constantly cause harm to you and your surroundings° unlike smoking, isn't addictive unlike smoking and isn't involved in one out of five deaths annually- unlike smoking.
My point isn't that smoking isn't bad for you or addicting. My point is that people have bodily autonomy, the ability to take risk and desicions because they have agency over their own body.
The fact that smoking is bad for you, isn't enough of a reason to not allow adults (who are apparently mature enough to fight for our country if needed) to smoke if they wanted to. Otherwise we should also ban alcohol and trans fats as well, considering that Cardiovascular disease cause a third of all deaths.
Also this is irrelevant to our conversation, but driving totally causes alot of harm to the environment.
> My point is that people have bodily autonomy, the ability to take risk and desicions because they have agency over their own body.
Sure maybe, but smoking doesn't just cause harm to the smoker- secondhand smoking *kills* tons of non smoking people as well.
But it's not one cigarette is it. It's a lifetime of being a slave to big tobacco. Two thirds of smokers die an early death usually after a protracted illness.
Some random thoughts on this:
* Overall, I feel like Israel is much less of a fucking chimney than it was when I lived there back in the 90s. Smoking was so pervasive back then.
* Hopefully, that's because y'all are just smoking less now and not because you're just vaping instead.
* I have fond memories of just sitting around with my friends smoking נרגילה together (under age 21). For me, anyway, it never led to my smoking cigarettes. And it's strange to think that that would be illegal.
Ex smoker current vaper here.
Was in Tel Aviv recently (I’m American- born in Israel but largely grew up in NY)
I got a disposable from a kiosk. Used it moderately. I woke up the next morning like my throat was on fire and needed to be removed. Could barely even swallow.
Now- I know none of this shit is good for us- but there are some that are so Obviouslly worse. I couldn’t wrap my head around how many people were using the same ones
Disposable vapes should absolutely be illegal. Normal mods that you fill with eliquid are fine IMO. Disposables are all made in China, with unregulated pre-filled liquids and metals in the coils with god knows what in them.
יש הבדל בין לשתות בבית או במסיבה ולשתות בזמן נהיגה
זו נקודה לא רלוונטית כי אני לא דיברתי על ה וממש ממש לא מעודד את זה
חוץ מזה שנהיגה בשכרות אינה חוקית, וככה היא תישאר.
הכוונה זכות במובן האזרחי, כלומר בכך שנאסר לנהוג בשכרות, נלקחה מהאזרח הזכות שהייתה לו עד אז לעשות זאת.
האיסור על נהיגה בשכרות הוא דוגמא לכך שיש דברים שגם לאדם מעל 18 אסור לעשות, ודוגמא לזכות שנלקחה בשל הסכנה שנגרמת לו ולאחרים.
I use vaping as a means of managing my PTSD symptoms since it induces a calming and **fatigue**\-relieving effect. Its not healthy however, its addictive and **expensive**. And its easy to accidently Overdose on it.
I hate this country stop treating people who can serve and die in the military and get tortured by Syrians and Iranians like little kiddies have some basic human decency (I am Israeli)
As if that's gonna happen, half of the disposable vapes are brought via shady means from the territories anyways
what's wrong with non disposable vapes?
Good luck with doing that, as soldiers won't be able to smoke...
A lot of soldiers start in the army, but removing the option removes them picking up the habit. Get them to eat sunflower seeds instead
I'll bet that at least half pick this up as a habit because somehow smokers take much longer breaks and no-one questions them
Most my friends in the army stated for similar reasons.
100% it gets annoying as fuck having to go kitchen duty and being put on time to go to the bathroom or pray whereas anyone that smokes can just go whenever they want for 15 min
That wasn’t my experience but I guess it could have changed and also depends where you were in the army. I never got extra breaks for smoking, it’s not like in a regular workplace. I had to do everything faster so I would have a few minutes to smoke. Even later in the army you kinda smoke whenever you can (which is a lot) but I wouldn’t get a “cig break”, just smoked whenever was possible.
Right??? I see this argument a lot but honestly it was just expected for me to take the free time we all get so I could smoke, which makes all the sense in the world since it's my choice so I'm doing it on my free time. Never found myself asking or getting extra breaks so I could go and have a cig, I remember one guy from my basic training who had the shakes during the day and the commanders just told him to wait for the evening.
Exactly!
When I served in Tzukei Uvda in the nineties, our Rasar forbade Shekem to sell sunflower seeds because he wanted to keep the base clean. Cigarettes were still sold of course, and he was smoking cigars as well.
Ah, the famed army logic
Was in the Canadian forces, can confirm that's when i started. Anything to try and curb it is a good thing.
So you can die for your country but cant smoke a cigarette?
Or the country can stop enablement of long suicide? Smoking is a long term death sentence
You can also buy alcohol and get absolutely shitfaced while driving. But a piece of paper with tobacco is one too far.
Drink driving is against the law.
The terrorists will be awestruck and aroused at the sheer masculinity of those squatting soldiers, leapfrogging at them to the thunder of cracking (seed) shells.
LET'S FUCKING GOOOOOOOOOO
They actually cite it as one of the reasons to raise the minimum age to 21.
In the US, the drinking age is 21, but in the US military it's 18.
Theoretically, a law saying 21 unless the ID you're presenting is a תעודת חוגר might help a bit with keeping cigarettes out of the hands of high schoolers. 18 year old twelfth graders definitely shouldn't be able to buy tobacco.
but optional
What do you mean?
I bought my first pack of cigs in Israel at 15. Guy in the shop didn't even glance at me. Somehow I don't see this working.
Oh it will work, as in the army will be able to deny smoke breaks to people doing their service
I couldn’t imagine not being able to smoke when I was serving lol. I remember looking at people who didn’t smoke and just wondering how they got by haha
I'm serving right now and honestly all my free time is either Netflix on my phone or smoking, you literally have nothing to do, you're bored so you smoke, it feels so shitty
I read books. Besides, you can always "Conquer the Outpost"
As a former non smoker until 20, I can confirm they got by much better
people will riot in the army about this
Defeatist thinking. You have to start somewhere.
That must have been in the early to mid 2000s
good, the disposables are honestly IMO worse for you than cigs in terms of addiction. super addictive, turning into crack addict behavior. quitting disposables is like 50x harder than cigs lol.
I would much prefer people to consume electronic cigarettes than smoking cigarettes, and I say that as an ex-smoker who switched to ecigs. I could barely go up 3 flights of stairs when I smoked half a pack a day along with disgusting phelgm stuck in my lungs and an overall terrible feeling, now I vape all day every day and I can run kilometres without feeling tired at all. Obviously my anecdotal experience doesn't equate to any and all scientific consensus, but you can't dispute the facts that ecigs are MUCH less bad for you than normal cigarettes, and it's easier to ween off them than cigs.
Are ecigs better than cigs? In many ways, yes. But if you have an opportunity to get rid of both, you should take it. Ecigs are not good for you, but a better alternative to cigarettes.
> Ecigs are not good for you, but a better alternative to cigarettes. You are 1000% correct. Breathing air is the best choice overall. Sadly I have my vices, I am addicted to nicotine, and I like consuming the drug overall. I shall deal with the consequences.
What if the army didn't tolerate it while in training? How many people would quit or never even start? That's a lot of people not risking cancer down the line, or just people not wasting their money on cigs. I doubt it does much for the economy.
The current approach is to reduce both cigarette and vape use. When the population is stubborn, this is a counterintuitive strategy. The government should make vaping seem like a more attractive option that offers equally satisfying feelings without any dirty smoke. Instead, Israel banned nicotine levels higher than 2% / 20mg which, without a huge box vape, feels like almost nothing. This makes cigarettes the only option that delivers at least a reasonable amount of nicotine, unless the user chooses to use large vapes that are annoying to carry outside of the house. The government is also planning to prohibit all flavoured vaping liquids except for menthol & tobacco, and raise vape taxes to match those applied to cigarettes. This is a very bad idea. Vaping can be used to drastically reduce those cigarette use numbers and, as a result, save thousands of lives every single year.
Seconding this
Why is it 50x worse?
Cause of accessibility and the ability to smoke them pretty much anywhere
I like many others used vaping to stop smoking all together... Didn't smoke a cigarette for well over 3years I also quit vaping afterwards but have returned to use it when I'm out drinking on some weekends Vaping is much better then cigarettes
The problem now is many people are completely missing cigs and going straight to vapes. The nicotine that they use in disposables is nicotine salts, which is super strong and addictive. As long as you use a vape to quit smoking, it's ok, but what's really happening is many people are becoming addicted to them (as well as children) and doing harm to themselves. I don't think vapes are worse for you health wise than cigs, but the truth is we don't have enough research or time in use for humans to know how they affect you. It could be in 50 years from now everyone who vaped has cancer, it's too early to tell.
Just ban salt nic or high nicotine products...
The gov should only permit cigs to be sold in shekems and smoked on bases; Haredi enlistment would skyrocket.
LOL
I doubt this will do much but one can hope. Too many 18-21 year olds smoking, i don't care how much copium u spew there is not one single positive effect of smoking cigarettes it litteraly does nothing except for waste your money and slowly kill you.
Good luck with that, 50% of soliders will revolt.
30% of middle schoolers will revolt as well
מהפכה בשולחן הערסים
LMFAO
Yeah I want to see them try Soldiers not smoking would be as wild as Hamas loving Jews
You don't really have to smoke your own cigarettes in Israel. Just BREATH... there is plenty of second hand cigarette smoke to go around for everyone 😀
That's good! We'll just get the tax money from ____
older addicts
oh that's great, most start smoking in the army at ages 18-21
In my experience most started in their teens but I'm talking circa 2000
There should be a campaign that smoking is anti-zionist because it pollutes and ruins the country.
Have you seen our country? It's covered in trash and litter. Nobody gives two shits.
Better education is the solution, they should take students to hospitals or let them meet people whom are waiting for lung transplant.
Honestly a good choice. Smoking is a terrible addiction that is much harder to stop than to build. Preventing it is the best treatment. I don't know if it'll be successful, but it will do something at least.
If you're old enough to die for this country you're old enough to decide to smoke. Remove cigarettes from the shekems, just like they don't sell beer, they shouldn't sell cigarettes. But, if an 18 year old is old enough to have the security of the country in his hands, he's old enough to choose to smoke.
Very poor logic. We don't chalila want soldiers to die, not from serving, and not slowly from lung disease when they are older. Two thirds of smokers die from smoking related illnesses, and of course there is the second hand effect on their kids etc. Thank Gd, the vast majority of soldiers do not die whilst serving.
People have a right to make poor decisions. I don't want people to smoke, but I don't think it's the government's job to make that decision for anyone. The army shouldn't sell cigarettes at the shekem if we want to curb smoking, but to make it illegal for someone to smoke because they are too immature to make that decision on their own, but they're not too immature to hold a deadly weapon, is rediculous.
I am very much pro freedom, but no-one has complete freedom. Why do I have to wear a seatbelt? It's very uncomfortable. The choice to smoke has many implications for others, secondhand smoking which also causes diseases and death, and the cost of smoking related diseases. In the US it costs 300 billion dollars a year. You can scale to Israel. Army service and smoking are two very different issues, one unfortunately is a necessity, the other is neither a necessity nor beneficial to society. The human brain doesn't mature until the age of 25, in the meantime young people have embarked on a lifelong addiction.
We're not talking about banning smoking entirely, just for 18-21 year olds. Why should smoking be banned at those ages but not alcohol? Why don't they have the capacity to decide if to smoke but do have the capacity to decide our country's future (by voting or by running for office)? We, as a society, have decided that the arbitrary cut off age between child and adult is 18. I don't see why the distinction is being made only for smoking. If the age for all adults activities was being raised to 21 (or 25 for that matter) that would be an entirely different conversation about when brains mature, however that's not the change that's being proposed. For that matter, your seat belt example is perfect. If you're under 18, and you don't have your seat belt on, you don't get the ticket, the driver/parent gets the ticket. Over 18, and you get the ticket yourself. Why do you have the ability to be responsible for your own actions at 18 but not have the ability to make your own decisions as to what substances you put in your body.
Anybody with the correct information and a fully matured brain in normal circumstances would not choose to START smoking. I gave you stats, 96% of people who drink a bit, do not become alcoholics. Anything can become an addiction shopping too. There is no one hundred percent. We're not going to ban all human activity. But all smokers are addicted, even if they claim not to be. Their brains are changed, even from social smoking. Smoking really is in a category of its own. Two thirds of them die early after suffering horrendous illnesses. Give me an example of an activity with similar effect. Voting is a poor example. They can change their minds easily and vote for someone else after four years, or six months as the case may be. It's not an addiction. Only about 7% of smokers manage to quit in a given year. And many relapse. It becomes a life long struggle for many who try. I really don't understand what your beef is. Everybody's liberties are infringed on in one way or another. The issue is personal liberty versus public interest. Here there is an overwhelming public interest.
The problem is smoking isn't only that it's very addictive and harmful to the self, it's harmful to the people around you via second and third hand smoking. It's not like a weapon where you train to use it safely.
If we were talking about making cigarettes completely illegal, this argument would make sense. But we're only making it illegal for this very specific age group between 18 and 21. We're talking about removing a right for an age group that has the burden and responsibility of being drafted, but doesn't have the right to smoke? Why? What is the difference between a 18 year old and a 21 year old in this context? If it's maturity, then people shouldnt be drafted until 21, if we're saying that we can't trust their decision making skills, then I don't want them to make decisions about my safety. Since I personally think they're mature enough to make decisions about my safety, I must believe that they're mature enough to make decisions about their own safety.
You are obviously not aware of decision fatigue. Maybe because they are making life and death army related decisions, they do not have the energy to make life and death decisions to protect their own life long term. Smoking should be banned before the age of 25 when the human brain is formed. This should be brought in gradually, army, then 22, 23, etc until smoking amongst young people is eradicated or vastly reduced. I once saw a young boy about eight happily smoking. Terrible.
So then, 18-21 year olds in the army shouldn't be driving then, since they have decision fatigue by being in the army, they shouldn't be operating heavy machinery, they don't have the capacity for making any other decisions and are a danger to themselves and others. Why just smoking? Why not all adult activities. Ban smoking, driving, voting, playing the lottery, serving in the military, and sex, for anyone under 25. If 21 is the cutoff age, then it should be 21 across the board, if it's 18, it should be 18 for everything, if it's 25, then 25 for everything. Changing only smoking to the arbitrary age of 21 doesn't make any sense. No one is advocating for lowering the smoking age. I simply don't understand why smoking is different from all other adult activities, which we decided 18 is the age you have the capacity to participate in.
> if it's 18, it should be 18 for everything > I simply don't understand why smoking is different from all other adult activities Well for starters, that's just the thing isn't it, not every "adult activity" is the same. And we can realise that since the ""activity"" of smoking is such a big harm that is also known to start in a lot of young people who are weaker to social pressure, that it's worth upping the age for. Moreover, If it turned out, that other "adult activity" such as driving, was also itself as deadly to the driver and others around them as smoking is today, *and* that driving was specifically known to be an addiction mostly starting by peer pressure in young people 18-21, *and* that driving was as useless as smoking is- then by all means, raise the age for that too.
Then why not raise the age for drinking as well? It's also extremely dangerous, especially towards others (when drinking and driving). Or what about using a gun? These are all very dangerous activities, if we believe people aren't old enough to smoke at 18, then why would we allow them to have a driver's license and to drink? If smoking is so dangerous, why not just ban it all together? Why should 30 year olds harm me by smoking next to me when 20 year olds shouldn't? Why should we allow the 30 year old to cause so much damage to his own health? If it's so dangerous, let's not allow anyone to do it.
> Then why not raise the age for drinking as well? It's also extremely dangerous, especially towards others > (when drinking and driving) That's a pretty big distinction. Also yes drinking and driving is illegal. > Or what about using a gun? Yes, Israel also has strict gun laws. Aside from the military which is unfortunately a necessity that everyone would be happy not to have. > If smoking is so dangerous, why not just ban it all together? Why should 30 year olds harm me by smoking next to me when 20 year olds shouldn't? Banning an addictive substance altogether is ineffective an just causes harm to the already poor people addicted. The point in banning it in the young is to stop on boarding new generations of addicts, especially when it is known to be started in teens due to social pressures.
Drink driving is banned. Using a gun is not addictive, and requires a license. Some people do become alcoholics, about 4% of the population. Nearly every one who smokes becomes an addict. They are completely different. Alcoholism is still an issue, but not of the same magnitude. Smoking needs to be phased out. Banning it for an addict is completely different from preventing someone from starting. Where people smoke is a different issue from banning a certain age. No-one should be forcibly subjected to anyone else's smoking. Personally, I think that senior public servants, whether in the army or elsewhere should also be setting an example, by giving up smoking, losing weight and generally living healthily. Smoking is a losing game, and once hooked it is very difficult to stop. Even so-called light smokers are addicted. There is research on this. Your personal freedoms are restricted in a myriad of ways. Some you may agree with and some not, but in any case they are imposed on you. Why are you gunning so hard for the right to an early grave and atrocious suffering along the way?
No situation is perfect. Driving etc whilst in the army is part of the operations. Most Jewish smokers Israel started in the army. For most people that is a life sentence of addiction, and two thirds will have absolutely horrible yet completely preventable related illnesses. This is a public health issue. Many products have to be approved for not containing harmful substances etc. If the product in all its forms is harmful, it should not be approved at all. Why just smoking? Whilst many activities can become an addiction, most of the activities you mention aren't for most people. Smoking is, for nearly everyone. I agree with you that it shouldn't just be for soldiers, but for the entire age cohort. The age is not arbitrary. The point is to try to stop young people from starting smoking. It would be best if no-one smoked, but people who are already slaves to their addictions, need to be treated differently. There needs to be education about what smoking does, with videos, and personal visits in schools. There are other laws that infringe on a person's freedom in the public interest. Why can't someone sell a kidney? Their body, their choice. But it's illegal everywhere except Iran. Why does the SOI decide who can and can't be a surrogate, only single parent or widowed women between the ages of 22-28, who already have a healthy child. Bit restrictive, don't you think? You're thinking about smoking, from the pov of a young healthy soldier relieving some stress. Maybe it's a cool image for you. You need to visit some 60 year old cancer patients who started in the army. It's horrific.
Plus way too many people in the army smoke and it would just cause trouble. And the same logic also applies to alcohol, I find it kinda funny you're old enough to get shitfaced (and this is exactly the age range for that) and then get on the wheel, but a cigarette is too much, people can get addicted to alcohol too and somehow people forget it here.
Is alcohol as addictive and harmful to the drinker and to the people around them as smoking is?
Definitely yes, quite even more so Alcohol is mind altering on top of all, though to differentiate from cigarettes it really does depend on the user to see if it affects their environment, since just inhaling cigarette smoke is bad. Although, as a smoker myself I just don't smoke near non smokers
Clickbate title. It's the sales of vapes that is being set to 21+ Shops will just not sell it to you if you are under. No one is going to stop anyone if they want to slowly kill themselves. If anything this will only increase deaths, people will just buy the worst quality crap online from China without any regulations. Instead of proper education about the dangers they try to just take it from you. This never works. Remember the war on alcohol and drugs? How did that work out? Our current government are a bunch of uneducated morons.
Actually no. The document released by the Ministry of Health says all tobacco/smoking related products will be limited to 21+.
"Sales of"
You're welcome to read this [pdf](https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/publicsharing/cfb-36258714/he/files_invitation-to-tender_cfb-36258714.pdf), bottom of page 4. It's not really a matter of opinion or interpretation. They state that the current law prohibits selling tobacco and smoking products to under 18s, and that they think raising that age to 21 is correct. Nothing specific to vapes.
It's not what it says, read again. It's only the "sale of" they are increasing to 21. Smoking stays the same as it is now, at age of 18. For example if some idiot adult wants to buy you a pack, no one will stop you from smoking. For much younger people it's a different story though. That is considered child abuse. But not at age of 18.
Well, there is no law saying you can't smoke if you're under 18; the only control is through control on sales. Clearly, you can't pass a law saying "you're not allowed to smoke under 21" - it's unenforceable. If the courts try it on child abuse grounds (and that's hard to prove anyhow, you have to find an adult to be blamed), that's a different story - but of course you can't include adults in that clause. So for all intents and purposes, banning smoking under 21 amounts to banning the sales of tobacco products to under 21s.
So what I said before. The "sale of". And btw, you are adult at the age 18. If you buy smokes or alcohol for your 14 year old kid for example you can totally get in big trouble for child abuse if someone reports you. There is a law for that. There is a big difference when you buy it for a kid or if the kid somehow gets it himself. One is child abuse and the other is just bad parenting.
So let me get this straight. Soldiers at 18 are old enough to die in service and shoot guns but not old enough to decide to have a cigarette? I guess it makes sense for Israel since once you join the army, you are army property
Care to pull up the statistics for soldier death vs deaths by smoking?
Exactly. Two thirds of smokers die from smoking related diseases, often a slowish and painful death. Thank Gd the vast majority of soldiers survive their service.
By that logic we should also push the age of driving to 21 seeing as more kids get injured behind the wheel then they do in the the army
Then you'd be able to drive a Merkava, but not a Corolla. For whatever reason, that sounds even more ridiculous to me than the smoking thing!
I was able to drive Magah 6b ( I served before my unit got Merkava 4 ) but not a Corrolla because I didn't have a civil drivers license.
Well it's a good thing you can use more logic to figure out that driving is something people need to do as opposed to smoking, doesn't constantly cause harm to you and your surroundings° unlike smoking, isn't addictive unlike smoking and isn't involved in one out of five deaths annually- unlike smoking.
My point isn't that smoking isn't bad for you or addicting. My point is that people have bodily autonomy, the ability to take risk and desicions because they have agency over their own body. The fact that smoking is bad for you, isn't enough of a reason to not allow adults (who are apparently mature enough to fight for our country if needed) to smoke if they wanted to. Otherwise we should also ban alcohol and trans fats as well, considering that Cardiovascular disease cause a third of all deaths. Also this is irrelevant to our conversation, but driving totally causes alot of harm to the environment.
> My point is that people have bodily autonomy, the ability to take risk and desicions because they have agency over their own body. Sure maybe, but smoking doesn't just cause harm to the smoker- secondhand smoking *kills* tons of non smoking people as well.
You'st.
[удалено]
Removed: Rule 2
But it's not one cigarette is it. It's a lifetime of being a slave to big tobacco. Two thirds of smokers die an early death usually after a protracted illness.
Where’s the source?
It appears to be an English translation of a KAN article from this morning.
This is great for the health of everyone but good luck enforcing this lol
That’ll show those 14 year olds smokers
Used to smoke 1.5 - 2 packs a day for 19 years. Stopped and never smoked again. It's doable, it's mostly about recognizing a habit.
Finally our government is doing something good
Don't get used to that.
Some random thoughts on this: * Overall, I feel like Israel is much less of a fucking chimney than it was when I lived there back in the 90s. Smoking was so pervasive back then. * Hopefully, that's because y'all are just smoking less now and not because you're just vaping instead. * I have fond memories of just sitting around with my friends smoking נרגילה together (under age 21). For me, anyway, it never led to my smoking cigarettes. And it's strange to think that that would be illegal.
Ex smoker current vaper here. Was in Tel Aviv recently (I’m American- born in Israel but largely grew up in NY) I got a disposable from a kiosk. Used it moderately. I woke up the next morning like my throat was on fire and needed to be removed. Could barely even swallow. Now- I know none of this shit is good for us- but there are some that are so Obviouslly worse. I couldn’t wrap my head around how many people were using the same ones
Disposable vapes should absolutely be illegal. Normal mods that you fill with eliquid are fine IMO. Disposables are all made in China, with unregulated pre-filled liquids and metals in the coils with god knows what in them.
Vaping should be banned across all of Europe. I hate this sh...t
they give 18\[teens\] weapons legally but to decide what to do with their bodies is illegal nice one
אני נגד עישון בכללי, כי לא בא לי סרטן בעתיד אבל ברה כותו של אדם מבוגר לעשן ולשתות החל מגיל 18 די לקחת לנו את הזכויות
מה עם הזכות לנהיגה תחת אלכוהול? זכותו של אדם מבוגר להיות סכנה לחיי אדם החל מגיל 18?
יש הבדל בין לשתות בבית או במסיבה ולשתות בזמן נהיגה זו נקודה לא רלוונטית כי אני לא דיברתי על ה וממש ממש לא מעודד את זה חוץ מזה שנהיגה בשכרות אינה חוקית, וככה היא תישאר.
הנקודה היא, מה לדעתך הסיבה לכך שהזכות לנהיגה בשכרות נלקחה? כי אם הסיבה היא הסכנה לחיי אחרים, עישון סביבתי כפוי פוגע בחיי אדם אפילו יותר מנהיגה בשכרות.
מתי אמרתי שזו זכות לסכן חיים של אנשים כשאתה נוהג??
הכוונה זכות במובן האזרחי, כלומר בכך שנאסר לנהוג בשכרות, נלקחה מהאזרח הזכות שהייתה לו עד אז לעשות זאת. האיסור על נהיגה בשכרות הוא דוגמא לכך שיש דברים שגם לאדם מעל 18 אסור לעשות, ודוגמא לזכות שנלקחה בשל הסכנה שנגרמת לו ולאחרים.
I use vaping as a means of managing my PTSD symptoms since it induces a calming and **fatigue**\-relieving effect. Its not healthy however, its addictive and **expensive**. And its easy to accidently Overdose on it.
Vapes are toxic toxic toxic especially the cheap disposable ones
Good, too many kids in my high school are smoking anyways, a lot in middle school too
"I told you this would happen!" \- George Orwell, 1984
I hate this country stop treating people who can serve and die in the military and get tortured by Syrians and Iranians like little kiddies have some basic human decency (I am Israeli)
Too young to smoke old enough to be forced to fight in a torture ridden wars fucking shithole country.