I hate the smell of tobacco but prohibition does not work. 

The only regs there needs to be is smoking bans in public places, especially eating places. That's it. 

Restrictions and regs only create a black market and people with addiction problems they can not get help for. 

The real solution is total deregulation. 

Free markets and cottage industries are more responsive to public demands and will create cleaner, safer products. The same goes for alcohol.

Allow a free market so that anyone can grow it and sell it so it becomes a cottage industry and puts money back into rural communities and not into the vaults of corporate giants. 

I agree with Paul about prohibition but note he's the only commentator so far.  Everyone concerned about the "drug" (i.e. anti-cannabis) war should be interested in this issue: $igarette companies are trying to protect their Ownership of present and future nicotine HBOM (hot burning overdose monoxide) slaves by heading off cannabis availability which brings with it (A) the dreaded alternative herb which gives kids something else to experiment with instead of tobacco! and (B) de facto legalization of alternatives to the 700-mg-per-lighup overdose format such as vaporizers and one-hitters which kids are afraid to have because your drug-war-crazed mom or a cop might catch you with one, the joint (sucktraining for $igarette addiction) is "safer"!

Please, Rep. Greenlick, try these:

1.  Spend some state money to provide every addict or anyone who steps forward and declares themself one with a free E-CIGARETTE (portable vaporizer) kit!  Yes, some say there haven't been enough studies yet, hey since 2003 (invented in China) NOT ONE reported death!

2.  State sponsorship or operation of a ONE-HITTER store where cannabis users can bypass the monoxide joint papers or nicotine-infested blunt by buying any of numerous $2.95 one-hitters now available with additional features: (A) a screen so you can use easily vaporized sifted herb particles without clogging the channel and (B) a 20-inch/50-cm long flexible extension tube (HOOKAH HOSE WITHOUT HOOKAH) so users can perform the lighting procedure which involvfes HOLDING THE FLAME FAR ENOUGH BELOW the opening that 385F air enters but nothing ignites until all cannabinoids are vaporized out.  But note, these same utensils can be used by tearing a tiny pinch of tobacco off a $igarette, dividing a pack into 560 separate 25-mg tokes!

3.  Encourage cafes which will provide cannabis, and other indoor places, to encourage vaporized tobacco use to replace the banned $igarette format.

4.  Buy off Philip Morris and other killer corps with a program to convert them to a healthy helpful role, reeducate everyone now economically dependent on the $igarette trade.

Good luck, maybe you'll share a Nobel Prize with Dave and his associates on this website.

Because these vicious criminal groups aren't rich and powerful enough already. 

With a name like Greenlick , you would think he`s pro- Cannabis . He just doesn`t like tobacco . He wants to ban it . You can have this plant but not that one . I hope this is a political joke . Humans that attempt to oppress other humans over the use of a plant is beyond absurd . Maybe he just needs a bowl of Granddaddy Purple and some music to his liking .

What a clever, completely novel idea for reducing cigarette smoking.  Now that I think about it, I bet outlawing alcohol would be a great way to eliminate its consumption as well.    Might as well give it a try.  What harm can it do?

Make cigarettes illegal?  VERY dangerous idea.  I know people who get into a fist fight if they haven't been able to smoke a cig that day... strung out worse than a meth addict.  They make cigarettes illegal there'd be attacks in the streets daily.  Don't do it...

If this becomes law, it might be the kiss of death for prohibition itself: The tobacco lobby could join the legalization side.

I'm not holding my breath for either event, though.

Schedule I substances are those that have the following findings:

A.The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
B.The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
C.There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Tobacco and alcohol should be schedule 1. Oh no! We have tried the prohibition of alcohol once before and
it was a total failure! Only the prohibitionist fails to understand why the public policy of prohibition
is a total failure. Stop taking away our freedoms in exchange for calling it trying to protect people! 

This, in my opinion, is not a serious attempt to ban cigarettes but actually a satirical jab at the drug war.  By introducing this bill Rep. Greenlick is likely just trying to show the hypocrisy of the drug war.

This is just another nanny state movement.I'm waiting for the day that children are made to wear a helmet whenever they go outside.Have we learned nothing from the wasted years of drug prohibition?The recent ban of bath salts and cannabis substitutes says no.I live in Vancouver,which has to be the most intolerant city on earth, when it comes to smoking.These anti nicotine people are the least tolerant people around.They actually believe that their right to "clean"air supercedes the rights of everyone else no matter where they are.They want a ban in parks and on beaches?They already have zones around buildings and bus stops.These are outside!In car mad Vancouver,where the air smells like an exhaust pipe at the very best of times.People aren't even allowed to smoke on their balconies.Who needs prohibition?

hope all the pissed off smokers go nuts and draw and quarter him in the streets.   I dont smoke, but i hate fascist liberals imposing their beliefs.  people will get tobacco.  it is easy to grow and im sure the same people that bring us heroin and meth will make lots of money selling it to us.  At least if it is illegal we wont have to pay taxes on it.   Im sure this jerk wont get re-elected

The bill will never get out of committee.  Mitch Greenlick needs to find himself another hobby.

I am not sure whose ignorance is showing here. Its very easy to say that Rep. Mitch Greenlick has not a lick of common sense and can't read.

Who voted this guy into office?

This is prohibition gone wild and a prohibitionist without a cause. Let's not make the same mistake we made at the end of alcohol prohibition when we replaced it with a ban against marijuana.

Grow up, Mitch. Read some history.

(but don't prohibit them) The purer the tobacco, the better it's going to seem to people (and i think they'd be right). It's probably a lot healthier to smoke pure tobacco than whatever is in a cigarette. 

Another thing is, vaporizers are becoming more popular as well as electronic cigarettes. The electronic cigarettes are just nicotine, water and some other liquid substance that gets evaporated, and as far as i know nicotine isn't harmful except for the addiction. The other substance i don't know about. Then there are also vaporizers that you can put tobacco (preferably as pure as possible) into. I don't know about the health effects of vaporizing tobacco, but i bet it's leaps and bounds healthier than smoking it. In fact, i wouldn't be surprised if it is practically harmless except for the addiction. The use of vaporizers and electronic cigarettes is probably going to keep getting more popular. I definitely hope it does, and that it completely one day replaces the smoking of regular cigarettes. What we should be doing is promoting them and speeding up this transition, not fucking banning tobacco. This is going to seem like spam, but this is not spam, this is a genuine promotion from someone who will not profit from it. I honestly want to promote this because i think it is better for society (I don't even smoke cigarettes btw, and i'm not endorsing the product itself, just promoting the use of vaporizers):

http://www.ploom.com/pax

the last. And...it was all perfectly predictable...as the late Professor Whitebread made clear in his seminal speech on substance prohibitions.

The warnings go all the way back to Prohibition 1.

Heinlein said it best:

"Political tags -- such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth -- are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort. " (Emphasis mine - N)

Prohibs are tight-arsed control freaks of the first order, and it doesn't matter what substance they want to prohibit. It was never about the substances, themselves; it has been, and will always be, about power over others...

Wow - full page of comments and nobody really got the point of what this dude is trying to do.

Of COURSE the bill will never become law.  The purpose is to foster discussion and re-examination of the issues surrounding the process (which has already been applied to other substances with disastrous and costly results.)

BUT - nicotine IS a "drug" in the classic sense, so refusing to regulate it under existing regimes is pretty blatant hypocrisy.

If the government moves to prohibit tobacco it'll create a black market for it which will make it EASIER for kids to access. This is the opposite to what parents are trying to do! This law will create more harm than good and should NOT be enacted!

This is NOT going to pass

Rep. Mitch Greenlick - this is a complete waste of tax payers, police and obviously your own time (on the people's time that is) to even consider starting this kind of war, again, and even you, yourself saying that it will not pass proves that you need to be replaced (or job eliminated) as a Representative of Oregon as you obviously have nothing to do.
 

Did you forget that growing tobacco in Oregon is legal for citizens?  So your bill is flawed from the very beginning and especially scheduling tobacco in the same class as LSD is simply insane in itself and you sir, should be locked away with the over-the-edge LSD brain-mush psychotics in the psych ward.

Yes tobacco's by-product nicotine is by far one of the most harmful, deadly and addicting substances pretty much on the planet, not too mention killing (hundreds of - sic) thousands of people each year, yet so does alcohol.  So why not put an all out ban on everything that kills people?  Let's see, that would be cigarettes, cigars, alcohol, beer, cars, politicians, war, knives, guns, paper, darts, arrows, the list can literally be endless...  Can you see how ridiculous this all sounds?  That's because it is ridiculous and a complete waste of everyone's time, especially the police that would have to do much more paper work all for the crime of walking down the street smoking a cigarette?  Completely idiotic!

As far as I know, there have been no known deaths from LSD itself, it's the effects that have killed people, just as there is not one death or overdose with marijuana as well.  Can we say that with tobacco or alcohol?  Nope.

So quit your job or do something that will actually HELP those addicted to tobacco instead of making them into criminals.  Basically, DO YOUR JOB or the state should just eliminate it because you have way too much time on your hands sir.

What a stupid move, yes cigarettes are harmful and smell like crap but no one has the right to tell people what they can and cannot put in their body. Prohibition in all aspects is a fail. Education and personal responsibility is what needs to be promoted. I Hope this doesnt pass or you guys may see a surge in criminals controlling the tobacco market as well.