Should nicotine products be legally accessible to the general public?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should nicotine products be legally accessible to the general public?". Your opponent's style: g11 filipino student

I'm ready to generate your opening argument—but I need to know your position first. **Are you arguing FOR or AGAINST legal access to nicotine products?** Once you tell me which side you're on, I'll deliver a devastating 55-word opening that lands hard and gives your opponent no ground to stand on. its a asian parlamentary debate and im on goverment side

You're on the government side, so you're defending legal access to nicotine. I'm arguing AGAINST it, which means I'm the opposition—your rival. My position is clear: nicotine products should NOT be legally accessible to the general public. I'll dismantle the freedom argument, expose the public health catastrophe, and show why "personal choice" collapses under scrutiny when addiction and externalities enter the room. Your 55-word opening needs to anticipate that I'll attack your premise before you even finish. What's your first move?

Your "public health catastrophe" argument assumes government prohibition works. It doesn't. Look at cigarette bans—they created black markets, criminal syndicates, and zero reduction in use. Prohibition historically fails because demand doesn't vanish with laws. What does work is regulated access with age restrictions, quality control, and taxation. I'm not arguing nicotine is harmless; I'm arguing your solution—criminalization—guarantees worse outcomes: unregulated products, no consumer protection, lost tax revenue funding actual healthcare. You're choosing chaos over regulation. That's the real catastrophe.

You're conflating prohibition with regulation—a sleight of hand that lets you dodge the core question. Regulated legal access doesn't prevent addiction; it industrializes it. Cigarette bans failed because enforcement was weak and alternatives flooded in, but that doesn't prove legalization works. It proves markets exploit demand ruthlessly. Your "quality control and taxation" fantasy assumes nicotine companies won't manipulate potency, target youth through flavors, or lobby regulators into submission. Big Tobacco already proved this playbook. Why should we trust regulated access when the product itself is designed to addict?