Ban the Smoking: It’s Bad for Everyone
Now that America is no longer dependent on tobacco production as a means to sustain its economy, the industry and culture surrounding it should be heavily controlled. Now that fewer people are smoking cigarettes, because of the well-documented health concerns related to its use, more cities and districts are cracking down on smoking in public places – and rightfully so. Smoking in public places should not only be banned, it should come with heavy penalties, such as outlandish fines, criminal charges and, if possible, public beatings. Due to the health problems associated with smoking cigarettes, due to smoking being a fire hazard and offensive to non-smokers, smoking in public places should never go under the radar. It should be banned on a national scale.
Smoking cigarettes, cigars or pipes in public places should be banned because it’s offensive to the non-smokers who have to endure the smoke, the butts, the mess and the smell. Consider the typical public place – a market door entrance, a park bench, an elevator. People come to these places for peace and quiet, for necessity, to get to work, so they should not be required to breathe another person’s poisonous tobacco fumes. Everyone knows that second-hand smoke is just as, if not more, dangerous than directly inhaling the smoke. Why should a health-conscious, everyday person have to be penalized for another’s bad decision? It just isn’t right – so smoking in public places should be banned altogether. It’s also disgusting to smell cigarette smoke – even worse when it’s on your clothes. The American government has yet to criminalize the use of all tobacco products, mostly because of billion-dollar companies like Phillip Morris, out of Richmond, Virginia, pays millions of dollars in taxes annually. But cigarettes are killing everyday Americans, costing them too much in the long run. They should certainly be banned everywhere, not just in public places.
More articles to read: Junk Food in School | Why Are You Not in Class and out There Bleeding?
Smoking Is Not Fashionable Anymore!
Let’s ban smoking in public places because it gives young, impressionable adolescents the wrong idea. They see it and think it’s a normal, healthy, cool adult thing to do – something they perhaps feel they’re supposed to do it as adults, maybe even as teens. This is bad because they do not possess the foresight and self-preservation experience to avoid doing things that could one day kill them. By banning smoking in public places, fewer people will be seen smoking and, subsequently, outcast from society. It will be the thing that those people do; they will have to hide it. This is good because this mentality will condition smokers to perhaps give up smoking, a good deterrent for sure because the same social and peer pressure that may have encouraged them to begin smoking has gone the other way. Banning smoking in public places is a wonderful idea and should be taken up by every single jurisdiction, municipality, city, hole-in-the-wall town and county in the country.
In addition to smoking raising health concerns, banning public smoking altogether, including indoors, would surely cut down on fires – both in buildings and possibly in nature, as well. Just picture a waiter with five minutes for a smoke standing just outside a restaurant’s kitchen in a rush to fill their nicotine cravings. The headwaiter calls their name and they flick the cancer stick away – it’s not their problem, right? But it’s windy that night and the cigarette rolls into the nearby trash. And, bam – a fire has begun. People could die. How about banning smoking anywhere a fire could start, any place that could endanger others? This would cut down immensely on building fires. Innocent people wouldn’t have to die in fires, and their beloved possessions would not be destroyed. Banning public smoking benefits everyone, including the smoker.
Let’s conclude this argument by going a step further. If we can already see how banning public smoking would benefit our citizens – protecting their health, peace of mind, homes and possessions – why stop there? Let’s ban smoking tobacco products altogether! Let’s rid our wonderful society of this evil poison, this killer of people, this addictive substance with no health value whatsoever. Let’s make cigarettes so expensive to buy that few can afford them, and so hard to find that they may as well be sold on the black market. This should apply to those vaporized smoking apparatuses, too. They are said to be a healthier alternative to smoking filter tobacco products, but they are just offensive to be around.
Smoking or Non-Smoking Should There Be A Choice?
Imagine sitting in a restaurant unable to enjoy a meal due to the cloud of smoke coming from a neighbor s table. The fact that there was not a designated area for smokers has put the smoker and the non-smoker in an uncomfortable situation. Smoking should be banned in public places because non-smokers have a right to clean air, and because second hand smoke is more dangerous than actually smoking a cigarette. However, smoking should not be banned in public places because it is the smoker s choice to smoke just as it is the non-smokers choice not to smoke.
President Clinton is quoted saying that We ve got to do more to protect people in public places and clean up the air that all of us share (Rovner 571). For non-smokers, inhaling someone else s cigarette smoke can be very aggravating. It is bad enough that automobiles, processing plants, and other types of industries pollute our environment, but for a smoker to choose to smoke around a non-smoker is a violation of their right to clean air. Stanton A. Glantz, who wrote Smoke Free Ordinances, states, By March 1997, more than 150 communities in the United States had eliminated smoking in public places and work places. California law now requires that all restaurants be smoke-free and that all bars become smoke-free on January 1, 1998 . So, an effort has already become in some places to purify the air for those who do not smoke. If the nation would ban together as a whole, society could eliminate public smoking completely. By stopping public smoking, society rids the environment of a hazardous pollutant, and it prevents the danger and unhealthy affects of second hand smoke on non-smokers.
Second hand smoke increases the risk of heart disease and heart attacks by increasing a person s risk of developing blood clots. Second hand smoke, the smoke inhaled from other people s cigarettes, pipes, and cigars, causes 53, 000 deaths a year, and is the third largest preventable cause of death in the united states, behind regular smoking and alcohol abuse (Bernard 842). Jinsup Kim, M.D., reports that, exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) raises a non-smoker s risk of developing lung cancer by at least 50 percent (Health Article Magazine 65). The only effective way to avoid the negative effects of second hand smoke is to insist on a smoke-free environment whenever possible. Non-smokers can encourage smokers to walk outside to smoke and open windows to keep the room ventilated to minimize the consumption of second hand smoke.
As citizens of a freedom-based nation, the constitution encourages the right to freedom of press, freedom of religion, and, most importantly, freedom of speech. If Americans are free to make the choice to do anything, what makes the choice to smoke in public places different from any other decision? If a smoker makes the choice to smoke, then that person is aware of the consequences that goes along with that decision. American females have the choice to end a baby s life by receiving an abortion, therefore, smokers should not be inhibited from making a choice to smoke where they choose to do so.
In response to it being a smoker s choice to smoke, and the non-smoker s choice not to smoke shows that everyone is affected by smoking being banned in public places. Non-smokers choose not to smoke and are left alone, while people who choose to smoke are told when and where they can smoke. If America is a nation of freedom, then why is where and when someone smokes such a controversial issue? Smoking should not be banned in public places because it is the smoker s choice to smoke.
During the course of the meal a cloud of smoke is now no longer a bother. Because there are now designated areas for smokers and non-smokers someone could enjoy a meal without being uncomfortable. At the same time, a smoker is made uncomfortable because the restaurant is a non-smoking facility. Only the non-smoker can be completely satisfied. Is that fair in a free nation? If public places would compromise and designate certain areas for smoking and non-smoking then maybe everyone could be in a public area and be comfortable or satisfied.