Banning The Issue Of Banning Cigarettes

Smoking is an activity that has been around for many years for people to use and adapt into their lifestyle. It is a tool that many people use to help reduce the stresses of life and put them in a comfortable position that enables them to cope with the hectic lifestyle they are living. However, smoking has been scientifically proven to cause many types of cancer, the most common being lung cancer resulting in numerous deaths across the United States. According to BBC, "Smoking is a greater cause of death and disability than any single disease" (BBC, 2). Evidently, the benefits and drawbacks of smoking have been debated for many years, and only recently have some countries have placed a ban in public places such as Britain and the United

This problem, which plagues all Americans, should have action taken on a local scale to help protect the health of the public. The Ames City Council is in the process of debating a city ordanince which whould ban smoking in all public places, with the exception of those designated as "smokng areas". A public place shall be defined by Subsection

If a product kills million of consumer would we keep it out in the market? If an industry is costing the federal government 955 billion dollars would we keep subsidizing it? If there is a group of the work force that could be using their skills to aid in the hundreds of other areaas that they could be helping why wouldn’t we take action already? In 1920 the United States Government decided that the consumption, production and transportation of alcohol had enough of a negative effect on the nation as a whole that they banned liquor all together. The same action should be taken with the consumption, faming, distribution and even the possession of tobacco and cigarettes. Cigarettes should be banned because they have a countless amount of health consequences, tobacco farmers cost the federal government billion to bail them out instead of reinvesting that money to aid in really any other are of farming that is struggling, and lastly because of the environmental impact and footprint that the growing of tobacco and manufacturing of cigarettes produces.

Have you ever gone to a restaurant or to the bowling alley and come home smelling like cigarette smoke? And while you were there, some people are sitting there smoking by you and you can’t stand the smell of it. So you go out side and to get some fresh air and what do you know there’s some more people lighting it up and smoking but they are polite enough to go outside. Doesn’t this annoy you, that you can barely go anywhere without people smoking in your presence. This leads us to the question, Should smoking in public areas be allowed? Smoking in public areas is something that could definitely be dealt without. The things I will cover with you are the effects of smoking, the effects of

I whole heartedly feel the government should intervene and ban public smoking, with no exceptions. Now when we talk about the government doing something like banning all smoking in public; the questioned in posed “is the government over stepping it boundaries?” the answer to that is; I don’t think so. True enough people have a right to smoke, and I’m not saying

Consumption of Tobacco is a worldwide phenomenon. Nearly every country is planning to raise more restrictions around the consumption of Tobacco. The awareness about its ill effects is rising through the corridors of Parliaments of many countries with the help of governmental and non-governmental organizations. There are some internationally recognized organizations like the “World Lung Foundations” that are striving hard to reduce the consumption of tobacco to a bare minimum. There are numerous reasons that support the argument that tobacco should be completely banned from the United Sates.

Since our nation was founded we have prided ourselves in the right and ability of our people to make their own decisions and be responsible for their own actions. There are those in our nation that believe tobacco should be prohibited. These people feel that the free use and sale of tobacco infringes on their rights in some way. Others, smokers and non-smokers alike, feel that trying to stop every

When the medical associate researches the health ethnics of smoking they should have research tobacco is legal substance, people have a choice. The banning of smoking in public place only forces the people to smoke in the privacy of their homes even more. This will affect most eating and drinking establishments financially. The government will stand by these laws for banning smoking but do they stand by the taxes that are made for the selling of

Tobacco remains legal and the treasury is said to make around 10 billion each year from taxing it. Coincidentally many states still have smoker-friendly bars. The smoking ban is said to be bad for business as well. Despite more efforts to prove otherwise, pubs and clubs are dying, in part, because of the business lost as smokers find somewhere else to drink they can smoke in peace. Where and how smokers think will always be beyond my understanding. They believe that the smoking ban is technologically backwards. It is not difficult, with decent modern air filtration technology, to make smoke virtually unnoticeable and certainly harmless. The smoking ban does not stop people from smoking. Even if it were appropriate to

Smoking should not be permitted in public areas, since it’s not reasonable to force a non-smoker into inhaling unwanted toxic smokes into his own body. Just like one has the option of being a smoker, they other may have the right to pick the option of not wanting to be a passive smoker.

The proliferation of smoking bans means that, in many states, it is extremely difficult to find a place where it is legal to smoke in public. The smell of cigarette smoke also creates problems for people who live or work with non-smokers. And because cigarette smoking involves an open flame, there are safety concerns as

One major issue of the Smoking In Public Ban is how will the economy react. Some people avoid businesses that allow people to smoke there because they don’t want to endanger themselves, their family, or both. Another pro for the ban in sense of the economy would be the odor of the cigarettes would be gone (Rutherford np).The ban will make businesses more family friendly which will add more money to the economy and cause more jobs be added to the workforce, internal improvements, and many other things that will strengthen our nation. The cons of the smoking in public in terms of the economy would be that it would encourage smokers to smoke less, which is good for the smokers but not so much for the economy because the tobacco industry would

In the article “Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition” by Robert Procter states that “Another objection commonly raised to any call for a ban is that this will encourage smuggling, or even organized crime.” I can agree with this statement although this author is for banning this statement brings out a huge issue that could potentially arise from banning tobacco. If there is a will there will be a way. Another outrageous idea I read in the article called “Regulatory Approaches to Ending Cigarette-Caused Death and Diseases in the United States” by Richard Daynard was the fact that the government would give tobacco companies a limit to how many cigarettes that can produce each year. By doing this it stated by the end of 2015 “it would become unlawful for a cigarette manufacturer to produce more than two-thirds of the brands baseline.”. So not only would the indoor-outdoor smoking bans be in effect the government would now be regulating the amount of cigarettes produced in the United States. Therefore I feel as strongly as others about banning smoking rights. I am a non-smoker myself and as long as you aren’t purposefully blowing smoke in my face, feel free to do as you please. While you can, that is.

The nation endorses freedom of choice, which includes smoking. In America, freedom is everything; freedom is notorious a symbol for the nation. Therefore, this right can only be seen as something that cannot be taken away. “Quite simply, a just government does not have the authority to ban smoking on private property or to tell smokers to quit or to punish them if they do not” (In Defense of Smokers). The government does not poses the authority to impose their will upon a citizen; “Another reason to oppose the current campaign against smokers is because it violates the legitimate rights of smokers” (In Defense of Smokers). In addition to endorsing freedom, the nation should work to preserve it, because without upholding the rights that our

If you’ve watched television it’s likely you know about the no cigarette law campaign, over the years there has been less smokers and nevertheless a campaign came along trying to make an anti-cigarette law. As a critical thinker, i decided there should NOT be a anti-cigarette law but, I do agree with the message to rid of smoking.