The Pros And Cons Of Smoking In Public Places

At the beginning I thought that is a great proposal which can help to reduce tobacco use and damage associated with smoking, and promotes healthy life style. Then I raise the question why authority bans smoking in public housing, but not in private apartment? Every attempt at prohibition and social control make the poor to suffer more and more. Banning smoking in public housing can limit poor’s life choices personal space and privacy. People living in the public houses have a right to enjoy their free time at their home. Also, elderly and disable public housing tenants who are addicted to smoking will have a difficult time of getting outside to smoke. Additionally for the most people smoking help to reduce stress and give some time out from

It can stain your teeth and gums, resulting in yellow teeth and bad breath which can affect your social life. It can cause sexual problems for men by reducing the amount of sperm they can produce. It has also been proven that 'smoking causes aging of skin' (Buzzle 36), because the skin is deprived of blood. Pregnant women should not even try to smoke cigarettes during their 9 months because of the harm it could do to the baby and themselves. The affects of smoking on women and the child during pregnancy are as follows: high possibility of miscarriage, pregnancy complications and possible death of the baby. These are just a small variety of facts on smoking and how dangerous it can be, yet millions of people across the U.S choose to smoke anyways, without realizing the harm it can doing to their bodies. For secondhand smokers, the same principle applies. Don’t smoke and you will live a healthy lifestyle. I have personally seen many of my friends who hang around with their other friends that happen to smoke. When I confront them about the harm it is doing to them, they tend to ignore the advice I offer, so I let them be, hoping that one day they will realize that smoking harms more people than just the smoker themselves. It causes harm to the people around them and to the environment, increasing the pollution in our world. Former U.S vice-president Al Gore, believes that smoking is

Every year, there are over 400,000 smoking-related deaths in the United States. A large percentage of these are due to lung cancer, whose leading cause is smoking. However, not all deaths are smokers themselves. Anyone in the vicinity can fall victim to second hand smoke. These people, through no action of their own, can have their lives threatened.

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

Smoking has been a controversial issue in public culture as well in media. When someone smokes, the person lights the tobacco and all the chemicals so they burn. The person breathes in the smoke so it goes through the airways and into the lungs. The nicotine in the smoke get passed into the blood. Throughout the 20 century smoking has garnered too much attention on tv and in people life. Moreover 100 million people died from tobacco related diseases in the 20th century without action taken. Tobacco kills up 50% of its users, even though 1 billion people could die this century from tobacco related diseases. One research conducted by CNN in 1994 showed that 40% of people are in favor for smoking. Yet another research by Anna Heart showed that 70% population are for knowing public smoking. All thing consider smoking has a lot of disadvantages more than advantages and represent death. Personally I’m against smoking for many reasons health, addiction.

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

When people smoke in public, their cigarettes give off harmful fumes that are harmful to anyone else around them. This is labeled as secondhand smoke. Lung disease, heart disease, bronchitis and asthma are some of the most common damaging

Nearly 3,000 nonsmoker die each year due to the outcome of having them considered as second hand smokers. An individual has the right of choice of being a smoker or not. Yet, nonsmokers’ rights are being violated when they’re in public and are literally forced to be “passive smokers”.

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

The advocates of the smoking bans point at the societal and individual damage caused by smoking. The justification in their eyes for such ban is that smoking harms individuals’ health and passive inhaling the smoke causes serious health issues. They also emphasize a vital role of a government to protect its citizens’ health and well-being. Apart from that, the supporters mention large public and private spending from tax-payers money related to health issues caused by secondhand smoke. Despite of possible benefits, the regulation remains controversial in the US with only 8 states having such bans. The opponents of smoking bans in private cars with minors refuse the governmental control over behavior in a private property. They are against the violation of property rights and also against control of autonomy. According to the opponents, citizens should be responsible for their own health and should have freedom to make their own heath decision for themselves and their children. They refuse the paternalistic role of the state, however do not fully deny the paternalistic roles

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

Furthermore, numerous states across America have banned smoking in major public places, such as in restaurants, bars, work places, banks, parks and just about any area where there are a lot of people congregating. This is an effort to preserve public health. Even some advocates of smoking bans agree that, “restricting cigarette smoking in public places has clear health benefits and no adverse economic consequences” ("Smoking Bans and the Tobacco Industry"). The world can function pretty well without smoking, in fact studies showed that since the inception of smoking bans, there is a higher likelihood that a smoker may quit and that there is significant reduction in exposure to secondhand smoke. It not only benefits, non-smokers but it also helps smokers to kick the habit. Providing a flurry of reasons why it is so important to strive for the illegality of that which has done so much harm. With it completely illegal, Americans from state to state would undergo a drastic change—but for the better, our life spans would subsequently increase and we would be one step closer to getting rid of the diseases which have plagued us, as humans so long.

Passive smoking is not necessarily a voluntary action. Constant exposure to second hand smoke can be attainable from homes, car, workplaces, and several varieties of public places. Personal actions of active smokers affect others who wish to decline in the inhalation of tobaccos wide quantity of 7,000 chemicals (“Secondhand Smoke"). In theory, to partake in an action that has an unsure timeline of death is ones own choice; however, making this decision for others by subjecting them to harm is unlawful. Smoking tobacco should not be allowed in public places, for these reasons you put others lives at stake.

Smoking and secondhand smoke are major problems that many people are badly affected by. When getting exercise and playing outside turns into something harmful that is when it is time to draw the line. I think people should not be allowed to smoke in public areas or in the vicinity of others because it is harmful to their health, it is harmful to the smoker’s health, and it creates a negative image about the smoker.

Smoking in public does indeed affect non-smokers in a negative way and studies prove this to be true, from the year 1990 till now about 19% of non-smokers exposed to secondary tobacco smoke also like the actual smokers of tobacco have a greater chance of getting lung cancer due to the tobacco entering and damaging their lungs, than those who are not exposed to the tobacco smoke. With that being said, the implication of smoking in public is bad for the people around the person