Preview

Smoking Ban in Public Places

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1222 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Smoking Ban in Public Places
All people have a fundamental right to breathe clean air—with no exceptions. In the past few decades America has made great strides in protecting the individual’s right to a smoke-free environment but there is still work to do. No one should have to choose between their health and a good job; law that prohibit smoking in public places help create a healthy environment for all people. The common good must be protected over the perceived individual’s right to smoke because clean air but clean air is a basic human right secured by the United States Constitution’s promise to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, and promote the general welfare. Local, state, and even the federal government need to impose smoking bans in public places. It’s an American right to breathe clean air.
Anti-smoking laws help establish justice by creating healthy workplaces and public environments for all. When the government or independent institutions work to establish justice, it is securing equality to all. Clean breathable air allows every individual the same opportunity to live healthy lives without giving favor to a specific group who may choose to smoke. Nearly 440,000 American die each year from smoking-related illness and about 38,000 of those are directly related to secondhand-smoke. According to a recent study at the Center for Disease Control, smokers and nonsmokers alike benefit from workplace and public area smoking bans. Dr. Lynn R. Goldman of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who chaired the panel that produced report said, “It is clear the smoking bans work. [They] reduce the risk of heart attacks in nonsmokers as well as smokers” (LA Times). It is the government responsibility to ensure nobody is subject to toxic air in the public or at the workplace. Clean air provides all persons with an equal opportunity to succeed. When the government creates, enacts and enforces smoke-free laws, it is working to establish justice in our country. Local,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Many people debate over where government intervention is appropriate and personal freedom should begin. One of these highly discussed topics is banning smoking in public places. The ban of smoking in public has many advantages and reasons. Smoking in public puts innocent adults, teenagers, and children at risk of serious health problems. If smoking is banned in public, this may help lower rates of potential smokers and current smokers as well. The welfare of the nonsmoker and the smoker are both affected by allowing smoking in public. By banning smoking in these areas, the population would be positively influenced.…

    • 943 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Smokers Get a Raw Deal

    • 553 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Even since people began smoking, smokers and nonsmokers have been able to live with one another using common courtesy and common sense. Not anymore. Today, smokers must put up with virtually unenforceable laws regulating when and where they can smoke—laws intended as much to discourage smoking itself as to protect the rights of nonsmokers. Much worse, supposedly responsible organizations devoted to the “public interest” are encouraging the harassment of those who smoke.…

    • 553 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Being exposed to second hand smoke from burning tobacco products causes disease and early death among nonsmokers. Public policies help to make and enforce new laws that are beneficial to the public, for instance, smoke free laws that prohibit smoking in public places like bars and restaurants to help improve the health of workers and the general population, there for saving lives by sparing non-smokers from breathing in the second-hand smoke. Smoking does not just harm the smoker it also harms people nearby, who breathe in the smoke. Tobacco smoke can cause cancer, strokes and heart disease and public policies makes us aware, cigarette smokers and tobacco companies in check.…

    • 641 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The name of this article is “Proposal for nationwide smoking ban gives some a bad taste.” This article was written by Associated Press, but was adapted by the Newsela Staff. It was published on November 20, 2015. Since this was a group effort there are no specific author credentials. The author’s intended audience is people who believe smoking in public places shouldn’t be allowed.…

    • 215 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Vice President of Philip Morris Companies Inc. Stanley S. Scott, in his essay “Smokers Get A Raw Deal”, addresses the growing discrimination against smokers. Scott states that recently people who smoke are forced to, “… put up with virtually unenforceable laws regulating when and where they can smoke…” instead of, “… using common courtesy and common sense.” which is unjust and unfair (Scott 3). He supports his claim by giving several examples of times when smokers have been attacked in public by random citizens, like in New York, in a Seattle drugstore, on a Los Angeles bus, and in the Bronx (Scott 5). He also uses an allusion when he mentions the segregation of African Americans (Scott 1). Scott finally creates a false dilemma when he says, “ the basic freedoms of at least 50 million American smokers are at risk today,” he prompts American citizens to ask themselves if discrimination of any sort is okay? Scott adopts a professional and passionate tone for his audience, the readers of the New York Times, non-smokers, and in essence the nation.…

    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Harms of Smoking and Health Benefits of Quitting - National Cancer Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/cessation…

    • 145 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the following viewpoint, Stephen Kaufman, who is a staff writer for the Washington File, published by the U.S. Department of State, states that the American public has changed its attitude regarding to smoking (Kaufman 1). Kaufman supports his statement that public attitudes are changing in a meeting with John F. Banzhaf, an lawyer who teaches public interest law at George Washington Law School in Washington, D.C. (Kaufman 1). Smoking bans are generally seen as an effort to protect the health of nonsmokers (Kaufman 1). Eleven states have banned smoking in indoor public places such as malls, restaurants and bars (Kaufman 1).…

    • 3940 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Smoke-Free Air Act,trades off liberty for security. Smokers will now be unable to smoke were they wish. Essentially, property rights to restrict consumer choice hae been infridged upon and have been shifted from smokers to non- smokers, in the interests of health and security. Smokers are openly against this act because it violates their…

    • 481 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Smoking Bans in Casinos

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages

    It is troubling to hear the public discussion on this vital public health issue reduced to a debate over the rights of smokers and nonsmokers, when I know this legislation is the difference between life and death for many. Countless studies have scientifically confirmed the devastating health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke. The evidence is so overwhelming, it begs reality that anyone could make an argument against an indoor smoking ban with a clear conscience (80).…

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Are smoking bans against smoking in public places really that necessary to protect non-smokers from the harmful chemicals of second hand smoke? The answer from a smoker is: Yes! However, another question that should be asked is: Do smoking bans infringe upon the rights of your freedom to smoke if you choose to smoke in places other than your personal residence or automobile? The answer from a smoker is: Yes! Therefore, the real question that must be asked is: Are smoking bans becoming too restrictive? Comment by SVSU: Quite a few questions here. Why not simply state these things?…

    • 941 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This article highlights the advocacy of large companies to reduce tobacco use for the improved health of their employees and to eliminate exposure to unwanted secondhand smoke. Environmental tobacco smoke is just as detrimental to non-smokers as it contains harmful substances that expose those who don’t smoke to the health risks of cigarette smoking and increases their risk of developing a smoking-related illness. Promotion of a smoke-free work environment not only benefits the employees, but also the public whom they serve by reducing exposure to environmental smoke that causes heart disease, lung cancer, respiratory illness, and has other adverse effects to vulnerable populations including pregnant women and children. These companies are increasing community awareness to the detrimental affects of smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke by paving the way to eliminate exposure to environmental smoke and reduce tobacco use in an effort to reduce illness and health care costs related to smoking, and increase productivity of employees and the overall health of their communities. The public benefit to this is that many states are enacting smoke-free laws in the workplaces and public buildings to reduce the number of deaths and disability caused from involuntary exposure to tobacco…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tobacco and Its Effects

    • 1453 Words
    • 42 Pages

    Introduction Once considered a glamorous and sophisticated habit, smoking is now viewed with increasing disapproval. The recognition of the health risks of smoking is a primary cause of this change in public opinion, and it has led to significant changes in the behavior of many Americans. Over the past four decades, the proportion of cigarette smoking among adults in the United States has dropped 30%. Private businesses and all levels of government have jumped on the nonsmoking bandwagon. Almost every state now restricts smoking bands for indoor workplaces. The U.S. Surgeon General has proposed that America become a completely smoke-free society.…

    • 1453 Words
    • 42 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In the United States, for every eight smokers that die from tobacco use, one non-smoker dies as well (Clarke 2010). In recent years, a growing awareness of the deadly effects of smoking has led to the enactment of tobacco control policies throughout the industrialized world. Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death worldwide (Jones 2009) estimating that one billion people are expected to die during the 21st century as a result of tobacco-related disease”(Cole 2012). Secondhand smoke (SHS) contains hundreds of toxic chemicals and is linked to cause cancer, coronary heart disease, and respiratory problems. Innocent individuals of all ages should not be impacted by the poor choices of smokers around them. After all, there is no risk-free level of exposure to someone else’s drifting smoke. The debate on smoking bans has rose significantly in the pass two decades. There are two types of bans, partial and full smoking bans. Full bans make it illegal to smoke in any public area. Although smoking is seen to be a personal right to many Americans, smoking should be banned in all public places. As a result the ban will overall reduce health risks, change smoking behavior in workplaces and improve the economy.…

    • 2011 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many smokers will argue about their rights to smoke, while conversely this stance can cause infringement on the nonsmoker’s rights to breathe clean air free from the effects of second-hand exposure. Smoking laws should be revisited and stricter laws should be enforced to protect the health of the innocent. To what degree can a recreational activity be allowed to cause harm to unwilling participants? Stricter law in this area is the only measure to protect those who are subjected to another individual’s addiction or habit.…

    • 609 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In recent months, dozens of localities and a number of states have enacted sweeping smoking bans. The bans generally forbid smoking in “public” places, which are defined to include not only publicly owned facilities but also privately owned properties to which members of the public are invited (e.g., bars, restaurants, hotel lobbies, etc.). Proponents of the bans insist that they are necessary to reduce risks to public health and welfare and to protect the rights of nonsmoking patrons and employees of the regulated establishments. Specifically, ban advocates have offered three justifications for government-imposed bans: First, they claim that such bans are warranted because indoor smoking involves a “negative externality,” the market failure normally invoked to justify regulation of the ambient environment. In addition, advocates assert that smoking bans shape individual preferences against smoking, thereby reducing the number of smokers in society. Finally, proponents argue that smoking bans are justified, regardless of whether any market failure is present, simply because of the health risks associated with inhalation of environmental tobacco smoke (ets), commonly referred to as “secondhand smoke.” This article contends that government-imposed smoking bans cannot be justified as responses to market failure, as means of shaping preferences, or on risk-reduction grounds. Smoking bans reduce public welfare by preventing an optimal allocation of nonsmoking and smoking-permitted public places. A laissez-faire approach better accommodates heterogeneous preferences regarding public smoking.…

    • 5926 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Good Essays