More handpicked essays just for you.
Effect on the ban on smoking in public places
Effect on the ban on smoking in public places
Reasons against the smoking ban
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Smoking ban in public places has been a hot issue these last months not only in Malta but also in various countries who are discussing the effects a ban would have. There have been several debates on smoking ban. Even though the harmful effects of smoking, both active and passive, are well known and undeniable smoking is far from being in decline; it is spreading among young people in particular quickly.
Most controversial debate is going on public smoking ban. The reason is simple, smoking ban affects directly all people rapidly and we can see its effects in a short-term period. There have been a lot of arguments brought up both in favour and against a public smoking ban. Some of the arguments in favour are the following. Smoking ban is one of the controversial ways for reducing smoking and recognizing non-smokers’ right to health protection. The health risks of smoking are clear. Passive smoking does carry risks. Many leading medical and scientific organizations recognize second hand smoke as a cause of a range of life-threatening conditions. The health situation could be drastically improved if one of the risk factors - tobacco - was eliminated. People have a right to protect themselves from smoke inhalation. People shouldn’t have to inhale the ill-effects of other people’s smoking. The creation of smoke-free public places also improves air quality.
Those opposing a smoking ban say that freedom of choice would be affected by such legislation. Some people against a ban say that smoking bans damage business. A smoking ban could lead to a significant fall in earnings from bars, restaurants and casinos. Another argument is that the smoker has a basic human right to smoke in public places, and the ban is a limitation for smokers’ rights. Businesses, smokers, publicans, tobacco industries, stars, and some of the non-smokers oppose public smoking ban. Smokers light a cigarette because they need to smoke, not because they want it, because nicotine is physically addictive. Therefore, some smokers think that the public smoking ban is oppressiveness. They see the ban as a treatment to smokers as second-class citizens. Smokers agree that the smoking ban benefits the world, but cannot support the ban, because effects of nicotine obstruct them.
Smoking has become a big epidemic in the United States. As a tobacco free person, I want to be able to breathe clean air anywhere I go. As we know, smoking can harm every organ in the body (Center for Disease Control and Prevention). I believe that smoking should be banned in public places such as drinking establishments, hospitals, buses, train stations, and restaurants. Not only does smoking affect the individual smoker, it also causes a number of health problems, increases death rate, and it affects not only the lives, but the health of other people around them. On the contrary, smoking should be banned in public areas for these reasons.
It is clear that smoking hurts people’s health and poisons the people around them. A ban on smoking in public would provide the environment nonsmoker, decrease cancer or others health problem, and it also will reduce a number of young people influence in society.
Banning vaping products from public would cause many questions on why cigarettes aren’t banned in public. In addition, vapers would think cigarette companies paid the government to ban vaping outdoors, or banning products made after 2007 because they are losing money and business from vape products. This would cause people to start smoking cigarettes again, which would cause more people to die annually, more people will be at the risk of having cancer, and kids would still be exposed to
Smoking cigarettes is a detrimental practice not only to the smoker, but also to everyone around the smoker. According to an article from the American Lung Association, “Health Effects” (n.d.), “Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., causing over 438,000 deaths per year”. The umbrella term for tobacco use includes the use of cigarettes, cigars, e-cigs and chewing tobacco. While tobacco causes adverse health consequences, it also has been a unifying factor for change in public health. While the tobacco industries targets specific populations, public health specifically targets smokers, possible smokers, and the public to influence cessation, policies and education.
They argue that it is their body and they are have the right to choose what they want to do. Since smoking cigarette don’t cause people to get high or drunk that they can hurt other people, smokers believe that smoking is safe and risk free. For those smokers who knows the risk in smoking, they argue that smoking reduce the chances of being obese. I understand that people have the right of their free will but getting lung cancer is not the best way to avoid obesity. By banning cigarettes, the government is not taking away smoker’s free will but they are making necessary action to their population. Most of the smokers will quit if they could and most of the smokers start at a young age without knowing the effects of smoking. Banning cigarettes reduce the death rate of lung cancer and heart disease since they are mostly caused by smoking. The government will save over 100 billion in the next 10 years that used from the smokers medical bills. This money can be put to education, transportation and other expenses. There is many ways that smokers can benefit from the government banning smoking cigarettes. A pack of cigarette cost $20 dollars and regular smoker’s smokes at least a pack a day. That amount of money can be saved and be used for more
Some disagree with these motives by claiming that smoking bans have not actually saved any lives or prevented people from taking up the habit. Contrarily, global research now actually shows that smoking tobacco kills people both directly and indirectly; indirectly, of course, referring to second-hand smoke. Another argument against these smoking bans is that a number of people feel as though they infringe upon their individual rights. These people believe they have a right to smoke tobacco anywhere they choose, not unlike many people who also believe they have a right to avoid forced exposure to deadly second-hand smoke. One might wonder which of the two takes precedence.
This year alone cigarettes will kill over 420,000 Americans, and many more will suffer from cancers, and circulatory and respiratory system diseases. These horrible illnesses were known to come from cigarettes for years. Recently the Food and Drug Administration declared nicotine, the main chemical in cigarettes, addictive. This explains why smokers continue to use cigarettes even though smokers are aware of the constantly warned about health dangers in cigarettes. Some researchers have also found out that smoking by pregnant women causes the deaths of over 5,000 babies and 115,000 miscarriages. The only way to get rid of the suffering and loss of life by cigarettes is to ban them. . For years cigarettes have been known to cause cancer, emphysema, and other horrible illnesses. The deaths of over 420,000 of Americans this year will be do to cigarettes. With all the other causes of deaths, alcohol, illegal drugs, AIDS, suicide, transportation accidents, fires, and guns, cigarettes still count for more deaths than those do combined. We can’t stand and watch people die because they smoke cigarettes. Thousands of smokers try to rid themselves of cigarettes but can't because of additive nicotine. Nicotine was recently declared addictive by the Food and Drug Administration, which explains why many smokers continue to smoke despite the health warnings on cigarette smoking. Nicotine makes it almost impossible for cigarette smokers to quit smoking because of its addictive nature, and with the cigarette manufacturers putting just enough nicotine in the so they cant be outlawed. The benefits of outlawing cigarettes greatly outnumber the disadvantages, for example, many scientists believe a link between smoking and a shortened life span exists between the two, a ban on cigarettes could increase life spans. Many studies suggest that billions of dollars now spent on smoking related. Smoking related illnesses could be reduced by outlawing cigarettes, families could save money by not purchasing cigarettes, and accidental fires costing millions of dollars caused by cigarettes would stop. Although a complete ban on cigarettes currently remains almost impossible, several organizations recently helped create a bill that could control cigarettes much in the same way the government now controls drugs. One such organization, the Food and Drug Administration, headed by David Kesslar drafted a major part, which would require manufacturers to disclose the 700 chemical additives in cigarettes, reduce the level of harmful chemicals, require cigarette companies to warn of the addictive nicotine, restrict tobacco advertising and promotion, and control the level of nicotine cigarettes contain.
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.
In my opinion, I think smoking in public isn’t good for non-smokers because if they breathe the smoke of smokers their health will be unhealthy a...
Many restaurant and bar owners think that the ban will decrease business, but a counter-argument to this is that only twenty percent of the city's population are smokers, and when the smoking ban is in place, the other eighty percent will go out to bars and restaurants, dramatically increasing business. There are many different opposing arguments to banning smoking, and the debate will probably never end. Smoking should be banned in public places because, although some may argue that it infringes on their freedom, smoking is replete with harmful substances. People should be able to frequent bars and restaurants without the fear of experiencing an asthma attack or developing lung disease. Everyone deserves the freedom to live and breathe without restriction.
One of the newest trends in America is an alternative to smoking called “Vaping”. There are many advocacy groups that are currently petitioning and fighting legislature that would make this new trend illegal. Many claims have been made stating that vaping is more dangerous than smoking traditional big brand tobacco. There are also arguments that there have not been enough studies to prove that vaping is less harmful than conventional smoking methods, which is not the case however. Vaping has been around since the early 1960s and has proven to be healthier than its tobacco cousin, the cigarette. Currently the United States Government is trying to pass a law that would ban the production, distribution, and sale of many vape products. This ban would make it so the big brand tobacco companies would once again be the number one source for nicotine. I strongly believe that vaping is a safe alternative method to smoking that will reduce many medical risks and diseases associated
Although it is beneficial for the economy for the production of tobacco products it is extremely risky to use the product. According to researchers second-hand smoke is terrible for everyone in the world who walk by someone who is exhaling. In the article by Robert Proctor “Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition” he states that cigarettes are the “most deadl...
Limiting smoking in public areas is necessary to prevent exposing others to smoke, however it is not worth restricting the freedom of people who want to smoke. Those that smoke should be free to enjoy the same rights as the rest of the human beings around them. Opponents of this topic would say it is difficult to avoid being exposed to smokers that are in doorways or in a main public area. They are under the impression that even if smokers smoke in a designated area that it still affects them and causes them harm. Their opinion is that it is unfair to expose anyone to this danger and should be banned no matter if it violates the smoker’s freedom to choose.
Smoking Should be Banned in All Public Places. Every year thousands of people die because of having cancer or other tobacco related illnesses due to smoking. Smoking is seen everywhere. from our own television screens to even the world wide web; the internet.
The smoker creates arbetens occasions for them multinational tobacco companies and pharmaceutical companies. They are the only argument to suggest that smoking is good (it creates jobs ) .