Should Cigarette Smoking be banned?
How do you feel as a nonsmoker when you happen to pass beside a smoker on a cigarette and get the smoke? Well, you will agree that the act of smoking should be prohibited. Laws have been put in place to ban tobacco use in most states of the USA. These countries have their unique regulations regarding cigarette smoking and its allowance such as an increase in taxation on cigarettes, promotion of cessation, expansion of the smoke-free space in public among others. Public outcry is on the rise regarding due to the impacts of cigarette smoking that encompasses the health of the smoker and the public as well as rising costs of mitigating its effects felt by the public. Irrespective of such impacts, some states allow smoking of cigarettes in bars and clubs as well as setting smoking zones for the addicted smokers. However, the question that rings the mind? Do all these laws help in regulating cigarette smoking and its impacts to the public? Yes, for instance, there have been bans on cigarette smoking in flights and advertisement on televisions with reduced outlets for smoking to help the public. Cigarette smoking should be banned.
Cigarette smoking has led to increased health concerns even to the nonsmokers. Smoking affects the health of the smokers besides controlling the addict’s habits and expenditures. On the same note, the public health concern is on the rise due to cigarette smoking. It is supported by the evidence that has been released in the public domain by the surgeons on the impacts and the diseases related to smoking. The public continuously inhales the secondhand smoke which is dangerous. The banning of cigarette smoking is the best option even though it is against the smokers’ rights to do whatever is good for them. However, a right for a person to do any activity is provided so long as that right does not bring harm other people. Therefore, the nearby smokers’ rights are infringed since it puts them at risk without their consents hence making them contact diseases such as lung cancer, throat diseases, and emphysema and breathing problems among others. Furthermore, children are at greater risks due to increased exposure to secondhand smoke hence they are at higher risk of infant death syndrome, middle ear infection, asthma bronchitis, and pneumonia that make their health poor.
Secondly, the public is financially burdened due to cigarette smoking. The financial burden continues to rise with more than $ 193 billion spent on an annual basis in the USA alone. Enterprises with the USA are on continuously losing lots of money concerning reduced productivity due to sick employees who are directly or indirectly affected by the cigarette smoke. Furthermore, costs are incurred due to cigarette smoking problems which include healthcare costs, and counseling costs, reduced wages due to increased youth exposure to cigarette smoking among others.
Even though smoking cigarette is still at high levels, it is unethical in the public domain to claim a right to a tobacco cigarette, and yet the actions cause disturbance to the public. Besides, lots of lives have been lost due to diseases such as lung cancers, bronchitis, and pneumonia among others while these kinds of infections are preventable. Thus, banning of the habit of cigarette smoking is the best ways to minimize such problems.
In conclusion, cigarette smoking should be prohibited since it is the primary cause of preventable diseases as well as premature deaths all over the world. The cigarette smokers suffer the impacts of such acts due to their choice. However, the cost incurred by the public as well as the nonsmokers who suffer due to secondhand smoke should not be the case as these activities can be done away.
Smoking Ban Persuasive Essay
985 WordsApr 1st, 20084 Pages
BACKGROUND INFORMATION For several decades, smoking remains one of the most common and most unhealthy of human habits. Smoking, specifically in public, had generally been regarded as a personal choice that bystanders had little control over. Now for the first time, the act of public smoking is becoming regulated, even restricted in many cities worldwide. The city of Columbia has recently implemented a ban on smoking in efforts to reduce the negative effects of smoking on employees and customers of restaurants and bars. The issue is that smoke directly affects everyone in the vicinity of a public place, restaurant or bar. Based on the evidence that a ban on smoking prevents secondhand smoke, deters the unhealthy habit of smoking, does…show more content…
A study in El Paso, Texas, proved that a smoking ban did not affect business. By comparing revenues from restaurants, bars, and retail establishments twelve years before and one year after the smoking ban was passed, the results of the study showed that there was no statistical difference in revenue (Huang). Another similar study conducted in New York City, New York, showed that businesses were not only unaffected by the smoking ban but eventually thrived, as tax receipts increased eight point seven percent. In addition, employment in restaurants and bars increased by 10,600 jobs in New York since the smoking ban began ("The State"). Thus, the claim of business in Columbia negatively affected from the smoking ban is inaccurate. Many critics claim that a smoking ban harms business in Columbia, because a few restaurants and bars have closed since the ban was in enacted. However they have failed to supply viable evidence that a smoking ban negatively affects business, forgetting to count for others factors such as bad food, location, and poor business decisions by owners. Besides not affecting business, a smoking ban deters smoking in general. With the ban in place it allows those who want to quit smoking the incentive to quit. A contributing factor to this is inhaling tobacco actually increases the number of receptors in the brain that crave nicotine. So, if there is no smoke being inhaled people