Smoking Should Be Banned in Public

In: English and Literature

Submitted By them
Words 765
Pages 4
Intro:
History of Smoking debate in Australia
Discussion of first article * Lack of emotional reasons usually associated with smoking * Use of enforceability the main reason presented most logically * Punch line offering a different argument
Discussion of cartoon * Humour * Both sides
Conclusion

Federal law bans smoking in all Australian Commonwealth government buildings, public transport, airports and international and domestic flights. All states are also subject to the plain packaging laws and health warnings of cigarettes and the cost of cigarettes has markedly increased to persuade people not to smoke. There are also varying laws across the states relating to smoking. For Victoria, smoking is banned in all restaurants and bars and enclosed spaces but has been allowed in public spaces. This issue arose in the media when a councillor on the Melbourne City Council sought to have smoking banned in all public spaces.
The Age editorial (February 1 2013) ‘Smoke-free should not mean an outright ban’sets out its argument against banning smoking in public spaces is a dispassionate and logical way. What is most apparent about the editorial in its refusal to outline what smoking might do if inhaled by passers-by suggesting that the emotional and medical arguments about smoking are ‘done and dusted’ and most people accept that smoking is bad for health. Instead, the article puts forward the argument that smoking in public spaces in ‘unenforceable’. This gives its argument substance and causes the reader to ponder how such a law could be enforceable, given that any space which is not private is public.Where could people smoke this ‘legal’ substance. Further, There might even be some sympathy evoked by describing smokers as a ‘dwindling band’ and ‘outcasts’ addicted to their ‘damaging indulgence’. Giving the past of smoking in the first paragraph…...

Similar Documents

Why Smoking Should Be Banned Permanently

... Topic: Smoking should be banned permanently Name: Course: Instructor’s Name: Date: 30th May, 2012 Outline * Title Page * Introduction * Thesis statement * Body * Reasons as to why smoking should be banned permanently. * Conclusion * References Introduction. Smoking develops slowly and becomes a hard to drop habit when one becomes addicted. Smoking has a lot of disadvantages and impacts negatively on the smokers’ finances. Thesis statement: This paper seeks to define the reasons as to why I believe smoking should be banned permanently Reasons why belief smoking should be banned permanently. In my view, smoking should be prohibited entirely as the dangers associated with the habit are numerous and the disadvantages by far surpass perceived benefits of smoking. Firstly, smoking has adverse effects on health. Smoking can cause cancer of the lung, bronchitis and diseases of the heart. This leads to high mortality rates in a country (Bearman, 2011). Studies have also found that smoking contribute to impotence among smokers. Secondly, smoking is a hugely expensive habit. The cost to an individual smoker is highly significant. For instance, a person smoking two packets a day smokes over 700 packets in one year. Assuming that a pack costs $6, the individual would spend up to $4,200 per year. There are also indirect expenses incurred due to lost productivity and in health care. Thirdly, the habit of smoking is highly addictive. Nicotine contained......

Words: 424 - Pages: 2

Guns Should Not Be Banned in the Us

...for this tragedy makes sense like blaming airplanes for the 9-11 attacks. The problem lies with the perpetrator, not the tool used to commit the crime. It is an illusion that further gun control will protect the public since no law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Guns should never be banned in the United States, because the possession of guns ultimately helps improve public safety. Embodied in the Second Amendment to the Constitution is the truth that self-governing individuals should bear the responsibility for defending themselves. The Amendment states, a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Cramer and Joseph examined the history of pistols in early America that tells us the Framers' original intent in protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms with no apparent limitations concerning handguns. Many pro gun control supporters adhere to the belief that the availability of guns make violent crime happen and, more importantly, that criminal violence in general can be reduced by limiting access to firearms. This is a testable empirical proposition. Research shows that disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence. For example, in Washington, D.C. and New York City, severe gun control laws had been applied, yet Washington D.C. is the "murder capital of the US" and New York City ranks......

Words: 699 - Pages: 3

Should Smoking Be Banned

...using violence is one of the only ways to get their point across. (Geraldine Baum, 2001) Extremist groups try to recruit as many people as they can. They especially target the young. The use of the World Wide Web is extremely important as technology has arisen all over the world. Extremist use the internet as a major source of recruitment in several ways, for instance, through identifying potential sympathizers in discussion forums. Would-be supporters also use the internet as a means to make themselves known to extremist groups as potential members. Extremist groups have found video-sharing websites, such as YouTube and MySpace Video, an effective means to promote propaganda and hateful material that might not otherwise be seen by the public. Internet users who search video-sharing sites will often find anti-Semitic and racist videos when looking for information completely unrelated to the videos due to misleading tags and titles that extremists attach to the videos when uploading them to the sites, (Chris hale, 2012) Extremist group are also using the internet to spread hatred of other groups worldwide. By doing so, it makes it even easier for them to promote the hate and then hide the evidence if their website or video is caught. When the English Defense League sprang to life two years ago, it had fewer than 50 members. Now its members are over 10,000 people. It uses Facebook to promote their hate filled causes, (Paisley Dodds, 2011). Extremist groups are a great......

Words: 1096 - Pages: 5

Smoking in Public Places and Why It Should Be Banned.

...For many years people have been smoking and other people have been complaining about it. It’s been a continuous war against why or why not smoking should be allowed in public places. On one hand, you can go outside your home and say have a drink with some friends at a bar, on the other hand you’re going to a restaurant to celebrate your son or daughters graduation and you have to breathe in the smoke from across the room. Smoking in public places subjects people who don’t care to smoke to second hand smoking, which is said to have worse effects then firsthand smoking. The effects of smoking are not a good thing any way you look at it. It causes lung cancer, it causes you to have hard time breathing, and it could even cause you to lose your voice. This is why I believe that smoking should be banned from public places. I think smoking in bars is fine. Let there be a designated public place outside the home to smoke, but keep it contained. Don’t make people who don’t want to breathe in the pollution feel like they can’t get away from it. Smoking needs to be banned from public places. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The price of cigarettes is twice as expensive then a gallon of gasoline these days. There are people that smoke more than one pack a day. At an average of $8.00 a pack, people could easily waste half a paycheck a month just on......

Words: 278 - Pages: 2

Should Smoking in Public Areas Be Allowed?

...Should smoking in public areas be allowed? 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 second hand smoke, and some policies that are against public smoking. First I’ll start with the effects of smoking. To make cigarettes, tobacco leaves are dried and shredded, and then they are rolled into tubes. The smoke from tobacco in these cigarettes contains more than 4,000 gases and chemicals many of them are poisonous. Some of theses substances include ammonia, which is used in cleaning fluids, carbon monoxide, the deadly gas in car exhaust fumes, and tar. When cigarette smoke is inhaled, these substances are injected into the body. A smoker breathes smoke directly through the mouth in the bronchial tubes, which lead to the lungs. Tiny particles stick to the walls of the tubes, causing irritation. Then the smoke passes into the lungs...

Words: 1520 - Pages: 7

Smoking in Public Places

...Should smoking be banned in public area? Nicotine is the addictive drug in tobacco smoke that causes smokers to continue to smoke. Addictive smokers need enough nicotine over a day to “feel normal” to satisfy cravings or control their mood. Along with nicotine, smokers inhale about 7000 other chemicals in cigarette smoke which are chemically active and trigger profound and damaging changes in the body. (Better Health Channel). According to the 1192 report of the journal of the American Medical Association, about 40000 people die from passive smoking. Because passive smoking would be more deadly to the public especially children, smoking should be banned in public places. Smoking in public areas leads to secondhand smoking which causes lung cancer in adults and also causes cancer in children who have not previously exhibited symptoms, sudden infant death syndrome and increased risk of lower respiratory track infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis in children under 6 years old. ) Secondhand smoke is a mixture of the smoke given off by the burning end of a cigarette, or cigar, and the smoke exhaled by smokers. Secondhand smoke is also called environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and exposure to secondhand smoke is sometimes called involuntary or passive smoking. Secondhand smoke contains more than 4,000 substances, several of which are known to cause cancer in humans or animals. EPA has concluded that exposure to secondhand smoke can cause lungs cancer in adults who do......

Words: 1751 - Pages: 8

Should Smoking in Public Areas Be Allowed?

...Should smoking in public areas be allowed? 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 second hand smoke, and some policies that are against public smoking. First I’ll start with the effects of smoking. To make cigarettes, tobacco leaves are dried and shredded, and then they are rolled into tubes. The smoke from tobacco in these cigarettes contains more than 4,000 gases and chemicals many of them are poisonous. Some of theses substances include ammonia, which is used in cleaning fluids, carbon monoxide, the deadly gas in car exhaust fumes, and tar. When cigarette smoke is inhaled, these substances are injected into the body. A smoker breathes smoke directly through the mouth in the bronchial tubes, which lead to the lungs. Tiny particles stick to the walls of the tubes, causing irritation. Then the smoke passes into the......

Words: 1520 - Pages: 7

In China, Should Smoking in Public Places Be Prohibited?

...In China, should smoking in public places be prohibited? In recent decades, the number of the smoker in China has increased significantly, and the issue of whether smoking in public places should be banned or not has been widely argued. The term ‘smoking in public places’ refers to the phenomenon of having a cigarette in the area where many people gather. This essay will argue that smoking in public places should be prohibited. The reasons for this include the health issues caused by smoking, negative effect on public environment and the related safety problem. It is argued that the main negative aspect of smoking in public places is the extremely harmful influence on health. For the smokers, their lungs and throats can be damaged seriously. Moreover, the incidence of cancers, especially lung cancer and laryngeal cancer, to the large extent is increasing because of smoking. Additionally, smoking in public area will also affect other people’s health. The harmful chemicals contained in the second hand smoke may cause a series of disease, such as heart disease and respiratory disease. Undoubtedly, banning smoking will make a large difference on these related health problems. Another reason to prohibit smoking in public places is its negative impact on the environment. Firstly, plants can be poisoned by the harmful chemicals released by smokers. In addition, the smoke also contains a large amount of particles, which adds greatly to the air pollution. Thirdly, during the......

Words: 432 - Pages: 2

Cigarette Smoking Should Not Be Banned

...10/21/2014 Cigarette Smoking Should Not Be Banned Every time one of those anti-smoking commercials come on tv, it’s always questionable about how people can still continue to smoke after seeing something so graphic. Especially the one where the woman is in the bathroom, and her face starts to basically peel off. So gross! Why would someone still want to smoke, knowing that it completely destroys their body? Maybe, because people know that those commercials are just scare tactics, and that someone’s face is not literally going to peel off from smoking. Smoking, just like drinking, or even driving, is risky, but it’s also a choice. They would never ban driving, even after all of the deaths caused every day. They definitely wouldn’t try banning alcohol again, even after all the deaths it still causes. So, why should they ban smoking? Smoking is a personal choice(Jeffery, 2). It doesn’t alter the state of mind like drugs or alcohol(contrary to what some people may say). If anything, the only person being harmed, is the person inhaling the smoke. Cigarettes don’t only contain toxins. They contain nicotine, which isn’t harmful, but is very addictive, just like caffeine, and there are millions of people out there who are definitely more addicted to their morning coffee or soda than there are people who smoke cigarettes. Smoking can be harmful, but usually in only excessive amounts, just like junk 2 food, or soda, or anything else in the world. Should they start banning......

Words: 578 - Pages: 3

Public Smoking Bans

... Public Smoking Bans Maria Robbins Ivy Tech Community College ENGL 111-JOF-Research Paper Cooper-3830 November 4, 2013 Abstract The smoking ban has caused smokers to adjust their smoking behavior. Public places have banned the smokers from smoking inside their businesses. The smoking ban has caused smokers to make choices. This has decreased their smoking and some have been able to quit completely. Still there are people who have smoked their whole life and have chosen not to stop smoking. Smokers do not have the freedom to smoke in public places that they once had. The public smoking ban has been the center of debates, because smokers feel it is their right to smoke when and where they want. The non-smokers want to be able to go out and enjoy a smoke-free environment. Public Smoking Bans Public smoking has been a right the smoker has had for years. Only in recent years has the public smoking ban law been put in affect. It took many years of debating over the fact if smoking in public should be ban. Smoking is an individual choice, and it is an activity that is absolutely legal. However, some states have passed laws to prohibit the activity in public and in workplaces. This legislation has been the focus of many debates in statehouses and city-county councils throughout the country. The smoking bans forces a smoker to not be welcome to smoke freely in public. For years the non-smoker had to deal with going out to public......

Words: 3946 - Pages: 16

Cigarettes Should Be Banned or Not

...Running head: CIGARETTES SHOULD BE BANNED OR NOT Should cigarettes be made illegal? Submitted by: Student ID: Tutor’s Name: * Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3 1.1 Background of the study 3 1.2 Cigarettes themselves should not be illegal. 4 2. Conclusion 4 References 6 1. Introduction If we think for a moment why people in our society smokes? Despite of the fact that it has extreme and awful effects and there are no particular reasons that it must be legal for anybody. Heart disease, cancers and lung disease are only few of the hundreds of harmful impacts of smoking. What amazes me is why anybody would like to smoke if they truly know how it annihilates their body, also why society wants to keep it legal in any case. In this article, I would say smoking must be made illegal. Various people argue that smoking must not be banned; perhaps the reason is that it’s their personal freedom since smoking is exceptionally addictive and individuals get to be dependent to it. So we will find out in this essay that what makes them saying this. However, if what just leaves smoking is joy, shouldn't the government set health over delight? 2.1 Background of the study Around 400,000 deaths every year in U.S. alone are due to smoking ailments. Why might somebody even get a cigarette without focusing the effects it can cause him or her? Banning of cigarettes must be made legal as cigarettes are an addicting and effective drug which is......

Words: 728 - Pages: 3

No Smoking in Public

...Large International Consumer Goods Organization Introduction Smoking in public should not be allowed at all. Smoking on itself is a vice that should be discouraged among the population. It should be discouraged owing to its adverse effect which putt time the people who smoke down. At times smokers die as a result of the toxicity of the substance smoked. Therefore, I oppose with strongest terms possible that smoking should be allowed in public. Smoking entails inhaling smoke from drugs like tobacco, bhang among others which are toxic and are classified as hard drugs which are a cause of very dangerous effects in the body and in the environment. The reasons people should not smoke in public are explained below. Smoking in public results in air pollution which exposes living organisms to its danger. It is evident that tobacco that is commonly smoked in cigarettes contains four thousand dangerous chemical which when breathed out by the smoker and released to the environment. The particles could find themselves settles on the leaves of the plants. As a result they particles could block the pores meant for photosynthesis or poison the plant. The plant could also absorb the particles and when fed on by the primary producers, the animals could get poisoned. It is also worth noting that the micro-organisms in the air also get intoxicated and this leads to interference with the ecological balance. In addition to that smoke in public greatly affects the pseudo-smokers. Pseudo smokers......

Words: 616 - Pages: 3

Cigarettes Should Be Banned F

...Cigarettes should be banned from this topic. Medical studies have shown that smoking not only leads to health problems for the smoker, but also for people close by. There are approximately 600 ingredients in cigarettes. When burned, they create more than 7,000 chemicals. At least 69 of these chemicals are known to cause cancer, and many are poisonous. Tobacco smoke consists of many harmful chemical, that was responsible for more than 100 million deaths worldwide in the 20th Century. The World Health Organization has estimated that, if current trends continue, tobacco could cause a billion deaths in the 21st Century. So based on these studies, I strongly agree that cigarettes should be banned. First of all, it has been proven that tobacco consists of carcinogenic compounds which cause serious harm to a person’s health, not only the smoker. So anyone around them included the smoker could develop cancers of the lungs, mouth and throat, and other sites in the body. It is simply not fair to impose this upon another person. It is also the case that people’s health is more important than businesses. In any case, pubs and restaurants could adapt to a ban by, for example, allowing smoking areas. Besides, we all complain about the high medical costs and taxes yet we do not see that children and asthmatics often need medical care more than they should because of smoking around them. It is also expensive for the smoker as it is a costly habit which affects the family’s...

Words: 351 - Pages: 2

Should Smoking Be Banned

...I am under pressure”. They smoke everytime, everywhere and can not give up smoking. Without holding a cigarette, they will feel uncomfortable like loosing a best friend. They think that smoking is a good leisure activity and somehow can also be good for their health. However, other people think that smoking should be banned due to its negative effects. Opponents of banning smoking claim that smoking undoubtedly helps them to relax, for some people, it even improve their concentration. However, a large number of research studies show that smoking increases people’s likelihood of developing certain diseases (compared with people who have never smoked) and causes earlier death. Thus, if people never began smoking, the prevalence of those smoking-attributable diseases would decline, and life expectancy would increase. The medical research also finds that ceasing to smoke improves health. The risks of many smoking-attributable diseases decline after quitting, although a smoker does not have the same health as someone who has never smoked. Opponents also maintain that smoking is the smokers choice, and they will pay for their health problems. However, such an argument ignores the fact that there are many people around them when they are smoking. Studies show that secondhand smoke—the inhalation of smoke by someone other than the smoker, sometimes referred to as environmental tobacco smoke or passive smoking—has also been linked to a number of illnesses. Among newborn and......

Words: 435 - Pages: 2

Do You Agree or Disagree That the Government Should Ban Smoking in Public Places?

...Do you agree or disagree that the government should ban smoking in public places? Since Los Angeles prohibited smoking in bars, clubs and restaurants in 2003 some European countries decided to follow the same idea three years later. It has been an attractive initiative from the American government, which helped “a global trend” (BBC 1). In 2007 new tougher restrictions appeared. The New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg based on studies that showed that even smoking outside, a significant harmful effect can be felt by non-smoker people. Banning smoking in public places is a real benefit for all non-smoker people. In fact, Government chose to prevent passive smokers from hypothetical diseases. First of all, we will discuss about the main effects of cigarettes on smokers and non-smoker’s health. Then we will focus on the impact on the environment. Finally we will emphasize the reaction of non-smoker about this new law. Margaret Davidson published an article in “The American Legion” entitled “Smoke Free or Freedom to Smoke” and explains, “Smokers will, on average live 13 to 14 fewer years than nonsmokers”. She also states that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention “recognize cigarette smoking as the greatest preventable cause of death.” In fact, smokers, on average, live 13 to 14 fewer years than non-smokers, this first explanation shows that smoking is really noxious and has a real impact on our health. Smoking harms nearly every organ of the body, causes many......

Words: 733 - Pages: 3