Should Smoking Be Allowed At Parks And Other Public Venues?

Smoking is an activity that has been around for many years for people to use and adapt into their lifestyle. It is a tool that many people use to help reduce the stresses of life and put them in a comfortable position that enables them to cope with the hectic lifestyle they are living. However, smoking has been scientifically proven to cause many types of cancer, the most common being lung cancer resulting in numerous deaths across the United States. According to BBC, "Smoking is a greater cause of death and disability than any single disease" (BBC, 2). Evidently, the benefits and drawbacks of smoking have been debated for many years, and only recently have some countries have placed a ban in public places such as Britain and the United

Smoking should be banned in Australia. Smoking is a disgusting habit that many Australians use every single day. The impact of banning smoking altogether in Australia would be a massive favour for everyone. Australian adults who smoke everyday and Australian Secondary Students from the age 12 to 17 smoke over 22 billion cigarettes per year and effecting other people to start smoking because they think it’s a cool way to get attention. But I think that banning it in almost all public places is a great idea but I raise this question to you, “Why not just Ban Smoking?” This question was raised in a ‘The Age’ article in 2013. The main point of the article is, smoking is banned in pretty much all public places and there are often neighbours writing to the council complaining about a smoking neighbour, so why not just ban it altogether?

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

Public smoking has been an issue for people who do not take part in the smoking epidemic for as long as smoking has been around. What people need to understand is that individuals who do not engage in the activity of ruining their lungs are being forced into the act of involuntary smoking rather they like it or not, and that is unacceptable.

Smoke does affect not only the smoker but also the individuals who are inhaling the smoke. Many people have understood what it causes or seen the effects of smoking, and yet they still do it. While many places still allow smoking areas, they should be banned because it still dangers the health of individuals who are non-smokers by hurting their lungs and most importantly their

New Jersey has to continue the prohibition of smoking in public access restaurants, bars, parks, and clubs. Nonsmokers can consume second hand smoke which is dangerous. The risk of smoking in a building can result in a fire and lead to traumatic events. The smell of smoke can deter people from coming in. Smoking bans are very important to preserve intact, so we don’t have these risks to society and businesses. For a long time people have had different views about smoking in public places. Smokers feel it is their right to smoke where and when they want, and nonsmokers feel like their rights are getting violated.

Every day in America families’ gathers together to celebrate special events or the accomplishments of one of its members. Many times these special moments can be ruined or brought to an abrupt end due to others nearby smoking. Public spaces should be safe and accessible to all members of society to use without the inconvenience of someone else’s smoking ruining their outing or causing health issues to flare up such as, asthma. People do have the right to choose to smoke if they desire, but nonsmokers have the right to go out to public places with their family and not be exposed to harmful secondhand smoke. Studies have shown that secondhand smoke is just as harmful as smoking and leads to a higher occurrence of cancer and heart disease. Furthermore,

The smokers who choose to bring harm to themselves have the right to damage their health if they choose. The alternatives non smokers have are to not be in presence of smokers. Where public places advertise no smoking, and still supple designated areas for smokers they should still take in account that the smoke still ventilates the surrounding areas. My advice is not to engage where there is no smoking, and smoking areas. The fumes from the non smoking area cannot be contained completely. If you don’t want to stop passive don’t attend these public places. The article on line indicated if there was enough non-smokers going to these public facilities there would be no need to post no smoking () .

In 1865, although Washington Duke may have created a product that will probably never go out of business, it still has a big effect on our people today and could be a bigger problem for generations to come. Cigarettes have been smoked for a long time now and it hasn't slowed down, even when smokers know what can happen. However I don't think they really understand how much it affects their body and the stress they put on there lungs. Smoking kills and shouldn't be allowed in the USA because of the death rate it has behind it.

This source is published by the University of Illinois; it is the frequently asked question page. It was published this summer, therefore, I have recent information to back up my points. This source will be useful for my research question because it addresses topics about how campuses are continuing to eliminate smokers on campus, one way they eliminate it is by enforcing policies, however, if the polies are not followed there is a fined. In addition, it talks about why campuses are going smoke free, so this will be a great source to refer to when I address why I believe George Mason University should be a smoke free campus. Mostly importantly, the question if secondhand smoking is much of a problem is addressed. Many believe it is not a problem, therefore, when I talk about how it is a major problem I will refer to this site to get information to prove my point.

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

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

Should cigarette smoking be banned for everyone in the United States? Why? Why not? Should those who chose their time smoking to relieve stress, personal enjoyment, or simply just because, have to lose their right to what makes them happy? Smoking tobacco products has been around for decades and in many different forms. Should personal rights be pushed aside to please those around us that disagree with the so called “disgusting habit”? In the paper The Washington Times an article caught my interest called”D.C. seeks bans on smoking in national parks” written by Steven Dinan. In this article he stated that “Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton wrote Park Service Regional Director Steve Whitesell saying she’s heard from constituents who fear

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 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