Smoking is one of the major health issues of the 21st century, and laws to restrict where people can smoke are an increasingly common feature of life in western democracies.
If you have to write an essay against banning smoking in public places, whether because it's an assigned topic or because you feel strongly on the issue, there are a few points that will help you out.
Some countries have banned smoking in all government buildings; others have added any building that the public have access to, and even open-air spaces that are publicly owned.
Although the trend is in favor of smoking bans there are plenty arguments you can use to argue against them. But suppose that the smoker is a friend, a business associate, or a superior. I think that this is unacceptable as non-smokers are forced to inhale harmful smoke while on a night out.
On the condition that they are causing harm, the smokers are obliged to refrain from smoking, and this remains true even if those doing the harm are unaware of the harm they are causing. This is an offense to, or intrusion upon, the nonsmoker, rather than an obvious harm, so it is unlikely that we are going to get a straightforward application of the harm principle.
Although there are arguments on both sides, I strongly agree that a ban is the most appropriate course of action. On the other hand is it fair that non-smokers should have to inhale second hand smoke which can dame their health.
Background It is important that this distinction between activity and passivity not be confused with the more controversial distinction between doing something to another and letting something happen to another. Therefore, smoking should be banned in public places. Smoking is already a bad addiction for many people, but it is also bad for the people that do not smoke.
By putting forth a ban of smoking in public places the government promotes a healthier lifestyle for everybody and it protects every citizen from many diseases and health risks such as cancer and other deadly diseases. As a citizen I feel that my family and I should be able to have a choice whether we want to be around cigarette smoke or not.
The argument against a ban on smoking in public places is presented first. In others the reaction was different. The level of annoyance can be much greater than any smoker might realize since it is not an individual smoker, but a team of smokers with which the nonsmoker must contend; and as a team, smokers constitute a powerful collective source of annoyance.
Then a variety of arguments for smoking in public places presented. In this essay I will examine both sides of this controversial issue. Smoking should be banned in public because people are exposed to hazardous smoke in many places.
Click on order now to place an order for a custom paper.
Second hand smoke has been proven to be harmful to smokers and non-smokers. Is a bar a public space or the private property of its owner. They believe that they have the right to smoke wherever they choose while smokers feel that their rights have been violated and their health damaged.
On the condition that they are causing harm, the smokers are obliged to refrain from smoking, and this remains true even if those doing the harm are unaware of the harm they are causing.
If you would like to read the entire paper, click here to purchase a membership pass now. It can be a controversial subject, with pressure groups on both sides trying to influence the direction of lawmakers.
The lungs are used to take in oxygen from the air and help us make blood cells in the body. In addition, they believe a ban would possibly drive many bars and pubs out of business as smokers would not go there anymore.
Whether an annoyance can reach the level of moral status depends on just how annoyed one can get. Smoking not only harms the smoker, but also those who are nearby.
For example some US and Canadian states have introduced laws to ban people from smoking in their cars, and in the UK some campaigners want to limit the right to smoke in your own home.
If it is a friend, he may feel that the friendship will be strained if he insists on his right to be free from secondhand smoke. Use an editor to spell check essay.
Goodin Suppose there is a public room, say a bar, populated by smokers and nonsmokers, and individuals of both groups have the right to be present in the room.
The argument against a ban on smoking in public places is presented first. It is made clear that it is not the authors opinion by the topic sentence: " Opponents of such a ban argue against it for several reasons ".
The banning of smoking in public places would benefit everybody and should be imposed everywhere because it would reduce the risk of health problems to non-smokers, reduce the number of smokers all together, and reduce the amount of valuable money tax payers spend on smoking related expenses.
However, banning smoking in public places will give some justice to the non-smokers. Separate smoking sections should be introduced in workplaces.
The smokers can go to that section for a puff and at least leave the non-smokers free of pollution. Then a variety of arguments for smoking in public places presented. The underlying aim of this paper is to provide a moral guide to the formation of a public policy toward smoking behavior. Such a policy, paper will argue, is likely to have as its consequence the elimination of nonsmokers’ exposure to secondhand smoke.
Smoking In Public Places - The Smoking Ban Backlash Essay Words | 7 Pages Smoking Ban Backlash Walking down Boston’s Boylston Street at the late hours of the evening, the sidewalks are crowded with smokers taking their last hauls before entering the bars for a night of drinking.
In order to prepare an argumentative essay on smoking in public places, the writer must consider several factors: One of these factors is the laws and regulations that govern any country. The writer needs to read extensively relevant materials that explain what the law of the land is regarding smoking.For or against smoking in public places essay