Preview

The Smoking Ban

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1357 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Smoking Ban
The smoking ban

The smoking ban was introduced in Britain on July 1th 2007. When it came into effect it was prohibited to smoke cigarettes in most of public places and workplaces in England like bars, pubs, cafés and in busses and trains. This law has brought a big debate. In this assignment I will investigate the debate and create a discussion with a part of my own opinions.

1.
In text 1, Robin McKie claims how good it is for everyone that the smoking ban is getting introduced. According to science, the ban will make a major difference for the health of the British people “Improvements in people’s health will begin to filter through the population almost as soon as England’s smoking ban takes effect today”. Robin McKie also thinks the smoking ban will have a nice effect on the non-smokers which is getting exposed of the dangerous cigarettesmoke from pubs and small restaurants “Non-smokers who breathe in second-hand smoke currently face increased risks of about 25 per cent of getting lung cancer or heart disease. These rates should improve dramatically once their exposure to the smoke of others is curtailed”.

In text 2, the writer A. N. Wilson argues how the smoking ban is not only a break on the basic civil rights of freedom -“this attack on the basic liberty” but also how the ban can stop England having more famous artists. A. N. Wilson claims that almost every big writer of England was a smoker and there is a good chance that the cigarettesmoke was stimulating and inspiring them “is it mere chance that the lifetime of Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), who introduced tobacco-smoking to England, was also the time when great story of English literature really began?”.
In text 3, the journalist and writer Simon Jenkins shows us why the smoking ban, which the British parliament has introduced, was a mistake. Simon Jenkins argues that the decision is illiberal. It gives the individual citizen less liberty “they voted for a nationwide ban on smoking in

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Many people debate over where government intervention is appropriate and personal freedom should begin. One of these highly discussed topics is banning smoking in public places. The ban of smoking in public has many advantages and reasons. Smoking in public puts innocent adults, teenagers, and children at risk of serious health problems. If smoking is banned in public, this may help lower rates of potential smokers and current smokers as well. The welfare of the nonsmoker and the smoker are both affected by allowing smoking in public. By banning smoking in these areas, the population would be positively influenced.…

    • 943 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cigarette Smoking is a well-recognised cause of preventable ill health, premature death and a major health inequality in England. Smoking is the inhalation of the smoke of burning tobacco that is used mostly in three forms: pipes, cigarettes and cigars. (Smokefree NHS)…

    • 1001 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    Smoking Bans in Casinos

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages

    It is troubling to hear the public discussion on this vital public health issue reduced to a debate over the rights of smokers and nonsmokers, when I know this legislation is the difference between life and death for many. Countless studies have scientifically confirmed the devastating health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke. The evidence is so overwhelming, it begs reality that anyone could make an argument against an indoor smoking ban with a clear conscience (80).…

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The name of this article is “Proposal for nationwide smoking ban gives some a bad taste.” This article was written by Associated Press, but was adapted by the Newsela Staff. It was published on November 20, 2015. Since this was a group effort there are no specific author credentials. The author’s intended audience is people who believe smoking in public places shouldn’t be allowed.…

    • 215 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Are smoking bans against smoking in public places really that necessary to protect non-smokers from the harmful chemicals of second hand smoke? The answer from a smoker is: Yes! However, another question that should be asked is: Do smoking bans infringe upon the rights of your freedom to smoke if you choose to smoke in places other than your personal residence or automobile? The answer from a smoker is: Yes! Therefore, the real question that must be asked is: Are smoking bans becoming too restrictive? Comment by SVSU: Quite a few questions here. Why not simply state these things?…

    • 941 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The smoking ban ensures a healthier environment for employees and customers of restaurants and bars because it prevents secondhand smoke. According to the surgeon general, the contents of secondhand smoke contains dangerous carcinogens (cancer-causing agents), and holds that secondhand smoke exposure causes harmful diseases and premature death in children and adults (U.S.). Furthermore, adults exposed to secondhand smoke experience immediate effects on their cardiovascular system, causing an increased risk of heart disease from twenty-five to thirty percent and lung cancer increased from twenty to thirty percent ("Fact"). By requiring smokers to exit the building to smoke or use outdoor patios, establishments (under the smoking ban) remain smoke-free, creating a healthier atmosphere for employees and customers. Other methods venues have used to decrease secondhand smoke include separating smokers and nonsmokers, filtering the air and ventilating buildings. However, these are simply inadequate. Eliminating smoking indoors fully prevents exposure to secondhand smoke (U.S.).…

    • 975 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    | The United Kingdom is considering the appeal and revocation of a partial public smoking ban that exempts non-food serving bars (pubs). According to a public poll performed, 72% of the U.K. people preferred a full-scale public smoking ban. The U.K. Parliament will vote on changing the partial ban to a full ban with no exemptions (“New hope for a complete smoking ban in public places,” 2006).New hope for a complete smoking ban in public places. (2006). Lancet, 367(9506), 184. Retrieved July 24, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.…

    • 639 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ethical Issues

    • 574 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Explain: By making “the prohibition of smoking in public places a law”, the government can protect the health of community and the environment as well since it greatly reduces the risks of being affected for people who don’t smoke. Therefore, this practice is ethical.…

    • 574 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In recent months, dozens of localities and a number of states have enacted sweeping smoking bans. The bans generally forbid smoking in “public” places, which are defined to include not only publicly owned facilities but also privately owned properties to which members of the public are invited (e.g., bars, restaurants, hotel lobbies, etc.). Proponents of the bans insist that they are necessary to reduce risks to public health and welfare and to protect the rights of nonsmoking patrons and employees of the regulated establishments. Specifically, ban advocates have offered three justifications for government-imposed bans: First, they claim that such bans are warranted because indoor smoking involves a “negative externality,” the market failure normally invoked to justify regulation of the ambient environment. In addition, advocates assert that smoking bans shape individual preferences against smoking, thereby reducing the number of smokers in society. Finally, proponents argue that smoking bans are justified, regardless of whether any market failure is present, simply because of the health risks associated with inhalation of environmental tobacco smoke (ets), commonly referred to as “secondhand smoke.” This article contends that government-imposed smoking bans cannot be justified as responses to market failure, as means of shaping preferences, or on risk-reduction grounds. Smoking bans reduce public welfare by preventing an optimal allocation of nonsmoking and smoking-permitted public places. A laissez-faire approach better accommodates heterogeneous preferences regarding public smoking.…

    • 5926 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Explanation : The residue in the butts/filters contains toxic, soluble chemicals. These chemicals are deadly and add to the existing cocktail of environmental pollution. A lot of people just throw the filters on the ground after smoking their cigarettes, which makes the streets dirty and when it rains it will be carried to our harbors, beaches and rivers, which will have a harmful impact on our water quality.…

    • 1105 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tobacco has been a part of our nation’s history since the very beginning. Using tobacco has never been considered a healthy habit, but people today still smoke regardless of the harms done. In New York there have been bans for smoking in public places. This could be a start of a new trend to ban smoking everywhere in the US. However tobacco should not be banned because of individual rights, it’s effect on the economy, and the increased crime it could cause.…

    • 1404 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There has been some debate recently about whether smoking should be banned. Smoking has been considered a controversial issue recently due to many negative effects bring from it. Deborah Arnott, in her article “Legislation to ban tobacco will save thousands of lives” (Guardian, September 2009) suggest that smoking should be banned in all public places and in private as well. While David Hockney ‘s article, entitled “ The anti – smoking bigots should butt out “ (The Guardian Online, September 2008) takes the opposite view : smoking should not be banned . This essay will critically respond to both of these articles.…

    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Whether you smoke or not, how bad is it when as you walk into a restaurant to eat a nice meal, you 're greeted with a cloud of smoke in your face. This is the biggest issue with a smoking ban for Northern Kentucky. Supporters say the ban is needed for protection against the hazards of secondhand-smoke. Opponents call it unnecessary and say it infringes on the rights of business and property owners.…

    • 787 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One possible reason to support the ban is the health concerns and the possible negative effects of cigarette smoke on both the smoker and the non-smoker in the vicinity. Studies have shown that every year hundreds of thousands of people around the world die from diseases caused by smoking cigarettes. The rationale for smoking bans posits that smoking is optional, whereas breathing is not. Therefore, proponents say, smoking bans exist to protect breathing people from the effects of second-hand smoke, which include an increased risk of heart disease, cancer, emphysema, and other diseases. Laws implementing bans on indoor smoking have been introduced by many countries in various forms over the years, with some legislators citing scientific evidence that shows tobacco smoking is harmful to the smokers themselves and to those inhaling second-hand smoke.…

    • 633 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The inherent health risks of smoking are well known; those consenting adults who choose to puff away, regardless of the risks of cancer and other illnesses, should be left to their own devices WITH the understanding that society should not have to shoulder the burden of increased health care costs associated with smoking related illnesses. It's not up to the government to police individual choice when it is affecting the individual rather than society.…

    • 761 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays