Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

New York's Ban on Smoking in Bars and Restaurants

Good Essays
839 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
New York's Ban on Smoking in Bars and Restaurants
For this assignment, I will discuss why I agree with New York 's ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.

On 26 March, 2003, the New York State legislators approved a state-wide smoking ban in all bars and restaurants. Governor Pataki signed it immediately; a similar bill was defeated one year earlier. The ban took effect July 24, 2003. Many of us believe in our rights or freedoms as citizen, what many forget is sometimes our right or freedoms will impact the rights or freedoms of others. I have countless friends who smoke; I do not. When Texas started to embrace the no smoking policy pioneered by New York, I was pleased. We all have the right or freedom to smoke, but not when it puts others at risk. In a 2007 Gallup poll the poll found that 54% of Americans favored a complete ban inside of restaurants, 34% favored a ban in all hotel rooms, and 29% favored a ban inside of bars. Second hand smoking can be more dangerous than smoking the cigarettes themselves. According to the American Cancer Society Secondhand smoke, also known as environmental tobacco smoke, is a mixture of 2 forms of smoke that come from burning tobacco: the smoke that comes from the end of the burning cigarette, and smoke that is exhaled by a smoker. Some statistics released by the American Cancer Society state: • An estimated 46,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers • About 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults • 150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations annually • Increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma • More than 750,000 middle ear infections in children

The belief that smoking is a right is to say the least, wrong; it is a freedom that is given to all adults, and like all freedoms, it can be taken away when abused. If we look at the cost associated with smoking, the benefits of making it illegal far exceed the benefits for keeping it legal. When someone chooses to fire up a Paul Mall, what they are really doing is potentially shortening their lives or the lives of those around them. What many smokers fail to understand, if 30 out of 100 people are smoking within the Bar or Restaurant at any given time, the workers are inhaling smoke for their entire work shift. I don’t know how many cigarettes that equates to, but I’m sure it is many times than the number of cigarettes each of them smoke independently, increasing their (the non-smoker) risk of lung decease or related health illnesses.

It is hard for me to think that smokers do not understand the difference between a right and a freedom; I think they just don’t care about the non-smoker. The reason I choose not to smoke is because I grew up with a father who smoked, as a teen (like most if not all) I tried smoking, my dad never had to tell us kids not to touch his cigarettes, he smoked unfiltered cigarettes. I think it was the smell more than anything that bothered me; rather I was with my dad, or my grandparents, they were smoking. My grandparents came from Poland when they were in their late 20s and nearly everyone in Europe smoke, not sure why. But even my dad understands why secondhand smoke is bad, he does not smoke in the house (any more), nor will he smoke inside his vehicle if someone else in riding with him.

Growing up in the Military, I think more Soldiers dip chewing tobacco than smoke cigarettes. I believe the only victim in this is the person doing the dipping. Those who choose to smoke do so knowing what the outcome is, when they ignore the facts surrounding the health issues, then the government needs to step in and protect those choose not to or who have to work in the environment created by the smoker. No one can say they are being discriminated against because they choose to smoke, no one is born a smoker, it is a choice and a bad one at that.

The New York legislature was able to take the first step in ensuring a better work environment for the employees, in reading about the increased risk of health decease based of second hand smoke, they needed to protect their constituents. The number of carcinogens given off of tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 chemical compounds; more than 60 of these are known or suspected of causing cancer. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), secondhand smoke meets the standard to be classified as a potential cancer-causing agent.

References: http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/TobaccoCancer/secondhand-smoke http://www.gallup.com
The American Cancer Society

References: http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/TobaccoCancer/secondhand-smoke http://www.gallup.com The American Cancer Society

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Best Essays

    Candy, D., Davies, G. and Ross, E. (2001) Clinical paediatrics and child health. Edinburgh: WB Saunders.…

    • 4906 Words
    • 20 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

    Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in the United States, and doing it in public is even worse because smokers not only harm themselves, but also those around them. I remember how my great uncle would always smoke in his house regardless of his surroundings. When his daughter visited him for a vacation, she brought her three year old daughter with her. The baby was healthy before coming to her grandpa's house, but in less than two weeks, she had developed ear infections and started to cough. When they went to the doctors' office to find out how she had gotten it, the doctor linked it back to the second hand smoke that she was breathing in. When my great uncle found out about it, he finally started to care about where he was smoking and who he was with, and decided that he would smoke in a secluded place where no one but him may be affected. Like my great uncle in the past, many smokers think they could do whatever they want because it is their body, but to me, their right ends where my health begins. I believe that smoking in public places should be banned at a federal level because even the smallest wisp of smoke can do a lot of damage to the people around them and the environment.…

    • 1044 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Smoking has been a public health threat for many years, so the main policy objective of the Smoke-free Air Act is the protection and security of all individuals in New York City. The 2002 legislation was passed to ensure that all workers have a safe, smoke free workplace environment, and that all nonsmokers can breathe smoke-free air in public places. The law is an important part of New York City’s effort to eliminate tobacco use as it is one of the most significant public health threats.The Act is excepted to reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses which account nearly one of every five deaths, each year in the United States (U.S. Department, 2004).…

    • 481 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    References: Brunswick, M. (2007, September 30). New smoking ban. Retrieved March 17, 2008, from http://www.startribune.com/local/11606746.html…

    • 845 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Smoking Bans in Casinos

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Many smokers argue that a smoking ban infringes on their rights to enjoy a cigarette. But really, it’s the non-smoker whose rights are violated when they are forced to gamble or work in a cloud of secondhand smoke. “Research from Stanford and Tufts universities shows secondhand smoke is a danger to millions of casino patrons and thousands of workers” (Myers). People have a right to enjoy a casino without being in danger. Baskies sums it up well:…

    • 2139 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    “As far as bars go, I am down with them to stay smoking because it’s an isolated environment that you can choose to go to or not,” said Jailynn Suswal, an administrative assistant at The John Buck Co. “I don’t understand the whole bar population being required to be non-smoking.” “Now that smoking isn’t allowed within 15 feet of buildings, walking downtown sucks,” said Suswal, the administrative assistant. “The sidewalks are consumed with pockets of smokers, and as a pedestrian, I am constantly walking through clouds of smoke.” If this policy of the 15 feet rule were in affect here, it would create more second-hand smoke on our city’s…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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 not affect business in similar cities, the city of Columbia should retain its ban on smoking in restaurants and bars.…

    • 975 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    There are many reasons why smoking in public should be banned. The three main reasons to ban smoking in public are because of the health risks, offensive smell, and environmental risks that are the cause of cigarette smoke. Secondhand smoke is smoke from a cigarette, cigar, or pipe that is involuntarily inhaled, especially by non-smokers (The American Heritage Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, n.d.). In many public places smoking is allowed and is not fair because non-smokers are exposed to chemicals that can harm them internally and externally. Children for example, are chronic victims of secondhand smoke. The inhalation of cigarette smoke that can harm people nearby is called passive smoking (Pros Vs. Cons, 2007, p.1). Also cigarette smoke can make non-smokers agitated by the smell of cigarette smoke, which is not very pleasant. Also the environment is tainted by the hazardous chemicals, which can cause permanent scars on the earth. For the most part, smoking in public should be banned to help decreases its negative affects.…

    • 1467 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Good Essays

    Secondhandsmoke

    • 1307 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Exposing non-smokers to second-hand smoke goes against their rights. Everyone makes a decision on whether or not they will smoke, so why must smokers choose to smoke around non smokers? Exposure to second-hand smoke also exacerbates existing respiratory conditions such as asthma. Studies have shown that second-hand smoke increases the frequency of episodes and severity of symptoms in asthmatic children, and it is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children who had not had previous symptoms. Second-hand smoke is the mixture of “side stream” smoke emitted by the burning end of a cigar, cigarette, or pip and “mainstream” smoke breathed out by a smoker. It contains more than 4,000 chemical compounds, like tar and nicotine that make up at least 60 identified carcinogenic substances. While smokers are entitled to smoke if he or she wishes, consideration must be given to the rights of nonsmokers who are exposed to that tobacco smoke. Second-hand smoke constitutes a grave threat to the fundamental right of all persons to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, as well as to other related human rights and fundamental freedoms (Praetorius). Comprehensive smoke free air laws have been effective in reducing exposure to secondhand smoke, increasing the number of people who quit and discourage kids from starting to smoke (Egendorf 77). Anti-smoking activists give…

    • 1307 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This article is about how laws that ban indoor smoking or smoking in public places are decreasing cases of second hand smoking and possibly saving lives. It explains how putting these laws in place can decrease the risk of heart disease in some people. It states that now every work place even bars ban smoking. It shows in a study where they banned smoking in restaurants for 18 months after they had allowed it for 18 months and saw a per-capita drop of 33% or 1/3. It does show the other side that these laws restrict the freedom of smokers in response that restrictions are needed to protect the rights of non-smokers to remain tobacco…

    • 1189 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Smoking is a privilege not a right. So people who smoke should smoke in the comfort of their home because it is a privilege. Smoking should be put in the same category as sex. People would not have sex in public places. They would do that in the privacy of their home, not walking down a street, or in a restaurant.…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Smoking Ban

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages

    What do you think of when you see someone smoking in a public area? Do you think they are really thinking about the people around them? Do you think they know that they are harming the people around them? I don’t think they do, but we know they are. Smoking in public facilities should be banned because it influences children, it causes litter and odor, and it causes second-hand smoking.…

    • 521 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Fresh Air

    • 1581 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma…

    • 1581 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays