Should tobacco be outlawed?
Solutions to social issues can be developed with the use of creative thinking and criticism. In this paper the question, “Should tobacco be outlawed?” Is to be considered and requires the application of logic. “” The author will show how the application of the principles of liberty can logically be applied to answer challenging questions with social issues.
Should tobacco be outlawed?
Tobacco smoke can be offensive to a majority of restaurant customers; does that mean smoking should be outlawed in all eating establishments? The principle of liberty would say the smoker has the right to smoke but conversely the non smoker customer has the right to dine and not be overwhelmed by tobacco smoke. Instead of outlawing smoking in all restaurants allow the free market to settle the debate. The spots bar owner who desires to attract a large number of customers can offer a nonsmoking dining area and another section for smokers. The second dining area room would be separated and could include a strong ventilation system pulling the tobacco smoke out. Next door the owner of another sports bar can choose to make it a nonsmoking establishment. Each business owner accepts the effects of their choice realizing either way some potential customers won’t feel welcomed.
Three parties are hurt when the government decrees that no eating establishment can allow smoking. First, it negatively affects the right of the tobacco users who wants to smoke at their favorite spot. Next it takes away the freedom of business owners to choose how they will conduct business and how they will meet the interest of their customers. Third, it affects nonsmokers as occurred in Las Vegas Nevada where smoking was outlawed but it failed to have the desired effect of halting smoking. Owners of eating establishments were forced to stop providing a separate smoking area; in practice the business owners didn’t chase out customers who smoked in the place of business. It was a challenge to enforce and it
Should tobacco be outlawed?
Tobacco smoke can be offensive to a majority of restaurant customers; does that mean smoking should be outlawed in all eating establishments? The principle of liberty would say the smoker has the right to smoke but conversely the non smoker customer has the right to dine and not be overwhelmed by tobacco smoke. Instead of outlawing smoking in all restaurants allow the free market to settle the debate. The spots bar owner who desires to attract a large number of customers can offer a nonsmoking dining area and another section for smokers. The second dining area room would be separated and could include a strong ventilation system pulling the tobacco smoke out. Next door the owner of another sports bar can choose to make it a nonsmoking establishment. Each business owner accepts the effects of their choice realizing either way some potential customers won’t feel welcomed.
Three parties are hurt when the government decrees that no eating establishment can allow smoking. First, it negatively affects the right of the tobacco users who wants to smoke at their favorite spot. Next it takes away the freedom of business owners to choose how they will conduct business and how they will meet the interest of their customers. Third, it affects nonsmokers as occurred in Las Vegas Nevada where smoking was outlawed but it failed to have the desired effect of halting smoking. Owners of eating establishments were forced to stop providing a separate smoking area; in practice the business owners didn’t chase out customers who smoked in the place of business. It was a challenge to enforce and it