Ban eliminated smoking in most public places.
The idea is to protect non-smokers from second hand smoke.
Smokers view this as a violation of their Constitutional rights.
The question is whose rights take precedence.
Controversy
The mayor of Dallas supports the ban.
Restaurants feel the ban will hurt business.
Councilwoman says the ban does not go far enough.
Restaurants try to get enforcement of the ban blocked.
Smokers group tries to get ban's wording changed by using a petition.
Health Effects of Second Hand Smoke
Negative upper respiratory effects have been proven.
Asthma can be aggravated in children.
Links to heart disease and cancer have not been proven.
Exposure to second hand smoke can result in hospitalization for extremely sensitive individuals.
D. Conclusion
It's impossible to justify allowing people to smoke in public if it will cause harm or discomfort to even one person.
Based on this information, the ban is just.
THESIS STATEMENT
This paper takes the position that the smoking ban is just, and that the rights of non-smokers to not inhale smoke is more important than the rights of smokers to smoke in public.
References
All of the references I provided you with are from online sources. The bibliography of the paper includes the web addresses for those sources. Therefore, I have provided you with the sources, since I have provided you with the links to those sources.
The Dallas Smoking Ban: A Good Idea
On January 22, 2003, the city of Dallas, Texas put an indoor smoking ban into effect. This ban prohibits smoking in most restaurants, bars, and clubs. The ban also includes public places such as schools, libraries, hospitals, and public transit systems. The idea behind the ban was to protect non-smokers from the detrimental effects of second hand smoke. However, as can be imagined, smokers have not taken this ban quietly. In fact, the Dallas smoking ban has generated a great deal of controversy. At issue with smokers is what they see as an unconstitutional infringement on their rights. Non-smokers, on the other hand, see the ban as beneficial for their health and the health of their children and families. The question in this debate then becomes one of which right is more important and takes precedence -- the right of smokers to smoke, or the right of non-smokers to not inhale cigarette smoke. This paper takes the position that the smoking ban is just, and that the rights of non-smokers to not inhale smoke is more important than the rights of smokers to smoke in public.
The Dallas city council approved the controversial smoking ban on a ten to three vote. The smoking ban, while affecting most public areas, still allows smoking in tobacco shops and pool halls, as long as these establishments also have a designated non-smoking area (Boie). Most Dallas area restaurants are opposed to the smoking ban, claiming that such a ban would be detrimental to their businesses. However, the mayor of Dallas, Laura Miller, has made it clear that she dreams of a smoke-free world, and that she hopes Dallas is a model city on that path. The mayor feels that the restrictions being imposed by the ban are not enough, and that second hand smoke will still be permitted to infiltrate the lungs of unsuspecting citizens (McFadden). The ordinance exempts outdoor patio areas and freestanding bars (that are not connected to a restaurant and derive seventy-five percent or more of their revenue from alcohol sales). The mayor, and other councilpersons who agree with her, had hoped that even these areas would have been included in the smoking ban.
In addition to the Dallas area restaurants, there are others who do not share the mayor's vision of a smoke free world. One group, the Dallas Democracy Project, has been petitioning voters to amend the ban (Savona). In order to move forward with action resulting from their petition, the group needs to get at least forty-seven thousand signatures. The group feels that it will have no trouble obtaining this many signatures for their cause. If the Dallas Democracy Project does get the requisite number of signatures, the city council could either consider amending the ban at that time, or else the issue would go to a public referendum. The group is not trying to overturn the smoking ban completely. What it wants is for the ban to be amended to allow ventilated smoking areas in the public places currently affected by the ban.
So, just how realistic is all of this talk of the dangers of second hand smoke? Is the Dallas smoking ban just, in light of the scientific evidence, or could it be that the smokers are right and that the evidence against second hand smoke is not enough to justify taking away their personal liberties...
Smoking in Public Places Like many smokers, David W. Cowles started smoking in his teens. He wanted to look older, to appear more sophisticated, to fit in. Today, after 50 years of smoking, Cowles has finally stopped. Still, it seems he did not stop early enough. Shortly after, Cowles was diagnosed with lung cancer and emphysema. Surgeons removed the growth in his lungs but to this day, Cowles confesses to having
Smoking in a Public Area Smoking in public areas has emerged as one of the controversial topics in the recent past, especially in light of the impact of smoke on people's lives. The controversy associated with this issue has been centered on debates regarding the positive or negative effects of smoking. Some people have argued that they have the right to smoke whenever they feel the urge to do so while
Banning Smoking in Public Places In the present age of information explosion, almost everyone is aware of the harmful effects of smoking although the leading tobacco manufacturers have managed to confuse the issue through lobbying cleverly conducted media campaigns. That a large number of people still choose to smoke and inflict harm on their own bodies is partially attributable to the power of business corporations and the effectiveness of advertisement but
Banning Smoking in Public Places The debate on whether or not a nationwide federal smoking ban in all public places should be enacted has been going on for quite a while. In the U.S., most bans as well as restrictions in regard to cigarette smoking are a product of state laws. Although there are those who are convinced that public smoking should not be banned citing various reasons, numerous studies have
smoking bans in public bars and restaurants. There are three references used for this paper. Today many states have placed a ban on smoking in public bars and public restaurants. It is important to look at the health issues of smoking and determine why these bans should be enforced throughout the country. Health Issues Smoking is one of the leading causes of death in the United States. Many smokers argue they should
SMOKING History of smoking and the effects on health History of smoking The history of smoking and its effect on health Hard as it may believe to be today, the ill effects of smoking were not always well-known. The practice originated in the Americas with the Native Americans and the European colonists also indulged in the practice. Tobacco was a major cash crop in the South even before America formally became a nation. "Most
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now