|
Rocío Santos-Carrillo
Smoking Persuasive
September 12, 2002
In
this country the mentally ill are considered a danger to society
if their actions cause harm to others, even if they are not
aware of what they are doing. People who are a danger to
themselves or others are often institutionalized.
It has been proven that smoking harms both those who
smoke and those who are exposed to second hand smoke.
Obviously smokers are mentally ill in some way since they
insist on making themselves and everyone around them sick.
Is the answer to getting cleaner air for the general
public to institutionalize smokers?
It is a little extreme but there has to be a stronger
push towards getting this harmful habit out of our country. In
our modern society, smokers are everywhere. When was the last
time you went out and did not see a smoker in the street?
There are many arguments that people make about smoking
and why it should be banned but the most logical is that it is
not healthy.
It
has been proven that smoking causes all kinds of health problems
for smokers. Among adults cancer, heart disease, and stroke are
prevalent; the effects for infants and unborn children include
low birth weight and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), and
among younger people smoking causes reduced lung growth rate,
lower lung function levels, and higher phlegm production. Studies have also shown that “Teens who smoke are three
times more likely than nonsmokers to use alcohol, eight times
more likely to use marijuana, and 22 times more likely to use
cocaine. Smoking is associated with a host of other risky
behaviors, such as fighting and engaging in unprotected sex” (CDC
Web Site). This is
probably because of the risks involved in smoking, most teens
that would harm themselves by smoking would not think too hard
about harming themselves in other ways.
Obviously
smoking causes quite a problem in society.
Given all this information most people in their right
minds would not want to smoke but people tend to think that
since this information is based on statistics that there chance
of getting some type of disease is probably slim.
For example, teens tend to have an “it won’t happen
to me” attitude. But why take the risk? Granted, some people
like taking risks, they skydive, ride roller coasters, and
perform death-defying stunts.
I do not think, though, the risk takers want to die a
slow and painful death from cancer or die from a heart attack.
People who take risks want to be alive so they can take
more risks and continue having what they consider fun.
As a society we should try to keep smoking out of our
lives, not just to save the lives of smokers but for non-smokers
too.
The
EPA defines second hand smoke as smoke
given off by the burning end of a cigarette, pipe, or cigar and
the smoke exhaled from the lungs of smokers. Non-smokers
who inhale second hand smoke
are at risk of eye, nose, and throat irritation; headaches, lung
cancer, and, it is possible that the smoke may contribute to
heart disease. Specifically in children, smoke may lead to
increased risk of bronchitis, pneumonia, ear infections,
build-up of fluid in the middle ear, increased severity and
frequency of asthma episodes and decreased lung function. (EPA;
Health Risks). Not
only this, but smoke makes some people dizzy or light headed and
sick to their stomachs.
There
is no reason why an innocent group of people should have to
suffer through such serious side effects and uncomfortable
circumstances. Sure some may say they do not have to take it,
they can just leave or, why do they hang out around smokers, but
what about children? Kids
who have smoking parents do not have a choice but to breathe in
their parents smoke; it is not like they can just leave.
And though some people do have the option of leaving when
people begin to smoke, why should they have to?
This is a free country where people want to be able to do
whatever they want. People
go crazy when things are censored or when rights are taken away
and they get angry with the government when it does not do what
it is supposed to. So do non-smokers have the right to enjoy
clean air as much as smokers have the right to smoke?
Granted
there are other things that people do that are harmful, but with
many of these things there are stronger laws to protect innocent
people. Take drinking for example, for most people there’s no
harm in a drink or two, in fact it might even be helpful, so
there’s no reason to ban it all together. However, there are those that overdo it, for them there are
consequences. In
some places you can get arrested for WWI (walking while
intoxicated) and everywhere DWI (driving while intoxicated) is a
crime. People can
even get their cars taken away, so obviously drinking has much
more legislation behind it. So,
why, if it’s a proven fact that smoking makes people sick and
can kill, is smoking so tolerated?
Most
people want two things: to be wealthy and to live long.
There is no reason why they should be denied the
opportunity to become wealthy since that is why many people come
to the United States. Living long, however, is hard especially
when you have so many people smoking and polluting the air.
However, it would be exceedingly hard to ban smoking all
together and at the present moment the best we can hope for is
banning smoking in public places and in apartment buildings
where there is poor ventilation. Luckily there are plenty of people pushing for just that
in the government and media.
New York City Mayor Bloomberg is trying to pass a law
that would prevent smoking in public, as they have already done
in California, The Truth.com has hilarious, out of the ordinary,
attention-grabbing commercials on why people should not smoke.
Thanks to all the work the government and other people
have been putting into getting rid of smoking we are well on our
way to a cleaner and healthier style of living.
Rocío
Santos-Carrillo
Works
Cited
-
Buckley Jr., William F. “The Beleaguered
Smoker.” National Review Online, 30 August 2002. 14
September 2002. <http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley083002.asp>
2.
“Health Risks.” U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 29 May 2002. 14 September 2002. <http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/healthrisks.html>
-
“State-Specific Prevalence of Current
Cigarette Smoking Among Adults and the Proportion of Adults
Who Work in a Smoke-free Environment — United States,
1999” The National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention
and Health Promotion. 3 November 2000. 14 September 2002.
<http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/youth/stspta5.htm>
|
|
Sergio Dias
America
Up in Smoke
Tobacco is a God-given, natural plant that every being on
Earth should have the right to use for whatever reason.
Slowly, America has been trying to eliminate tobacco, but
one can see that smoking cigarettes is something that is part of
our culture and can not be destroyed.
All over the world, tobacco has been used as a pass-time,
status indicator, and a fashion item.
To paraphrase a common cliché, “There are two types of
people in this world,” there are those who smoke and those who
do not. Most
nonsmokers can not stand tobacco smoke and will do anything to
keep away from it. When
it comes to this issue, everyone has a specific argument to
support his or her own theory.
Every human has the right to use the Earth and all of its
fruits. When the
pilgrims first came to America, they came with the intention of
having freedom of speech, religion, and action.
Slowly, throughout history, our government, which is
supposed to protect and advise people, has been taking away
certain rights from the blind population.
Even so, we have the right to do anything we desire,
under the condition that it does not harm others directly.
For the people that can not stand the sight and smell of
cigarette smoke, moving to a smoke-free area is the basic
solution. A law
that pleases everyone is impossible.
Whenever a law passes to please one group, another is
suppressed. No one
ever said that an individual that does not like smoke has to sit
next to a person smoking. That,
of course, is the person’s choice.
The United States government is attempting to eliminate
smoking in America by slowly putting restrictions on it.
No one makes a big deal out of these little restrictions
such as not being able to purchase tobacco until the age of 18
or not being able to smoke in restaurants and airplanes and that
is how the laws keep slipping into our society.
Increasing the legal age to buy tobacco to 21 is
completely absurd. It
did not seem to work for eliminating underage drinking, so why
would it work now? What
about the 18-20 year olds that smoke now, what will come of
them? This issue of
increasing the buying age raises many questions. For places like gas stations and bars, which depend on
tobacco sales as a large portion of their profit, this is a very
disappointing and concerning affair.
Would anti-smokers be comfortable knowing that their
selfish yearning for banning tobacco is a major cause for the
bankruptcy of many privately owned gas stations and bars?
Phillip-Morris, the single biggest tobacco enterprise in
the world, also owns other non-tobacco related companies such as
Kraft. Once again,
would anti-smokers be able to sleep at night knowing that they
might be the reason that millions of people, once employed by
Phillip-Morris, do not have the money needed to put Sunday
dinner on the table? And
not just Americans; people all over the world would be
unemployed. These
people being laid off would indirectly affect every resident of
the United States. Unemployment
checks would be sent out to millions causing taxes to increase. Is this the sacrifice that you would make to rid the country
of tobacco smoke? The
economy would suffer an astronomical blow.
Along with increased taxes, the country would suffer from
decreased revenue. A
pack of cigarettes costs roughly two dollars to produce, the
rest of the money goes to the government in the form of taxes.
A bar by a simple man’s definition is a place for
people to congregate, drink a few alcoholic beverages, and smoke
tobacco, be it a cigar or a cigarette.
Some may argue with this idea, but the large majority of
the population will smoke and drink at a bar.
Banning smoking inside of a bar would decrease attendance
and limit the variety of people that would go to a bar.
People would be robbed of being able to meet new and
different people, maybe even their “soul mate” or best
friend, simply because the person smokes.
Attendance would decrease for the fundamental reason that
smokers would have to go outside to have a cigarette.
Smokers will not tolerate that unnecessary inconvenience.
Cigarettes have been around for a very long time.
They have survived many generations, and there is no
reason why they should not be able to continue.
Tobacco is an economic contributor and a worldly staple
for people. Allowing
the government to control a smokers ability to smoke, is giving
the government way too much power.
What will be next? Shall we give prohibition another shot?
|
