|
Smoking has already be banned from public places. Banning smoking and raising taxes will not stop
people who want to smoke from smoking. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think smoking in general should be banned! Its a health hazard to everyone in America and it makes
lots of litter in beaches, parks and other public places! Ban it!!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ban smoking because I hate and detest it ;-)
;-)
;-)
seriously? I don't think smoking can be banned: These people are too addicted.
Smokers cannot go 30 minutes without lighting up the ole cig. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Second hand smoke causes cancer, that's a proven fact. Even if it weren't, smoking in public
affects those around the smoker: Dried eyes, dried throats, stinking hair and clothes, among other
things, not to mention the pollution and littering.
Smoking should be limited to people's homes and to specified locations, called "smokeeasies", in
reference to prohibition-era "speakeasies". Smokers should be locked in with each other and forced
to endure each other's pollution, and legally prevented from inflicting it on people who don't want
it.
Smoking around non-smokers should be made illegal in the same way drinking and driving is. The
immediate hazards may not be the same, but the health risk is. And people who have kids should be
barred from smoking or have their kids removed from the house. |
| |
 K9  26 May 2008 16:28
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yeah, I hate people who smoke right near you and then you have to leave because you start coughing
from second hand smoke. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You know what smokers can smoke anywhere but not around the public places like park with children.
You know. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It wouldn't hurt our economy one bit, because all the money tobacco companies use for marketing can
be used for bracing for the impact. Studies show that tobacco smoke is dangerous, and the people
around you haven't made the conscious decision to breathe in your smoke. Look at Dana Reeve; she
died of lung cancer at the age of 44 even though she never smoked. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
True it might hurt our economy, bu it should be banned because there are smokers and second hand
smokers if they both die of the same thing than then who will support the economy |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Why is it that the first answer to anything anyone dislikes is to make it illegal, ban it, eliminate
it, or take it away? Every choice we are still permitted to make is a precious freedom we should
not be so quick to give up.
While I dislike tobacco and non-tobacco smoke, I see no reason to take away the freedom from those
who do enjoy it. Particularly in public places.
Counterpoint: It is the right of any private landowner to make rules for the use of their space, to
include a No Smoking policy. Case in point: An outdoor stadium or ampitheater owner may choose to
make the establishment No Smoking to encourage those who do not want to be near smokers to attend
events at their place.
Important Caveat: As long as I don't ever have to pay for it! That means I won't pay for your lung
biopsy, your restaurant when it burns down, your cancer medications, etc. You made your choices,
pay for them yourself. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't like smoking but i do like our economy in places like Virginia tobacco products are the most
important processed products. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
