logo

Comparing Arguments for and Against Banning Smoking in Public Places

   

Added on  2019-09-16

8 Pages2268 Words382 Views
Disease and Disorders
 | 
 | 
 | 
UNIV 1212: Critical Thinking and Problem SolvingFall 2016-2017Assignment 4Compare and Contrast Two Argument Essays(20%=Individual Written Report)Purpose of AssignmentThe purpose of this assignment is to help the students show their understanding of arguments by comparing and contrasting two arguments, identifying the reasons for and against an issue, and evaluating the strength and weakness of each reason supporting and opposing the issue. ObjectivesThe student will be able to identify arguments supporting and opposing an issueThe student will be able identify weak and strong argumentsThe student will be able to compare and contrast arguments for and against an issueInstructional Media: Tools and ResourcesYou will be provided with online articles, reports, and different resources that will assist you in understanding arguments and knowing how to compare and contrast two argumentative essays. You will be provided in-class time one week before the assignment is due in order to discuss in groups and search online for additional required resources. Essay 1 – Arguments against Banning Smoking in Public PlacesIn recent years, there has been considerable legal and social debate on the topic of whether or not to ban smoking, cigarettes, cigars, and pipes in public
Comparing Arguments for and Against Banning Smoking in Public Places_1

places such as offices, restaurants, and libraries. Many people have used the health risks, both for smokers and non-smokers who inhale secondhand cigarettesmoke, as one of the strongest arguments against allowing smoking in public places. As a smoker, I will admit that this article may seem to be biased. However, I feel that there are some very substantial reasons that smoking shouldnot be banned in public places. Many public places such as schools have set aside a portion of the grounds in which smokers may smoke. In many cases, these designated smoking areas are located far enough away from the building so that the cigarette smoke will not affect the nonsmokers. As implied by the sign on the smoking area, these areas are the Designated Smoking Areas, and those that donot smoke should generally avoid these areas. If non-smokers should wish to enter the smoking area, then they should not complain when their clothes smell of cigarette smokeEmployees who smoke often do so because of stressful situations. Situations at work can inevitably lead to stress, thus the need for a quick cigarette to calm nerves. If there is a no smoking policy, then the employee eitherwill be less productive due to an inability to remain on task, or will "sneak off" to have a cigarette just as young teenagers sometimes do in Junior High and High School. Contrary to popular belief, smoking does not project an unprofessional image; it is the idea of smoker having to sneak off that project the unprofessional image. Contrary to increasing popular belief, smokers do have rights. As long as smokers are following company policy regarding smoking, such as smoking in designated areas, and properly extinguishing and disposing of smoking materials, they are not harming anyone aside from themselves. Smokers fund their own healthcare through the high taxes they pay on tobacco. In any case, heavy smokers are unlikely to give up since they are addicted to nicotine.Banning smoking in public will encourage people to smoke more at home. This will harm other people in their house, particularly children. This is important, since children are not old enough to choose freely to smoke passively. Also, people smoking at home may drink more alcohol than they would if they went to a bar. This is because they can buy it more cheaply at a supermarket or off-licence. Drinking more alcohol may lead to other health problems.A ban on smoking in public places would drive many bars, pubs and clubs out of business. Smokers would not go to these places. These businesses would also earn less money from selling tobacco. In many places, pubs and Working Men’s Clubs are important social places for communities. They also provide jobs for people with few skills in places with little other work. It is therefore important that they survive.
Comparing Arguments for and Against Banning Smoking in Public Places_2

It would be impossible to police this ban in many public places anyway. Small workplaces will often ignore the ban and are unlikely to be caught. Staff who do not smoke are unlikely to report smokers, in case their colleagues work out who told the authorities.Essay 2 – Arguments for Banning Smoking in Public PlacesThere has been an ongoing debate for years about whether or not to ban smoking in public places. Both sides of the argument have done their best to deliver compelling facts to support their opinions. No one denies that a person should be allowed to smoke if they choose to, but the problem comes when a person's smoking becomes an issue for those around them. The following are some arguments in favor of banning smoking in public places.Secondhand smoke increases the risk of fatal and nonfatal coronary heart disease by about 30%. In studies smokers had less of a risk or problem with coronary heart disease than the people exposed to second hand smoke. Secondhand smoke also increases the risk of lung and other cancers as well as other respiratory problems and accounts for 53,000 deaths each year in the United States. 3,000 of these deaths alone are from lung cancer in non smokers and approximately 22,000 are from heart disease in nonsmokers.Secondhand smoke is especially dangerous in children. It has been found that children who are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke are more likely to suffer from lung diseases such as pneumonia and bronchitis and many others and have a higher risk of developing asthma. It is also shown that children who breathe secondhand smoke have more ear infections than children whose parents shield them from the dangers. There are approximately 150,000 - 300,000 cases each year of children under 18 months of age with infections fromsecond hand smoke which results in around 7,500 -15,000 hospitalizations each year . It has also been found that one of the added reasons for sudden infant death syndrome is secondhand smoke or having a parent or guardian that regularly smokes. Secondhand smoke is also known to cause problems and issues in fetuses of mothers who are exposed to it.The main reason that we should ban smoking in restaurants and other public areas is because the smoke does not remain solely in the smoking area. Having a smoking area and a nonsmoking area in a building is better than havingeveryone mixed together and I will admit to that however; if you drop food coloring in water doesn't it spread? Smoke has the same effect and anyone who has ever paid attention to it will notice that fact. Smoke spreads from the smokingsection all through the building in the air, therefore spreading the dangers with it. For this reason smoking should not be allowed in public buildings.Smoking in public places also has several other negative effects. Everyone is aware of the unpleasant smell associated with smoking. Imagine being a non-smoker going out to dinner or some other event, only to find that when you get home, your clothes and even your body smell like cigarette smoke.
Comparing Arguments for and Against Banning Smoking in Public Places_3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Compare and Contrast Two Argument Essays
|4
|1359
|546

Compare and Contrast Between Two Arguments on Smoking Bans
|6
|1400
|83