argumentative essay about should smoking be illegal

Home — Essay Samples — Nursing & Health — Smoking — Should Smoking Be Made Illegal: Argumentative

Should Smoking Be Made Illegal: Argumentative

Categories: Smoking Smoking Ban Tobacco

About this sample

Words: 674 |

Updated: 8 December, 2023

Words: 674 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Works Cited

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Health Effects of Cigarette Smoking. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/effects_cig_smoking/index.htm
Chatterjee, K., & Chatterjee, K. (2014). Secondhand Smoke: Are We Protecting Our Children? Lung India, 31(4), 369–377.
Foulds, J., Ramstrom, L., Burke, M., & Fagerström, K. (2003). Effect of Smokeless Tobacco (Snus) on Smoking and Public Health in Sweden. Tobacco Control, 12(4), 349–359.
Hatsukami, D. K., & Stead, L. F. (2020). Tobacco Use: Prevention, Cessation, and Control. Oxford University Press.
Hu, T.-W., Lee, A. H.-Y., Mao, Z., & Ong, M. (2016). China at the Crossroads: The Economics of Tobacco and Health. World Scientific Publishing.
National Cancer Institute. (2020). Harms of Cigarette Smoking and Health Benefits of Quitting. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco/cessation-fact-sheet
Peto, R., Lopez, A. D., Boreham, J., Thun, M., & Heath, C. Jr. (2016). Mortality from Smoking in Developed Countries 1950-2010: Indirect Estimates from National Vital Statistics. Oxford University Press.
Schick, S., & Glantz, S. (2005). Philip Morris Toxicological Experiments with Fresh Sidestream Smoke: More Toxic than Mainstream Smoke. Tobacco Control, 14(6), 396–404.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.
World Health Organization. (2019). WHO Global Report on Trends in Prevalence of Tobacco Smoking 2000-2025, Second Edition. World Health Organization.

Video Version

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

Expert in: Nursing & Health Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 712 words

3 pages / 1160 words

4 pages / 2003 words

2 pages / 1162 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Should Smoking Be Made Illegal: Argumentative Essay

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Smoking

Vape has become one of the most popular means of smoking nowadays. People find that vaping is better than smoking cigarettes. Vape has many characteristics those attract people to take it instead of cigarettes. As people are [...]

Vaping, the act of inhaling and exhaling aerosol produced by electronic cigarettes or vape pens, has become a subject of intense debate in recent years. Proponents argue that it offers several advantages over traditional [...]

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Today, I would like to talk to you about the dangers of smoking and the impact it has on individuals and society as a whole. Smoking is a prevalent habit that has been around for centuries, [...]

Vaping, once hailed as a safer alternative to traditional smoking, has now come under scrutiny due to its potential health risks and widespread usage among young people. This essay explores the various dangers associated with [...]

Stop smoking it can cost you your life! What is smoking? How can something small cause so much harm to the world? Smoking is an addictive drug that can cause death or cancer it has caused, More than 10 times as many U.S. [...]

For years there has been conflicting research whether smoking should be banned or not and it is a significant issue today. Many people have given up smoking while others still continue to smoke. Smoking is the inhalation and [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
BMJ Open Access

Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition

The cigarette is the deadliest artefact in the history of human civilisation. Most of the richer countries of the globe, however, are making progress in reducing both smoking rates and overall consumption. Many different methods have been proposed to steepen this downward slope, including increased taxation, bans on advertising, promotion of cessation, and expansion of smoke-free spaces. One option that deserves more attention is the enactment of local or national bans on the sale of cigarettes. There are precedents: 15 US states enacted bans on the sale of cigarettes from 1890 to 1927, for instance, and such laws are still fully within the power of local communities and state governments. Apart from reducing human suffering, abolishing the sale of cigarettes would result in savings in the realm of healthcare costs, increased labour productivity, lessened harms from fires, reduced consumption of scarce physical resources, and a smaller global carbon footprint. Abolition would also put a halt to one of the principal sources of corruption in modern civilisation, and would effectively eliminate one of the historical forces behind global warming denial and environmental obfuscation. The primary reason for abolition, however, is that smokers themselves dislike the fact they smoke. Smoking is not a recreational drug, and abolishing cigarettes would therefore enlarge rather than restrict human liberties. Abolition would also help cigarette makers fulfil their repeated promises to ‘cease production’ if cigarettes were ever found to be causing harm.

Six reasons to ban

The cigarette is the deadliest object in the history of human civilisation. Cigarettes kill about 6 million people every year, a number that will grow before it shrinks. Smoking in the twentieth century killed only 100 million people, whereas a billion could perish in our century unless we reverse course. 1 Even if present rates of consumption drop steadily to zero by 2100, we will still have about 300 million tobacco deaths this century.

The cigarette is also a defective product, meaning not just dangerous but unreasonably dangerous, killing half its long-term users. And addictive by design. It is fully within the power of the Food and Drug Administration in the US, for instance, to require that the nicotine in cigarettes be reduced to subcompensable, subaddictive levels. 2 3 This is not hard from a manufacturing point of view: the nicotine alkaloid is water soluble, and denicotinised cigarettes were already being made in the 19th century. 4 Philip Morris in the 1980s set up an entire factory to make its Next brand cigarettes, using supercritical fluid extraction techniques to achieve a 97% reduction in nicotine content, which is what would be required for a 0.1% nicotine cigarette, down from present values of about 2%. 5 Keep in mind that we're talking about nicotine content in the rod as opposed to deliveries measured by the ‘FTC method’, which cannot capture how people actually smoke. 5

Cigarettes are also defective because they have been engineered to produce an inhalable smoke. Tobacco smoke was rarely inhaled prior to the nineteenth century; it was too harsh, too alkaline. Smoke first became inhalable with the invention of flue curing , a technique by which the tobacco leaf is heated during fermentation, preserving the sugars naturally present in the unprocessed leaf. Sugars when they burn produce acids, which lower the pH of the resulting smoke, making it less harsh, more inhalable. There is a certain irony here, since these ‘milder’ cigarettes were actually far more deadly, allowing smoke to be drawn deep into the lungs. The world's present epidemic of lung cancer is almost entirely due to the use of low pH flue-cured tobacco in cigarettes, an industry-wide practice that could be reversed at any time. Regulatory agencies should mandate a significant reduction in rod-content nicotine, but they should also require that no cigarette be sold with a smoke pH lower than 8. Those two mandates alone would do more for public health than any previous law in history. 5

Death and product defect are two reasons to abolish the sale of cigarettes, but there are others. A third is the financial burden on public and private treasuries, principally from the costs of treating illnesses due to smoking. Cigarette use also results in financial losses from diminished labor productivity, and in many parts of the world makes the poor even poorer. 6

A fourth reason is that the cigarette industry is a powerful corrupting force in human civilisation. Big tobacco has corrupted science by sponsoring ‘decoy’ or ‘distraction research’, 5 but it has also corrupted popular media, insofar as newspapers and magazines dependent on tobacco advertising for revenues have been reluctant to publish critiques of cigarettes. 7 The industry has corrupted even the information environment of its own workforce, as when Philip Morris paid its insurance provider (CIGNA) to censor the health information sent to corporate employees. 8 Tobacco companies have bullied, corrupted or exploited countless other institutions: the American Medical Association, the American Law Institute, sports organisations, fire-fighting bodies, Hollywood, the US Congress—even the US presidency and US military. President Lyndon Johnson refused to endorse the 1964 Surgeon General's report, for instance, fearing alienation of the tobacco-friendly South. Cigarette makers managed even to thwart the US Navy's efforts to go smoke-free. In 1986, the Navy had announced a goal of creating a smoke-free Navy by the year 2000; tobacco-friendly congressmen were pressured to thwart that plan, and a law was passed requiring that all ships sell cigarettes and allow smoking. The result: American submarines were not smoke-free until 2011. 9

Cigarettes are also, though, a significant cause of harm to the natural environment. Cigarette manufacturing consumes scarce resources in growing, curing, rolling, flavouring, packaging, transport, advertising and legal defence, but also causes harms from massive pesticide use and deforestation. Many Manhattans of savannah woodlands are lost every year to obtain the charcoal used for flue curing. Cigarette manufacturing also produces non-trivial greenhouse gas emissions, principally from the fossil fuels used for curing and transport, fires from careless disposal of butts, and increased medical costs from maladies caused by smoking 5 (China produces 40 percent of the world's cigarettes, for example, and uses mainly coal to cure its tobacco leaf). And cigarette makers have provided substantial funding and institutional support for global climate change deniers, causing further harm. 10 Cigarettes are not sustainable in a world of global warming; indeed they are one of its overlooked and easily preventable causes.

But the sixth and most important reason for abolition is the fact that smokers themselves do not like their habit. This is a key point: smoking is not a recreational drug; most smokers do not like the fact they smoke and wish they could quit. This means that cigarettes are very different from alcohol or even marijuana. Only about 10–15% of people who drink liquor ever become alcoholics, versus addiction rates of 80% or 90% for people who smoke. 11 As an influential Canadian tobacco executive once confessed: smoking is not like drinking, it is rather like being an alcoholic. 12

The spectre of prohibition

An objection commonly raised is: Hasn't prohibition already been tried and failed? Won't this just encourage smuggling, organised crime, and yet another failed war on drugs? That has been the argument of the industry for decades; bans are ridiculed as impractical or tyrannical. (First they come for your cigarettes.…) 13

The freedom objection is weak, however, given how people actually experience addiction. Most smokers ‘enjoy’ smoking only in the sense that it relieves the pains of withdrawal; they need nicotine to feel normal. People who say they enjoy cigarettes are rather rare—so rare that the industry used to call them ‘enjoyers’. 14 Surveys show that most smokers want to quit but cannot; they also regret having started. 15 Tobacco industry executives have long grasped the point: Imperial Tobacco's Robert Bexon in 1984 confided to his Canadian cotobacconists that ‘If our product was not addictive we would not sell a cigarette next week’. 12 American cigarette makers have been quietly celebrating addiction since the 1950s, when one expressed how ‘fortunate for us’ it was that cigarettes ‘are a habit they can't break’. 16

Another objection commonly raised to any call for a ban is that this will encourage smuggling, or even organised crime. But that is rather like blaming theft on fat wallets. Smuggling is already rampant in the cigarette world, as a result of pricing disparities and the tolerance of contraband or even its encouragement by cigarette manufacturers. Luk Joossens and Rob Cunningham have shown how cigarette manufacturers have used smuggling to undermine monopolies or gain entry into new markets or evade taxation. 17 18 And demand for contraband should diminish, once the addicted overcome their addiction—a situation very different from prohibition of alcohol, where drinking was a more recreational drug. And of course, even a ban on the sale of cigarettes will not eliminate all smoking—nor should that be our goal, since people should still be free to grow their own for personal use. Possession should not be criminalised; the goal should only be a ban on sales. Enforcement, therefore, should be a trivial matter, as is proper in a liberal society.

Cigarette smoking itself, though, is less an expression of freedom than the robbery of it. And so long as we allow the companies to cast themselves as defenders of liberty, the table is unfairly tilted. We have to recognise that smoking compromises freedom, and that retiring cigarettes would enlarge human liberties.

Of course it could well be that product regulation, combined with taxation, denormalisation, and ‘smoke-free’ legislation, will be enough to dramatically lower or even eliminate cigarette use—over some period of decades. Here, though, I think we fail to realise how much power governments already have to act more decisively. From 1890 to 1927 the sale of cigarettes was banned virtually overnight in 15 different US states; and in Austin v. Tennessee (1900) the US Supreme Court upheld the right of states to enact such bans. 19 Those laws all eventually disappeared from industry pressure and the lure of tax revenues. 20 None was deemed unconstitutional, however, and some localities retained bans into the 1930s, just as some counties still today ban the sale of alcohol. Bhutan in 2004 became the first nation recently to ban the sale of cigarettes, and we may see other countries taking this step, especially once smoking prevalence rates start dropping into single digits.

Helping the industry fulfil its promises

One last rationale for a ban: abolition would fulfil a promise made repeatedly by the industry itself. Time and again, cigarette makers have insisted that if cigarettes were ever found to be causing harm they would stop making them:

In March 1954, George Weissman, head of marketing at Philip Morris, announced that his company would ‘stop business tomorrow’ if ‘we had any thought or knowledge that in any way we were selling a product harmful to consumers’. 21
In 1972, James C Bowling, vice president for public relations at Philip Morris, asserted publicly, and in no uncertain terms, that ‘If our product is harmful…we'll stop making it’. 22
Helmut Wakeham, vice president for research at Philip Morris, in 1976 stated publicly that ‘if the company as a whole believed that cigarettes were really harmful, we would not be in the business. We are a very moralistic company’. 23
RJ Reynolds president Gerald H Long, in a 1986 interview asserted that if he ever ‘saw or thought there were any evidence whatsoever that conclusively proved that, in some way, tobacco was harmful to people, and I believed it in my heart and my soul, then I would get out of the business’. 24
Philip Morris CEO Geoffrey Bible in 1997, when asked (under oath) what he would do with his company if cigarettes were ever found to be causing cancer, said: ‘I'd probably…shut it down instantly to get a better hold on things’. 25 Bible was asked about this in Minnesota v. Philip Morris (2 March 1998) and reaffirmed that if even one person were ever found to have died from smoking he would ‘reassess’ his duties as CEO. 26

A: Because if we are marketing a product that we know causes cancer, I'd get out of the business…I wouldn't be associated with marketing a product like that.

A: If cigarettes caused cancer, I wouldn't be involved with them…I wouldn't sell a product that caused cancer.

Q: …Because you don't want to kill people? … Is that the reason?

Q: …If it was proven to you that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer, do you think cigarettes should be marketed?

A: No…No one should sell a product that is a proven cause of lung cancer. 27

If the Company felt that its product were now causing cancer or any other disease, it would immediately cease production of it. 28

To this recommendation was added ‘Until such time as these charges or irresponsible statements are ever proven, the Company will continue to produce and market cigarettes’.

What is remarkable is that we never find the companies saying privately that they would stop making cigarettes—with two significant exceptions. In August 1947, in an internal document outlining plans to study ‘vascular and cardiac effects’ of smoking, Philip Morris's director of research, Willard Greenwald, made precisely this claim: ‘We certainly do not want any person to smoke if it is dangerous to his health’. 29 Greenwald had made a similar statement in 1939, reassuring his president, OH Chalkley, that ‘under no circumstances would we want anyone to smoke Philip Morris cigarettes were smoking definitely deleterious to his health’. 30 There is no reason to believe he was lying: he is writing long before Wynder's mouse painting experiments of 1953, and prior even to the epidemiology of 1950. Prior to obtaining proof of harm, Philip Morris seems honestly not to have wanted to sell a deadly product.

Abolition is not such a radical idea; it would really just help the industry fulfil its long-standing promises to the public. The cigarette, as presently constituted, is simply too dangerous—and destructive and unloved—to be sold.

Summary points

The cigarette is the deadliest object in the history of human civilisation. It is also a defective product, a financial burden on cash-strapped societies, an important source of political and scientific corruption, and a cause of both global warming and global warming denial.
Tobacco manufacturers have a long history of promising to stop the production of cigarettes, should they ever be proven harmful.
The most important reason to ban the sale of cigarettes, however, is that most smokers do not even like the fact they smoke; cigarettes are not a recreational drug.
It is not in principle difficult to end the sale of cigarettes; most communities–even small towns–could do this virtually overnight. We actually have more power than we realize to put an end this, the world's leading cause of death and disease.

Competing interests: The author has served as an expert witness for plaintiffs in tobacco litigation.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Open Access: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

Persuasive Essay Guide

Persuasive Essay About Smoking

Persuasive Essay About Smoking - Making a Powerful Argument with Examples

What You Need To Know About Persuasive Essay

A persuasive essay is a type of writing that aims to convince its readers to take a certain stance or action. It often uses logical arguments and evidence to back up its argument in order to persuade readers.

It also utilizes rhetorical techniques such as ethos, pathos, and logos to make the argument more convincing. In other words, persuasive essays use facts and evidence as well as emotion to make their points.

A persuasive essay about smoking would use these techniques to convince its readers about any point about smoking. Check out an example below:

Simple persuasive essay about smoking

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Persuasive Essay Examples About Smoking

Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death in the world. It leads to adverse health effects, including lung cancer, heart disease, and damage to the respiratory tract. However, the number of people who smoke cigarettes has been on the rise globally.

A lot has been written on topics related to the effects of smoking. Reading essays about it can help you get an idea of what makes a good persuasive essay.

Here are some sample persuasive essays about smoking that you can use as inspiration for your own writing:

Persuasive speech on smoking outline

Persuasive essay about smoking should be banned

Persuasive essay about smoking pdf

Persuasive essay about smoking cannot relieve stress

Persuasive essay about smoking in public places

Speech about smoking is dangerous

Persuasive Essay About Smoking Introduction

Persuasive Essay About Stop Smoking

Short Persuasive Essay About Smoking

Stop Smoking Persuasive Speech

Check out some more persuasive essay examples on various other topics.

Argumentative Essay About Smoking Examples

An argumentative essay is a type of essay that uses facts and logical arguments to back up a point. It is similar to a persuasive essay but differs in that it utilizes more evidence than emotion.

If you’re looking to write an argumentative essay about smoking, here are some examples to get you started on the arguments of why you should not smoke.

Argumentative essay about smoking pdf

Argumentative essay about smoking in public places

Argumentative essay about smoking introduction

Check out the video below to find useful arguments against smoking:

Tips for Writing a Persuasive Essay About Smoking

You have read some examples of persuasive and argumentative essays about smoking. Now here are some tips that will help you craft a powerful essay on this topic.

Choose a Specific Angle

Select a particular perspective on the issue that you can use to form your argument. When talking about smoking, you can focus on any aspect such as the health risks, economic costs, or environmental impact.

Think about how you want to approach the topic. For instance, you could write about why smoking should be banned.

Check out the list of persuasive essay topics to help you while you are thinking of an angle to choose!

Research the Facts

Before writing your essay, make sure to research the facts about smoking. This will give you reliable information to use in your arguments and evidence for why people should avoid smoking.

You can find and use credible data and information from reputable sources such as government websites, health organizations, and scientific studies.

For instance, you should gather facts about health issues and negative effects of tobacco if arguing against smoking. Moreover, you should use and cite sources carefully.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Make an Outline

The next step is to create an outline for your essay. This will help you organize your thoughts and make sure that all the points in your essay flow together logically.

Your outline should include the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. This will help ensure that your essay has a clear structure and argument.

Use Persuasive Language

When writing your essay, make sure to use persuasive language such as “it is necessary” or “people must be aware”. This will help you convey your message more effectively and emphasize the importance of your point.

Also, don’t forget to use rhetorical devices such as ethos, pathos, and logos to make your arguments more convincing. That is, you should incorporate emotion, personal experience, and logic into your arguments.

Introduce Opposing Arguments

Another important tip when writing a persuasive essay on smoking is to introduce opposing arguments. It will show that you are aware of the counterarguments and can provide evidence to refute them. This will help you strengthen your argument.

By doing this, your essay will come off as more balanced and objective, making it more convincing.

Finish Strong

Finally, make sure to finish your essay with a powerful conclusion. This will help you leave a lasting impression on your readers and reinforce the main points of your argument. You can end by summarizing the key points or giving some advice to the reader.

A powerful conclusion could either include food for thought or a call to action. So be sure to use persuasive language and make your conclusion strong.

To conclude,

By following these tips, you can write an effective and persuasive essay on smoking. Remember to research the facts, make an outline, and use persuasive language.

However, don't stress if you need expert help to write your essay! Our professional essay writing service is here for you!

Our persuasive essay writing service is fast, affordable, and trustworthy.

Try it out today!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Caleb S. has been providing writing services for over five years and has a Masters degree from Oxford University. He is an expert in his craft and takes great pride in helping students achieve their academic goals. Caleb is a dedicated professional who always puts his clients first.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Social Issues

Cigarette Smoking Should Be Banned Argumentative Essay

Each year, nearly half a million Americans die prematurely of smoking as well as exposure to secondhand smoke. Another 16 million live with a serious illness caused by smoking . The reason why smoking cigarettes are so hard to stop is because the substance contains nicotine, which is very addictive. People use this as their way of feeling normal, and it's really taking a toll on their bodys and their general health. I believe that cigarette smoking should be banned because it causes too many health concerns for both smokers and nonsmokers.

Smoking is one of the worst possible actions an individual can do to their body. One little six inch object of tobacco is one of the deadliest objects in our world today. Thousands of chemicals are inserted into your lungs after smoking. Now picture that 10 times a day, everyday, for the rest of your life. People are basically poisoning themselves to an early death. The tragic fact about smoking is that tobacco use can actually cause cancer anywhere in the body. This is the leading cause of lung cancer as well as many other cancers and diseases. One third of all cancer deaths in the U.S are related to smoking. If nobody smoked, one of every three cancer deaths in the United States would not happen.

There is no reason to continue to allow the use of a product that is killing so many people. Smoking kills thousands of people a year and at this rate, this is a number that will grow before it shrinks. Millions of people even live with a serious illness which is caused by smoking. I believe that as a nation we are doing good with helping stop this problem, but were not doing good enough. More people should talk about this problem because it's only getting worse, especially with young people. More teens are using nicotine everyday and don't truly understand what they're doing to their bodys. As we all know smoking causes the lungs to turn completely black, like a chimney. Schools should definitely try to prevent their young students from stopping now while they can, before it gets bad.

Most smokers don't even enjoy their habit. The problem isn't that they don't know it's a bad habit, it's that they are addicted to nicotine. This is mainly the reason why individuals cant stop smoking. If one were to try to stop, the symptoms of withdrawal include cravings, anxiety, depression and cognitive/ attention deficits. The symptoms can begin within a few hours; driving the smoker to have another cigarette. There are a lot of positive things to come if one were to stop smoking. Quitting smoking cuts cardiovascular risks. Just 1 year after quitting smoking, your risk for a heart attack drops tremendously.

Another reason why cigarette smoking should be banned is because of how much money people are wasting for these tobacco products. Tobacco companies are getting richer by the day, and are swimming in pools of cash while tobacco users are gradually dying. The cost of cigarettes is already high and what people don't think about is how much more money they're going to spend later on in life for life insurance.

Cigarette smoking has led to many health concerns even for those who are right next to the smoker. Everyone is at risk because the general public is often exposed to secondhand smoke. This can be dangerous to those who have no intention to smoke at all. The sad reality of our world is that even the people making the right decision by not smoking, are still being exposed to secondhand smoke. Secondhand smoke causes stroke, lung cancer, and heart disease in adults. Children who are exposed to secondhand smoke are at increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, middle ear disease, more severe asthma, respiratory symptoms, and slowed lung growth.

Even a person who inhales second hand smoke without consent is in harm of dangerous diseases and cancers. This is an ongoing problem, especially with young children. Parents who smoke are allowing their children to receive poisons everyday. It's a horrible fact especially understanding that children's organs are a lot more sensitive than the average adult. Therefore, children are prone to become addicted a lot faster, and this means that they are most likely to continue that habit when they are older. There's no reason or excuse to why people who try to avoid smoking are the ones being affected by this issue. Cigarette smoking should be banned in public areas because it is an exposure to secondhand smoke, causes cancer, and premature deaths among people who do not smoke.

In conclusion, Cigarettes should be banned because of the ongoing number of premature deaths, many health concerns and the wasted money spent on cigarettes alone. Millions of people are dying each year because of cigarette smoking and in all reality we are doing nothing to fix this problem except giving our money away to these tobacco companies. Unfortunately, many people are at risk of losing their lives at a young age if we don't come together and help stop this issue.

Related Samples

The Concept of Freedom (Immigration Essay Example)
Antisemitism In The Merchant Of Venice
Drug Legalization in California Essay Example
Essay Sample on Why Men Are More Likely to Commit Violent Crimes
Argumentative Essay On Killing Animals
Overpopulation - Global Issue (Free Essay Example)
Essay Sample on Canadian Immigration Policy
Essay on Social Justice in the United States
The Increase Of Violence Against Asian Americans In The Period Of Pandemic
Women in Armenian Advertisements

Didn't find the perfect sample?

argumentative essay about should smoking be illegal

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Entertainment
Environment
Information Science and Technology
Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Health Smoking

Uncovering Whether Should Smoking Be Illegal in the Modern Society

Table of contents, smoking should be illegal in the modern society, a few more arguments on why should smoking be illegal.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

Heart Attack
Under The Influence
Women's Health

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?

Smoking is the act of inhaling or smelling smoke that results from burning something, most commonly tobacco. All enclosed public areas, including bars and restaurants, have been subject to statewide smoking bans in some states; only certain areas have been affected in other states. According to WHO’s Smoking and Tobacco Use Policy, a smoker is defined as someone who regularly or infrequently smokes any tobacco cigarette (WHO). A daily smoker, consequently, is someone, who smokes at least once a day. Smoked tobacco products include cigarettes, cigars, bidis, and kreteks. Some people prefer to use a pipe or a hookah (water pipe) to smoke loose tobacco. Tobacco products that are chewed include snuff, dip, and snus; smokers can also smell snuff. Some people smoke regularly, but not every day, and these people are known as “infrequent smokers” (Recher 18). Tobacco smoking in public places is prohibited by smoking bans or “smoke-free laws.” They include both criminal and health and safety regulations for the workplace.

Getting nicotine from cigarettes is like sucking on a tailpipe for air. Many countries have banned smoking, but despite decades of research showing its dangers, tobacco is still widely available and profitable for everyone but the customer (Recher 1). One percent of public funds are allocated to a chemical that has no benefits and only causes illness, disability, and death. Even though taxing tobacco has its benefits, including fewer smokers, increased government revenue, and a healthier society, as respiratory therapists, people should embrace the use of excise duties that the government may use selectively. Smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer, asthma, and other pulmonary diseases, with an estimated $12.0 billion in annual economic losses worldwide due to these conditions (Recher 1). The trade-off is illogical, even if one looks at it only from an economic standpoint.

As a reasonable position, the government should not dictate what vices the population engages in, which is why tobacco sales should continue. Even though the United States has tried to limit soft drink quantities, fast food is unregulated but failed miserably. Despite increased government interference, few people oppose access to these items. However, there is at least one advantage to these other “sins,” however. People need fuel, even if they eat at fast-food restaurants infrequently, drink alcohol, and gamble in moderation. There is no such thing as moderate use when it comes to tobacco. A person, those around them, or even those exposed to it in a tertiary setting cannot be exposed to any amount of cigarette smoke without harm. They are willing to tolerate smoking-related illness and death to make money. It is unlikely that Health Canada would allow tobacco smoking in Canada today, but it is also unlikely that any of today’s governments would denounce it. The public outcry from smokers and non-smokers, enforcement expenditures, illegal imports, anti-government action, and underground sales conspire to make absolute prohibition impossible.

Here is the dilemma: although tobacco has no health benefits, it cannot be outlawed. Smoking rates in the United States had steadily decreased since 1965 when more than half of the population smoked; by 2014, they had fallen to 18.1 percent (Recher 1). It means that people are forced to use whatever resources are still available to them to quit smoking: logical or emotional arguments, organized cessation programs, medications and patches, and e-cigarettes and gum.

In the history of humanity, the cigarette has been the most lethal item. An estimated 6 million people die from smoking each year, a number that is expected to rise before it decreases (Leung and Don 1). Only 100 million people died from smoking in the twentieth century, but a billion could die if people do not change their ways (Ritchie and Roser). This century, even if current consumption rates are gradually reduced to zero by 2100, people will still have around 300 million tobacco-related deaths in this century. (Roser and Roser). A flaw in the product design of the cigarette has resulted in half of its long-term users dying from their use. It’s designed to be addictive, too. Tobacco companies in the United States have the authority to reduce the nicotine content in cigarettes to non-compensable, non-addictive levels. It is within the FDA’s jurisdiction. Denicotinized cigarettes were already on the market in the nineteenth century, and the water-based nicotine alkaloid is easy to produce. When Philip Morris first started making Next cigarettes in the 1980s, they used supercritical fluid extraction techniques to reduce nicotine levels by 97%, which would be required to make a cigarette with just 0.1% nicotine, down from the current values of around 2% (Havermans et al.). Keeping in mind that the amount of nicotine in the rod is more important than how much a person consumes.

Cigarettes are intended to produce smoke that can be inhaled is another flaw. Before the seventeenth century, tobacco smoke was seldom breathed due to its harshness and alkalinity (Baron 1). A way of heating the raw tobacco leaf during the fermentation process to preserve its naturally existing sugars, flue-curing, was only discovered after the invention of smoking. Inhaling smoke with a lower pH is easier because of the acids produced when sugars are burned. Ironically, these supposedly milder cigarettes were much more dangerous, causing smoke to be sucked into the lungs and making them far more dangerous. Flue-cured nicotine, a manufacturing practice that can be changed at any time, is nearly solely responsible for the current global lung cancer epidemic. There should be a significant reduction in the amount of nicotine in the rods, but no cigarette should be supplied with a smoke pH lower than 8.5. The health of the public will be better served by these two new laws than by any other legislation.

Alternatively, it could be argued that the tobacco industry is a major source of corruption in society. By funding “decoy” or “distraction studies,” big tobacco has distorted scientific research. As a result, newspapers and magazines that rely on tobacco advertising for revenue have been hesitant to print critical articles on cigarettes. As a result of Philip Morris’ bribery of its insurance provider (CIGNA), the corporation polluted even its workforce’s information environment. Even the US president and military have been subjected to cigarette firms’ exploitation and coercion, as have the American Medical Association, the American Law Institute, several sports leagues, firefighting organizations, and the Hollywood industry. President Lyndon Johnson refused to approve the 1964 Surgeon General’s report for political reasons. US Navy attempts to go smoke-free were scuppered by cigarette manufacturers. Tobacco-friendly politicians were persuaded to thwart the Navy’s goal of having a smoke-free Navy by 2000 in 1986, and regulation was enacted requiring all ships to sell cigarettes and allow smoking. American submarines didn’t go smoke-free until 2011, as a result.

In contrast, smoking cigarettes is a major environmental polluter. Pesticide use and deforestation are both harmful to the environment when it comes to producing cigarette products because of their use in growing and curing and rolling, and flavoring (Leung and Don 1). Several square miles of savannah woods are burned each year to produce the charcoal needed to cure flues. A large amount of greenhouse gas emissions is also produced by the curing and transportation of cigarette goods and the careless disposal of butts. Adding insult to injury, the tobacco industry has generously supported those who reject man-made climate change even further. Even in the midst of a worldwide economic crisis, the easy-to-avoid cause of the catastrophe, cigarettes, are mostly overlooked.

Any proposal for a ban is likely to be criticized for increasing smuggling or even organized crime. That, however, is akin to blaming criminals with large wallets for their crimes. For reasons including price discrepancies and cigarette makers’ tolerance for contraband, tobacco smuggling is already widespread in the industry. In contrast to alcohol prohibition, when drinking was viewed as a more recreational substance, the demand for illegal drugs is expected to decline after the addicts overcome their dependency. In the end, smoking will not be eliminated by a prohibition on the sale of cigarettes since individuals should cultivate their own for personal use. Instead of criminalizing the possession, it’s time to put a stop to sales. As a result, in a liberal society, enforcement should be of secondary importance. On the other hand, smoking a cigarette is not a celebration of freedom but rather a theft of that freedom. People are putting corporations at a disadvantage by portraying themselves as defenders of freedom. Smoking poses a threat to individual liberties, and as a result, it should be discouraged.

Prohibitions are dismissed as impractical or totalitarian by the industry, which has been the case for many years. On the other hand, the freedom argument falls short when taking into account how individuals experience addiction. For most smokers, the only reason they ‘enjoy’ smoking is to stave off nicotine withdrawal symptoms; they need it to feel normal. Cigarette “enjoyers,” those who profess a love for the product, are an extremely rare breed. A majority of smokers want to stop but are unable to; many often regret starting the habit. It’s been known for a long time. In spite of product control, price, denormalization, and “smoke-free” laws aimed at reducing or eliminating cigarette usage, it is achievable. Even now, certain counties still ban the sale of alcohol, just as some municipalities did in the 1930s.

Cigarettes have been the most harmful invention in human history. Because of this, it is a huge financial and political drain, a contributor to both climate change denial as well as global warming itself, and a costly burden on cash-strapped nations alike. For decades, tobacco firms have said that if their products are shown to be dangerous, they would cease production. Since cigarettes have no recreational value, banning their sale is the best way to prevent people from smoking in the first place. Generally speaking, small towns and localities have the ability to outlaw the selling of cigarettes fairly instantly. The world’s leading cause of death and respiratory illness can be eliminated if people realize they have more power than they think.

Works Cited

Baron, Yves Muscat. “Incidence and Case-Fatality Ratio of COVID-19 infection in relation to Tobacco Smoking, Population Density and Age Demographics in the USA: could Particulate Matter derived from Tobacco Smoking act as a Vector for COVID-19 transmission?.” medRxiv (2020).

Havermans, Anne et al. Feasibility of Manufacturing Tobacco with Very Low Nicotine Levels. Tobacco Regulatory Science, Volume 6, Number 6, November 2020, pp. 405-415(11).

Leung, Janice M., and Don D. Sin. “Smoking, ACE-2 and COVID-19: ongoing controversies.” European Respiratory Journal 56.1 (2020).

Recher, Vedran. “Tobacco smuggling in the Western Balkan region: Exploring habits, attitudes, and predictors of illegal tobacco demand.” Radni materijali EIZ-a 1 (2019): 1-24.

Ritchie, Hannah and Roser, Max. Smoking. OurWorldInData.org . (2021). Web.

World Health Organization. Web.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, December 9). Why Should Smoking Be Illegal? https://studycorgi.com/why-should-smoking-be-illegal/

"Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?" StudyCorgi , 9 Dec. 2022, studycorgi.com/why-should-smoking-be-illegal/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Why Should Smoking Be Illegal'. 9 December.

1. StudyCorgi . "Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?" December 9, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/why-should-smoking-be-illegal/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?" December 9, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/why-should-smoking-be-illegal/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?" December 9, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/why-should-smoking-be-illegal/.

This paper, “Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: December 9, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
17 April 2024
Correction 18 April 2024

Smoking bans are coming: what does the evidence say?

Carissa Wong

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Smoking rates have declined globally over the past few decades. Credit: Debbie Bragg/Everynight Images via Alamy

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Nations worldwide are aiming to introduce some of the tightest restrictions ever on smoking and vaping, especially among young people.

On 16 April, UK lawmakers backed one of the world’s most ambitious plans — to create by 2040 a ‘smoke-free’ generation of people who will never be able to legally buy tobacco. The proposal is now a step closer to becoming law. The UK, Australian and French governments are also clamping down on vaping with e-cigarettes. These countries’ bold policies are currently in the minority, say researchers, but such measures would almost certainly prevent diseases, as well as save lives and billions of dollars in health-care costs.

Smoking scars the immune system for years after quitting

The UK plan would probably “be the most impactful public-health policy ever introduced”, says health-policy researcher Duncan Gillespie at the University of Sheffield, UK. The Conservative government’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak initiated the proposal. The government hopes that the smoking restrictions, alongside offering health benefits for individuals, will reduce toxic chemicals leaching from used vapes into the environment.

Smoke-free generations

The health harms of smoking tobacco have been established for decades — it substantially raises the risk of diseases including cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Increased awareness of these health risks has led to a global decline in the deadly habit in the past few decades (see ‘Smoke clearing’).

SMOKE CLEARING. Chart shows the worldwide decline of tobacco smoking among people aged 15 and over.

Source: WHO

Any drop in smoking rates saves money and reduces the burden on health-care systems, says Alison Commar, who studies tobacco policy at the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva, Switzerland. The WHO estimates that tobacco use costs the world US$1.4 trillion every year in health expenditures and lost productivity. “Every tobacco-related illness is adding to the burden on the health system unnecessarily,” says Commar.

The UK proposal, announced last October, would ban the sale of tobacco to any person born in or after 2009. That would prevent anyone who turns 15 or younger this year from ever buying cigarettes legally in the country. From 2027, the minimum legal age to purchase tobacco products would increase from 18 years old by one year each year — meaning that the threshold in 2028, for instance, would be 20. This strategy, the government hopes, will by 2040 create a smoke-free generation. The UK move follows similar legislation announced in 2021 by New Zealand. The nation reversed its intended ban because tobacco sales were needed to help pay for tax cuts, but the government said last month that it will seek to ban disposable vapes.

Modelling smokers

The UK government’s policies are backed by a modelling study published in December that predicts how the proposal would affect smoking rates and people over time. Its ‘pessimistic’ model predicts that the policy could reduce the smoking rate among people aged 14–30 from 13% in 2023 to around 8% in 2030. By 2040, just 5% of this age group would smoke. In the baseline scenario, 8% of 14- to 30-year-olds would smoke. In the ‘optimistic’ scenario, only 0.4% of that age group would start smoking by 2040 (see ‘Ban plan’). That model suggests that, by 2075, the policy would save tens of thousands of lives and £11 billion ($13.7 billion) in health-care costs by preventing smoking-related diseases.

These projections are based on solid evidence and are of high quality, says tobacco researcher Allen Gallagher at the University of Bath, UK.

Still, no country has ever introduced a policy that raises the minimum tobacco-purchasing age in this way — only time will tell what the effects will be, says Commar.

Vaping bans

Nations are also targeting vaping, a trend that began around 2010 and has surged among younger people. Many people have perceived it as a potentially healthier alternative to smoking — for which there is substantial evidence. But whether vaping itself harms health has long been controversial, and the evidence is uncertain.

“The results are not super clear, but certainly hint towards vaping causing damage to the lungs and other organs,” says Carolyn Baglole, who studies lung disease at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Canada.

BAN PLAN. Chart shows UK government projections for smoking prevalence and lives saved.

Source: UK government

Vapes are made of a box filled with liquid that usually contains nicotine, a heating element that turns the liquid into aerosols and a mouthpiece to inhale the aerosol ‘vape’ clouds, which are often fruity or dessert-flavoured. Although vapes lack tobacco and most of the toxic chemicals in cigarettes, the nicotine is still harmful. Nicotine can raise blood pressure, increase the risk of heart and lung disease and disrupt brain development in children and adolescents. In turn, this can lead to impairments in attention, memory and learning.

The UK plan includes banning disposable vapes, restricting vape flavours that appeal to young users and limiting how vapes are advertised. Most young people in Great Britain use disposable vapes rather than rechargeable ones than can be refilled with liquid, according to a survey by the public-health charity Action on Smoking and Health, based in London. Rechargeable vapes would remain legal.

Global policies

The French government also wants to ban disposable vapes this year, and in December its parliament unanimously backed the proposal. And in 2021, Australia restricted e-cigarette sales to smokers who have a prescription for using vapes to quit smoking. “There is a good consensus that vaping is likely to pose only a small fraction of risks of smoking over the long term,” says psychologist Peter Hajek at Queen Mary University of London, who led a study 1 that suggested vaping safely helped pregnant women to stop smoking.

But illegal vaping is still surging among people under the legal age of 18 in Australia, according to research by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. That’s led the government to tighten rules on vape products. “This policy push should see the upswing in youth vaping contained and reversed,” says epidemiologist Tony Blakely at the University of Melbourne in Australia.

The flavoured liquid in vapes also contains solvents such as propylene glycol and glycerin. Agencies including the US and European Union drug regulators have approved these chemicals for oral consumption. But animal studies suggest that inhaling them could cause damage and inflammation, raising the risk of lung and heart disease 2 . “The issue is we don’t know much about what happens when you heat these products and aerosolize them for inhalation,” says Baglole.

One thing researchers know is that the heating element in e-cigarettes can release heavy metals into the inhaled aerosols. These particles have been linked to a raised risk of heart and respiratory disease, she says.

Ultimately, scientists seem to be overwhelmingly in favour of tough restrictions on smoking and vaping. Research is needed to establish the long-term health impacts of such policies, says Baglole. “Hopefully, different types of studies, different models, in addition to human participants, will start to paint a more complete picture,” she says.

Nature 628 , 695-696 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00472-3

Updates & Corrections

Correction 18 April 2024 : The graphic ‘Smoking prevalence’ wrongly coloured the chart lines for the optimistic and pessimistic scenarios. This has been corrected.

Pesola, F. et al. Addiction 119 , 875–884 (2024).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Traboulsi, H. et al. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21 , 3495 (2020).

Download references

Reprints and permissions

Public health

Climate-targets group should rescind its endorsement of carbon offsets

Correspondence 30 APR 24

Want to make a difference? Try working at an environmental non-profit organization

Career Feature 26 APR 24

NIH pay rise for postdocs and PhD students could have US ripple effect

News 25 APR 24

Bird flu virus has been spreading in US cows for months, RNA reveals

News 27 APR 24

WHO redefines airborne transmission: what does that mean for future pandemics?

News 24 APR 24

More work is needed to take on the rural wastewater challenge

Correspondence 23 APR 24

W2 Professorship with tenure track to W3 in Animal Husbandry (f/m/d)

The Faculty of Agricultural Sciences at the University of Göttingen invites applications for a temporary professorship with civil servant status (g...

Göttingen (Stadt), Niedersachsen (DE)

Georg-August-Universität Göttingen

W1 professorship for „Tissue Aspects of Immunity and Inflammation“

Kiel University (CAU) and the University of Lübeck (UzL) are striving to increase the proportion of qualified female scientists in research and tea...

University of Luebeck

W1 professorship for "Bioinformatics and artificial intelligence that preserve privacy"

Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein (DE)

Universität Kiel - Medizinische Fakultät

W1 professorship for "Central Metabolic Inflammation“

W1 professorship for "Congenital and adaptive lymphocyte regulation"

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

14 Central Pros and Cons of Smoking Bans

Smoking ban policies are implemented in some American states and cities but the contentions on whether they are necessary and relevant are still heard from supporters and critics. Restrictions on cigarette smoking can be traced back as early the 16th century and up to now, this issue remains to be controversial.

Smoking ban is a policy that prohibits smoking in public places like restaurants, workplaces, parks, malls, government offices and schools, among others. There are policies implemented statewide and there are some that only restrict smoking in public places but not in enclosed areas.

To get an idea on how people are taking smoking bans, here are some of the views expressed by proponents and opponents.

List of Pros of Smoking Bans

1. They reduce the risk of second-hand smoke. Advocates for smoking bans claim that passing a law to prohibit smoking in public places can lessen the possibility of second-hand smoke being inhaled by non-smokers. Second-hand smoke, according to experts, can lead to increased risk to emphysema, cardiovascular disorders and respiratory problems. By restricting the places where smoking is allowed, this can be prevented.

2. They lessen air pollution. Supporters also say that states and cities which have non-smoking policies and prohibited smoking in restaurants and public indoor spaces have better indoor air quality as opposed to cities which still allow smoking public.

3. They improve work productivity. Proponents point out that not all people smoke at the office. If smoking is allowed, non-smokers can still inhale the smoke and it can be bothersome for them to smell the smoke. On the other hand, if it is prohibited, employees can be more productive. They also added that smoking can cause respiratory infections and smokers are prone to these. If employees smoke less, chances are, the risk of getting sick is minimized.

4. They reduce healthcare costs. Advocates maintain their position about the benefits of smoking bans by saying that reports indicate reduced health costs in cities were smoking are restricted. And since health care costs take around 9.3% of the country’s GDP, reducing it can affect the economy in a positive way.

5. They decrease the possibility of fires. Smoking can increase the risks of fire in places with highly flammable materials. There have been instances of fires which started from lit cigarettes. Moreover, accidents related to explosions at work sites can also happen if smoking will not be prohibited.

6. They reduce wastes. Cigarette butts are non-biodegradable and can clog water systems if thrown recklessly. With banning smoking in public places, there will be lesser cigarette butts and lesser toxic garbage that can be stuck in water systems.

7. They contribute to lower energy consumption and personal expenses. If smoking is banned in public places such as malls and restaurants, there will be lesser need to use ventilation and this can result to lesser energy consumption and in effect, lesser expense. As for smokers, advocates say that an individual who smokes a pack a day spends less than $20 each day and around $720 a year. With smoking bans, it can reduce the expense for cigarette purchase of a smoker in half.

8. They result to cleaner areas where food is prepared and manufactured. With restricting smoking, supporters posit that this can ensure cleanliness is observed in food preparation in restaurants and in the streets. Moreover, smoking bans in workplaces and pharmaceuticals also contribute to cleaner indoor quality as well as maintaining cleanliness.

9. They lessen the chance of influencing others to take on the habit. Supporters for smoking bans claim that cigarette smoking is also considered a status symbol and some teenagers can be influenced to smoke just to fit it. If these young people will be exposed to smoking less, they will not be easily tempted to try.

List of Cons of Smoking Bans

1. They take away freedom from people. Some critics see smoking bans as a violation on one’s personal liberty. They argue that people should have the autonomy to decide on what kind of lifestyle they will have. Although they are not totally against banning smoking, they say that it should be a personal choice.

2. They can affect businesses. Business owners who are not in favor of smoking bans as well as smokers who are used to smoking in public places such as restaurants and coffee shops argue that restricting smoking in these places can drive customers away and this can be harmful to businesses. And as for establishments which are already smoke-free, competition will be higher. It will also be harder for them to leverage since there will be more businesses that are smoke-free.

3. They are not effective. Groups not really in favor of smoking bans say that they are not effective since smokers will just be usually told to leave and that penalties are not stiff. Smoking ban policies do not have enough teeth since repercussions are not harsh enough.

4. They drive people to smokers to smoke somewhere else. Some critics contend that banning smoking in some places just leaves smokers no choice but to do it somewhere else. They mentioned that this can even lead to increase cases of DUI fatalities since smokers might drive to other places just so they can smoke.

5. They result to lesser tax revenues for the government. People against smoking bans are concerned on the effect on government revenues if the push for smoke-free states will be implemented. They say that the government earns from high taxes paid by tobacco manufacturers and smokers. If cigarettes will be reduced, this would mean lesser taxes and lesser revenue for the government.

The controversy on smoking bans is not to leave the debate arena soon. There will always be people who will advocate for banning smoking in public places for concerns on health issues and fire hazards. However, there are also those who are firm in opposing it. And although there is a higher percentage of people who are behind smoking bans, imposing these policies nationwide is not going to happen in the near future because the views of people will always be divided.

Top Streams

Data Science Courses in USA
Business Analytics Courses in USA
Engineering Courses in USA
Tax Courses in USA
Healthcare Courses in USA
Language Courses in USA
Insurance Courses in USA
Digital Marketing Courses in USA

Top Specialization

Masters in Data Analytics in USA
Masters in Mechanical Engineering in USA
Masters in Supply Chain Management in USA
Masters in Computer Science in USA
MBA in Finance in USA
Masters in Architecture in USA

Top Universities

Cornell University
Yale University
Princeton University
University of California Los Angeles
University of Harvard
Stanford University
Arizona State University
Northeastern University
Project Management Courses in Australia
Accounting Courses in Australia
Medical Courses in Australia
Psychology Courses in Australia
Interior Designing Courses in Australia
Pharmacy Courses in Australia
Social Work Courses in Australia
MBA in Australia
Masters in Education in Australia
Masters in Pharmacy in Australia
Masters in Information Technology in Australia
BBA in Australia
Masters in Teaching in Australia
Masters in Psychology in Australia
University of Melbourne
Deakin University
Carnegie Mellon University
Monash University
University of Sydney
University of Queensland
RMIT University
Macquarie University
Data Science Courses in Canada
Business Management Courses in Canada
Supply Chain Management Courses in Canada
Project Management Courses in Canada
Business Analytics Courses in Canada
Hotel Management Courses in Canada
MBA in Canada
MS in Canada
Masters in Computer Science in Canada
Masters in Management in Canada
Masters in Psychology in Canada
Masters in Education in Canada
MBA in Finance in Canada
Masters in Business Analytics in Canada
University of Toronto
University of British Columbia
McGill University
University of Alberta
York University
University of Calgary
Algoma University
University Canada West
Project Management Courses in UK
Data Science Courses in UK
Public Health Courses in UK
Digital Marketing Courses in UK
Hotel Management Courses in UK
Nursing Courses in UK
Medicine Courses in UK
Interior Designing Courses in UK
Masters in Computer Science in UK
Masters in Psychology in UK
MBA in Finance in UK

MBA in Healthcare Management in UK

Masters in Education in UK
Masters in Marketing in UK
MBA in HR in UK
University of Oxford
University of Cambridge
Coventry University
University of East London
University of Hertfordshire
University of Birmingham
Imperial College London
University of Glasgow

Top Resources

Universities in Germany
Study in Germany
Masters in Germany
Courses in Germany
Bachelors in Germany
Germany Job Seeker Visa
Cost of Living in Germany

Best Universities in Germany

Top courses.

Masters in Data Science in Germany
MS in Computer Science in Germany
Marine Engineering in Germany
MS Courses in Germany
Masters in Psychology in Germany
Hotel Management Courses in Germany
Masters in Economics in Germany
Paramedical Courses in Germany
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
University of Bonn
University of Freiburg
University of Hamburg
University of Stuttgart
Saarland University
Mannheim University
MBA in Ireland
Phd in Ireland
Masters in Computer Science Ireland
Cyber Security in Ireland
Masters in Data Analytics Ireland
Ms in Data Science in Ireland
Pharmacy courses in ireland
Business Analytics Course in Ireland
Universities in Ireland
Study in Ireland
Masters in Ireland
Courses in Ireland
Bachelors in Ireland
Cost of Living in Ireland
Ireland Student Visa
Part Time Jobs in Ireland
Trinity College Dublin
University College Dublin
Dublin City University
University of Limerick
Dublin Business School
Maynooth University
University College Cork
National College of Ireland

Colleges & Courses

Masters in France
Phd in France
Study Medicine in France
Best Universities in Frankfurt
Best Architecture Colleges in France
ESIGELEC France
Study in France for Indian Students
Intakes in France
SOP for France Visa
Study in France from India
Reasons to Study in France
How to Settle in France

More About France

Cost of Living in France
France Study Visa
Cost of Living in Frankfurt
France Scholarship for Indian Students
Part Time Jobs in France
Stay Back in France After Masters

About Finland

Universities in Finland
Study in Finland
Courses in Finland
Bachelor Courses in Finland
Masters Courses in Finland
Cost of Living in Finland
MS in Finland
Average Fees in Finland Universities
PhD in Finland
Bachelor Degree in Medicine & Surgery
MBBS Courses in Georgia
MBBS Courses in Russia
Alte University
Caucasus University
Georgian National University SEU
David Tvildiani Medical University
Caspian International School Of Medicine
Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University
Kyrgyz State Medical Academy
Cremeia Federal University
Bashkir State Medical University
Kursk State Medical University
Andijan State Medical Institute
IELTS Syllabus
IELTS Prepration
IELTS Eligibility
IELTS Test Format
IELTS Band Descriptors
IELTS Speaking test
IELTS Writing Task 1
IELTS score validity
IELTS Cue Card

IELTS Reading Answers Sample

Animal Camouflage
Types Of Societies
Australia Convict Colonies
A Spark A Flint
Emigration To The Us
The History Of Salt
Zoo Conservation Programmes
The Robots Are Coming
The Development Of Plastic

IELTS Speaking Cue Card Sample

Describe A Puzzle You Have Played
Describe A Long Walk You Ever Had
Describe Your Favourite Movie
Describe A Difficult Thing You did
Describe A Businessman You Admire
Memorable Day in My Life
Describe Your Dream House
Describe A Bag You Want to Own
Describe a Famous Athlete You Know
Aquatic Animal

IELTS Essay Sample Sample

Best Education System
IELTS Opinion Essay
Agree or Disagree Essay
Problem Solution Essays
Essay on Space Exploration
Essay On Historical Places
Essay Writing Samples
Tourism Essay
Global Warming Essay
GRE Exam Fees
GRE Exam Syllabus
GRE Exam Eligibility
Sections in GRE Exam
GRE Exam Benefits
GRE Exam Results
GRE Cutoff for US Universities
GRE Preparation
Send GRE scores to Universities

GRE Exam Study Material

GRE Verbal Preparation
GRE Study Material
GRE AWA Essays
GRE Sample Issue Essays
Stanford University GRE Cutoff
Harvard University GRE Cutoff
GRE Quantitative Reasoning
GRE Verbal Reasoning
GRE Reading Comprehension
Prepare for GRE in 2 months

Other Resources

Documents Required For Gre Exam
GRE Exam Duration
GRE at Home
GRE vs GMAT
Improve GRE Verbal Scores

Free GRE Ebooks

GRE Preparation Guide (Free PDF)
GRE Syllabus (Free PDF)
GMAT Eligibility
GMAT Syllabus
GMAT Exam Dates
GMAT Registration
GMAT Exam Fees
GMAT Sections
GMAT Purpose

GMAT Exam Study Material

How to prepare for GMAT?
GMAT Score Validity
GMAT Preparation Books
GMAT Preparation
GMAT Exam Duration
GMAT Score for Harvard
GMAT Reading Comprehension
GMAT Retake Strategy

Free GMAT Ebooks

GMAT Guide PDF
Download GMAT Syllabus PDF
TOEFL Exam Registration
TOEFL Exam Eligibility
TOEFL Exam Pattern
TOEFL Exam Preparation
TOEFL Exam Tips
TOEFL Exam Dates
Documents for TOEFL Exam
TOEFL Exam Fee

TOEFL Exam Study Material

TOEFL Preparation Books
TOEFL Speaking Section
TOEFL Score and Results
TOEFL Writing Section
TOEFL Reading Section
TOEFL Listening Section
TOEFL Vocabulary
Types of Essays in TOEFL

Free TOEFL Ebooks

TOEFL Exam Guide (Free PDF)
PTE Exam Dates
PTE Exam Syllabus
PTE Exam Eligibility Criteria
PTE Test Centers in India
PTE Exam Pattern
PTE Exam Fees
PTE Exam Duration
PTE Exam Registration

PTE Exam Study Material

PTE Exam Preparation
PTE Speaking Test
PTE Reading Test
PTE Listening Test
PTE Writing Test
PTE Essay Writing
PTE exam for Australia

Free PTE Ebooks

PTE Syllabus (Free PDF)
Duolingo Exam
Duolingo Test Eligibility
Duolingo Exam Pattern
Duolingo Exam Fees
Duolingo Test Validity
Duolingo Syllabus
Duolingo Preparation

Duolingo Exam Study Material

Duolingo Exam Dates
Duolingo Test Score
Duolingo Test Results
Duolingo Test Booking

Free Duolingo Ebooks

Duolingo Guide (Free PDF)
Duolingo Test Pattern (Free PDF)

NEET & MCAT Exam

NEET Study Material
NEET Preparation
MCAT Eligibility
MCAT Preparation

SAT & ACT Exam

ACT Eligibility
ACT Exam Dates
SAT Syllabus
SAT Exam Pattern
SAT Exam Eligibility

USMLE & OET Exam

USMLE Syllabus
USMLE Preparation
USMLE Step 1
OET Syllabus
OET Eligibility
OET Prepration

PLAB & LSAT Exam

PLAB Exam Syllabus
PLAB Exam Fees
LSAT Eligibility
LSAT Registration
TOEIC Result
Study Guide

Application Process

LOR for Masters
SOP Samples for MS
LOR for Phd
SOP for Internship
SOP for Phd
Check Visa Status
Motivation Letter Format
Motivation Letter for Internship
F1 Visa Documents Checklist

Career Prospects

Popular Courses after Bcom in Abroad
Part Time Jobs in Australia
Part Time Jobs in USA
Salary after MS in Germany
Salary after MBA in Canada
Average Salary in Singapore
Higher Studies after MBA in Abroad
Study in Canada after 12th

Country Guides

Study in UK
Study in Canada
Study in USA
Study in Australia
SOP Samples for Canada Student Visa
US F1 Visa Guide for Aspirants

Exams Guides

Duolingo Test Pattern

GPA CALCULATOR Convert percentage marks to GPA effortlessly with our calculator!

Expense calculator plan your study abroad expenses with our comprehensive calculator, ielts band calculator estimate your ielts band score with our accurate calculator, education loan calculator discover your eligible loan amount limit with our education calculator, university partner explore growth and opportunities with our university partnership, accommodation discover your perfect study abroad accommodation here, experience-center discover our offline centers for a personalized experience, our offices visit us for expert study abroad counseling..

18002102030
Study Abroad

Should Smoking Be Banned In Public Places Essay - Samples and Tips for IELTS

IELTS Preparation
IELTS E-Books
IELTS Registration
IELTS Exam Fee
IELTS Exam Dates 2024
Documents Required
IELTS Test Centers
Test Format
Band Descriptors
IELTS Speaking Test
General Reading Test
General Writing Task
IELTS Coaching
Types of Essays
IELTS for Australia
IELTS Results
Generation Gap Essay
GPA Calculator
Study Abroad Consultant In India
Study Visa Consultants in India

Updated on 27 January, 2024

Anupriya Mukherjee

Sr. content writer.

IELTS or the International English language Testing System is one of the most popular and standardized tests to measure the English language proficiency of non-native English speakers. The IELTS writing section has two tasks, and task 2 is an essay writing question. Here, an essay topic will be given and you need to write an essay in response to it. The should smoking be banned in public places essay has been asked multiple times in the IELTS writing test over the years.

The test-takers need to practice common topics related to general and controversial issues. The relevant essay questions may change, but the main topic often remains the same.

Applicants must develop ideas and provide relevant examples to write a winning essay on topics related to questions like should smoking be banned in public places? The essay writing module is a challenging task and needs thorough preparation. Let us take a look at some of the smoking should be banned in public places IELTS essay samples and some tips to ace the task.

Sample essay:, download e-books for ielts preparation, download ielts sample papers.

Tips to write a winning IELTS essay on ' should smoking be banned in public places

Frequently Asked Questions

Learn more about study abroad, popular study abroad destinations, sample 1 on s hould smoking be banned in public places essay.

Some say 'smoking in public areas should be banned' while others go against the ban. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Tip: It is an opinion-based topic. Here, both sides need to be discussed, and finally, the opinion of the test-taker should be discussed.

Smoking is quite common among the younger generations today. But it has detrimental health impacts on both the smoker and any other person that inhales the smoke. The idea that 'smoking in public should be banned, is supported as well as opposed by many people. I believe smoking in public cannot be completely banned but there can be a middle path.

There are convincing arguments in favor of the ban because smoking ultimately leads to serious health crises. Supporters of the ban have various reasons to state.

Firstly, smoking is injurious to health. The main cause of lung cancer is smoking tobacco. Active smokers also suffer from other diseases like tuberculosis and heart problems. The symptoms may take time to show up but it eventually leads to a major crisis. It does not affect only the smoker, but also the people around the smoker. Both active and passive smokers can fall ill, and this calls for huge support for a blanket ban on smoking in public places.

Secondly, smoking is an addiction that influences non-smokers too. Anything that becomes an addiction is not at all safe and it tends to spread quickly. Peer and colleague group influences are very common in forming smoking habits. It is very easy to pick up smoking when one stays among smokers for long. People spend plenty of time in public areas, hence, smoking should be banned in public areas to avoid such negative influences.

Lastly, non-smokers feel very stressed when among smokers. It becomes difficult for pregnant women, senior citizens, and children, to adjust to an environment that is filled with cigarette smoke. It irritates non-smokers of various age groups. Smoking in public should be banned as it leads to annoyance to a large extent.

Nevertheless, some people oppose this ban too.

Firstly, they are unhappy about giving away their rights to smoke. They believe that such a ban would make them feel deprived of their individual rights.

Secondly, people against the ban on smoking in public areas say that cigarettes are sold and advertised publicly, and banning them will not make any difference. “Why can’t the government ban cigarettes completely if smoking in public is not allowed?”

Thirdly, they argue on terms like it becomes difficult to give up due to addiction. There are many incidents where severe health conditions are reported by active smokers, due to nicotine withdrawal. It is not easy to give up on smoking if someone does it regularly.

Fourthly, it will be an expensive affair to ban public smoking and impose new rules. Hence, they feel that the best solution is to keep active smokers separated from the general public.

Considering both sides of the argument, I feel there should be designated smoking zones in public areas. The bus stands, shopping malls, restaurants, and offices must have separate smoking zones so that addicted smokers are not affected or deprived.

Important Resources to Read:

Sample 2 on ‘smoking should be banned in public places IELTS essay’

Some businesses restrict smoking inside office spaces. Do you agree or disagree with this step taken by the businesses? Give reasons for your opinion.

Sample essay:

Corporate offices often see groups of individuals discussing issues while smoking. Is it a habit or does smoking actually help you brainstorm? Well, for non-smokers it should be banned, and for smokers, it is almost office culture.

Many companies, firms, and government offices have imposed restrictions on smoking inside office spaces. I feel it can be addressed with some other effective measures.

There are certain seemingly positive sides to smoking during work hours. It is believed that smoking improves concentration and helps the employees relax after long meetings or completion of projects. There is constant stress regarding deadlines, appraisal, and targets at work. In such a scenario, smoking is supposed to reduce stress.

Nicotine is a stimulant and smoking during office hours might keep employees in an active and elevated mood. Some projects may demand employees to stay awake late at night and work. In such a situation, employees don't feel drowsy and sleepy due to the nicotine boost.

Despite all these positive sides, there are alarming negative aspects too.

Firstly, smoking is harmful to health. It is one of the main reasons behind the increasing number of lung cancer cases globally. Diseases like tuberculosis and various cardiovascular health issues are caused by prolonged smoking habits. It does not only affect the smoker but also the people who spend time around smokers. Passive smokers face detrimental impacts too when they come in contact with smokers.

Secondly, the non-smokers feel uncomfortable in public spaces filled with cigarette smoke. It causes them stress. It is also very annoying, particularly for pregnant women and senior citizens in the office areas.

The debate between smokers and non-smokers can stop only when the authorities plan something fruitful. A strict ban on smoking will do no good. It will instill a sense of anger and disappointment among smokers if their rights are taken away suddenly. Similarly, the health impact of passive smokers cannot be ignored. In my opinion, office spaces and public areas should have separate smoking zones. This way, non-smokers will not have any problems and smokers can also relax.

You Can Also Read Sample Questions and Answers For The IELTS Passage: G reen Wave Washes Over Mainstream Shopping

Tips to write a winning IELTS essay on ' should smoking be banned in public places

The time allotted for the task 2 essay is 40 minutes and no extra time is allowed.
The minimum word limit for an essay is 250 words but there is no upper word limit. It is recommended to write a little more than the prescribed limit.
Organize the entire essay in 3 parts, introduction, body, and conclusion. In the introduction is a clear overview of the entire topic. The body is an analysis of facts and the conclusion should contain the opinion and summing up points.
Paraphrasing is important. It increases the readability of the essay.
Write short, crisp, and to-the-point sentences. Do not write complicated and lengthy sentences.
Answer all the parts of the questions. Refer to the first sample below, which has three parts - 1. agree in favor of why smoking should be banned 2. disagree in context to why smoking should not be banned 3. your own opinion.
If you are using any facts or statistical data, you need to be sure about them.
Idioms make your write-up colorful and accurate. You need to know them well before you use them.
Use collocations wherever needed. Use connectors and linking words but do not stuff them unnecessarily.
Be careful about the punctuation.
Present all your ideas in the right flow. The ideas, concepts, and experiences should be relevant to the topic.
Maintain a semi-formal tone. Do not use any informal and personal phrases.
Proofread your essay once you are done with the writing. This will help you scan mistakes in your essay.
When you practice a particular topic you must focus on learning all the relevant vocabulary related to it.
Check spellings, you should not make spelling errors. Use only those words that you are 100% sure of.
Practice all kinds of essays. You can get pattern questions like advantages, disadvantages, opinions, causes and effects, causes and solutions, and direct questions.
The conclusion is very important. The way you sum up your opinion will matter in boosting your IELTS band.
Get your practice essays checked by an expert or any IELTS experienced professional you might know.

It is important to practice and prepare for a winning IELTS essay. The IELTS writing task is very important as it measures the writing skills of non-native English speakers. Go through all the samples and tips on should smoking be banned in public places essay to write well. For any assistance regarding the IELTS essays, applicants can get in touch with academic counselors of upGrad Abroad.

Also Reads:

How does smoking in public places affect the environment?

Smoking cigarettes or other tobacco products in public has an adverse effect upon the environment. It leads to pollution and releases toxic air and polluting agents into the atmosphere. The cigarette butts also pile up, littering several areas and the chemicals contained in the same are toxic. When they leach into water and soil, they end up contaminating the entire ecosystem, leading to pollution of the water and soil alike. Smoking is also an irritant for others if done in public.

How does smoking affect the society & community?

Smoking has a widespread impact on the community and society at large. Smoking in public releases toxic and harmful air into the atmosphere while also contributing towards increasing the pollutant counts in the air. It also leads to contamination of the soil and water through the littering of cigarette butts.

Exposure to second-hand smoke is also physically harmful for others in public. Smoking contributes towards respiratory disorders and air pollution as well. It also enhances the risks of various ailments and fatalities in society at large.

What are the arguments for and against banning smoking in all public places?

The arguments for banning smoking in public places are the following:

Smoking leads to air pollution and releases toxic air into the atmosphere.
Littering of cigarette butts leads to widespread soil and water contamination.
Smoking leads to serious diseases and respiratory illnesses for others owing to their exposure to second-hand smoke.
Smoking leads to a higher incidence of heart attacks, lung cancer and other disease which de-stabilize major chunks of communities, leading to higher healthcare costs for Governments and more strain on healthcare resources.

The arguments against banning smoking in public places are the following:

Smoking bans do not usually have the intended effect, i.e. getting people to cut down or give up smoking.
It may be perceived as an infringement of the freedom and rights of citizens.
It will lead to lower tax revenues for Governments, limiting their public spending as a result.
It will not be good for several businesses as well, especially in the food and beverages sector.

Why smoking should be banned in public places ielts essay?

Smoking is a social evil that is greatly impacting the society and community at large. At the individual and organizational levels, much more needs to be done for combating the harmful incidence of rising smoking levels amongst people in multiple age groups. Smoking causes innumerable ailments and diseases, while exposing people to harmful passive smoke and pollutes the air considerably. It also contributes towards soil and air pollution. I feel that smoking should be banned in public places owing to its negative effects on entire communities.

Smoking should be banned in public places because of the pollution it creates. Firstly, it leads to the release of toxic smoke and other pollutants into the atmosphere. Secondly, littering of cigarette butts leads to soil and water contamination alike. Thirdly, people who are non-smokers, are exposed to passive smoke for no fault of theirs and contract respiratory ailments in turn. Fourthly, banning public smoking will lower the incidence of fatalities and serious disease, lowering the strain on Governmental healthcare resources and costs of the same.

Banning public smoking will also set a more positive example for the younger generations who will be less likely to pick up the habit. Hence, I firmly believe that Governments should set examples by banning public smoking and setting the tone for a healthier tomorrow.

Here are few of the trending IELTS Reading Answers:

The Life And Work Of Marie Curie Reading Answers
Why Pagodas Don't Fall Down
Spoken Corpus Comes To Life Reading Answers
Striking Back At Lightning With Lasers IELTS Reading Answers
The Context Meaning And Scope Of Tourism Reading Answers
A Spark A Flint IELTS Reading Answers
The Concept Of Role Theory Reading Answers
Micro Enterprise Credit For Street Youth Reading Answers
When Evolution Runs Backwards IELTS
The Impact Of Wilderness Tourism IELTS Reading Answers
The Truth About The Environment Reading Answers
The Politics Of Pessimism Reading Answer
The Rocket From East To West Reading Answers
Glass Capturing The Dance Of Light
Population Movements And Genetics Reading Answers
The Megafires Of California Reading Answers

What is Scholarship

Learn all about the scholarships like types of scholarships and how to get a one

Provincial Nominee Program Canada

Learn all about Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) Canada

Fulbright Scholarship

Learn about the eligibility, benefits, procedure etc about Fulbright Scholarships

Education Loan for Study Abroad

Learn about educational loans, types, amount, eligibility & more in this article.

Best Universities in Australia

Learn about best universities in Australia along with other information

SEVIS Fees for F1 Visa

Learn about SEVIS fees amount & how to pay SEVIS fee here.

Learn more about the best universities in Germany for higher education

Learn all about USMLE exam here including USMLE steps, process & more

Letter of Recommendation (LOR)

Find our all about an LOR and also how to effectively write an LOR

Best Courses After 12th Commerce in USA

Know about the best courses to study in the USA after 12th commerce.

MBA Jobs in Australia for Indians

Know about the best-paying jobs after an MBA in Australia

Best Courses After 12th Arts in USA

Know the study options in USA for Indian students after completing 12th from Arts

Narotam Sekhsaria Scholarship

Narotam Sekhsaria scholarships are available for Indian students to apply for

What is SDS and Non SDS Visa

Difference between SDS and Non-SDS visa applications, their requirements & more.

MBA in healthcare management in the UK and the scope of work after graduating.

PR in Canada

How to get Canada PR from India along with the key factors, process and cost

CRS Score Calculator

Learn more about CRS of Canada’s Express Entry program.

MBA Fees in Canada

Learn about all the costs involved in pursuing an MBA in Canada.

What to Do After BCom

Popular courses after BCom abroad that you can opt for. Read to know!

Vidya Lakshmi Education Loan

Study abroad by applying for a student loan at the Vidya Lakshmi Portal.

Study in Canada & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Study in Australia & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Study in the USA & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Study in Germany & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Study in Ireland & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Study in UK & Save up to 20 Lakhs with upGrad Abroad

Anupriya Mukherjee is a passion-driven professional working as a Content Marketer and earlier worked as a Digital Marketeer. With around 6 years of work experience, she has experience creating high-quality, engaging content for websites, blogs, news articles, video scripts, brochures, and ebooks.

Important Exams

Important resources for ielts, free study abroad counselling, trending searches, editor's pick, other countries.

Bachelors in Aviation
BSc in Nursing
Masters in Accounting
MA in Communication
University of Melbourne Courses
Masters in Australia
Courses in Australia
Masters in Business Analytics in Australia
Universities in Australia
Nursing Courses in Australia
La Trobe University
University of Adelaide
Masters in Public Health in Australia
MS in Australia
Trent University
Courses in Canada
University of Saskatchewan
University of Victoria
Concordia University
Thompson Rivers University
Masters in Data Science in Canada
Masters in Canada
University of Windsor
University of Manitoba
Universities in Canada
Liverpool John Moores University Ranking
University of West London Ranking
Universities in UK
Northumbria University Ranking
Kings College London
De Montfort University
Birmingham City University
Queen Mary University of London
Queen Mary University of London Ranking
University of Oxford Courses
Manchester Metropolitan University Ranking
University of Cambridge Courses
University of Sussex Ranking
Courses in UK
University of Leicester Ranking
Masters in UK
University of Bristol
University of Strathclyde Ranking
Bachelors in UK
University of Leicester
University of Texas at Arlington ranking
New York University
Drexel University Ranking
University of South Florida ranking
Saint Louis University Ranking
Columbia University Acceptance Rate
George Mason University ranking
Northeastern University acceptance rate
DePaul University
George Mason University
New York University Ranking
Purdue University ranking
University at Buffalo
University of Dayton ranking
DePaul University Ranking
Universities in USA
Saint Louis University
masters in computer science in usa
Bachelors in USA
Purdue University
Columbia University Ranking
Northeastern University ranking
Pace University
Courses in USA
Masters in USA
University of Texas at Dallas ranking
CEFR Level in IELTS
Gre Exam Fee in India
Duolingo Accepted Universities In Australia
IELTS Band Score Chart
IELTS Speaking Scores
IELTS Common Speaking Topics
22 July IELTS Exam
Minimum IELTS Score For Canada
Duolingo Exam Fee
Duolingo Accepted Universities In Canada
MBA In UK Without Gmat
IELTS Introduction Sample
Duolingo vs IELTS
Universities in Canada Without IELTS
Gmat Syllabus
IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics
Usmle Test Centers In India
SAT Exam Syllabus
Top Phrases for IELTS Speaking Test
GRE Waived University In Usa
How to download IELTS Scorecard
Duolingo Certificate
Dublin City University Courses
Maynooth University Courses
Dundalk Institute of Technology Courses
Masters Courses in Netherlands
University of Europe for Applied Sciences Acceptance Rate
Courses in Netherlands
Study in Netherlands
Technological University Dublin Courses
Technological University Dublin
Universities in Netherlands
University of Limerick Courses
Dundalk Institute of Technology
National University of Ireland Galway Courses
Business Courses in Ireland

The above tips are the Author's experiences. upGrad does not guarantee scores or admissions.

Call us to clear your doubts at:

Download our App

Grievance Redressal
Experience Centers
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
University Partner
Accommodation
IELTS Band Calculator
Download Study Abroad App
Education Loan Calculator
upGrad Abroad Office
Expense Calculator
Knowledge Base
Business Partner

Top Destinations

Masters programs.

MBA in Germany, IU
MIM in Germany, IU
MS in CS in Germany, IU
MS in Data Analytics in USA, Clark University
MS in Project Management in USA, Clark University
MS in IT in USA, Clark University
MS in Data Analytics & Visualization in USA, Yeshiva University
MS in Artificial Intelligence in USA, Yeshiva University
MS in Cybersecurity, Yeshiva University

Study Abroad Important Blogs

Cost of Study:
Cost of Studying in Canada
Cost of Studying in Ireland
Cost of Studying in Australia
Cost of living:
Cost of living in UK
Cost of living in Australia
Cost of living in Germany
Cost of living in Ireland
Cost of living in Canada
Career Opportunities:
Career Opportunities in Australia
Career Opportunities in Germany
Job Opportunities in After MS in Canada
Job Opportunities After MBA in Australia
Job Opportunities After MS in UK
IELTS Exam Resources:
Academic IELTS
IELTS Band Score
IELTS Writing Task 2
IELTS Slot Booking
IELTS Score for UK
IELTS Score for USA
Validity of IELTS Score
IELTS Speaking Topics
IELTS Reading Tips
How to Prepare for IELTS at Home Without Coaching
IELTS Preparation Books
Types of IELTS Exam
IELTS Academic vs General
IELTS Exam Pattern
IELTS Essay
IELTS Exam Dates
Top Streams:
Fashion Designing Courses in Australia
Accounting Courses in Canada
Management Courses in Canada

Argumentative Essay On Should Cigarette Smoking Be Banned In Public

Type of paper: Argumentative Essay

Topic: Law , Cigarettes , Smoking , Countries , Tobacco , Events , Medicine , Health

Words: 1100

Published: 02/14/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Over the last few years, people tend to notice an increasing number of “no smoking” signs in public places. Many countries the world over have imposed public policies, laws and regulations that ban smoking in public places and workplaces. Indicatively, smoking on public transport has been prohibited in South Australia in 1994 (Drug and Alcohol Services for South Australia) and gradually the rest of the world’s countries have enacted similar laws, while countries like England and Wales are considering a pilot ban of smoking within prisons, for 2014 (BBC News UK). Ireland was the first country to ban smoking in both public areas, including dinning facilities and bars, and all workplaces, in March, 2004 (WHO 110). In the U.S, it all started with a surgeon general’s report, back in 1964, where he stressed the disastrous effects of smoking (Committee on Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Acute Coronary Events; Institute of Medicine 109). Within the first year, the government passed the Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965 that obliged tobacco companies to label their cigarette packages with health-related warnings (Committee on Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Acute Coronary Events & Institute of Medicine 109). However, it was not until 1973 when Arizona became the first state to prohibit smoking is selected public areas, followed by Civil Aeronautics Board that created smoking and non-smoking sections in their commercial flights (Committee on Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Acute Coronary Events & Institute of Medicine 110). Those opposed support that prohibiting smoking in public places violate individuals’ right to be free to decide and it does not prevent people from smoking, as believed. Adults tend to smoke to reduce stress, due to economic, personal or familial problems (Jacobs). Smoking gives a speedy nicotine hit after only 10 seconds after nicotine enters the human body that makes people who smoke feel feelings of pleasure (Cancer Research UK). That is why people want to smoke at their workplace to relax in between breaks, or when they go out to have some fun and forget about their problems. After all, since purchasing and selling cigarettes is not banned, why should smoking them be? On the other hand, people claim economies are negatively affected by banning smoking in public areas, where most people spend practically all their day. Studies have shown that prohibiting smoking in restaurants and bars affect their profitability, based on basic economic logic (Tomlin). People that usually smoke to relax and those that have linked smoking to having fun will most likely order less drinks, while out in a bar, and the same probably applies to restaurants, since smoking is also connected with eating and enjoying oneself. The reason for prohibiting smoking in public places is mainly to protect public health, particularly in relation to passive smoking. It is widely accepted that the health consequences and risks deriving from “involuntary exposure to environmental tobacco smoke emphasizes the need for stronger regulation to protect nonsmokers, particularly children” (WHO 38). Furthermore, smoke-free legislation is proven to be beneficial to current smokers, as it has helped them to reduce the annual tobacco consumption, if not completely stop smoking (WHO 38). Surveys conducted on staff working in public places portray a big success of the imposed smoke-ban measures, which admittedly were not as difficult to enforce as initially thought, especially in places where separate non-smoking areas have been created (WHO 125). The air is cleaner too. Research has shown that air quality has improved significantly, ever since the enact of the smoke-free law, with carbon dioxide levels reducing by 45%, and up to 98% in non-smoking bars and workplaces respectively (WHO 112). People have also reacted very positively towards the new smoke ban laws, by 54%, while health care givers report reduced rates of people with respiratory problems (WHO 125). However, the major concerns in implementing the prohibition of smoking in public places Whether cigarette smoking should be banned in public places or not remains a controversial issue that will most likely concern years to come. Being allowed to smoke in public gives people the freedom to choose, which is their right. On the other hand, prohibiting smoking in public places gives non-smokers the right to have clean air without having to suffer passive-smoking-related health problems. So, all in all, it is a rights issue that will need further research as to how, and if, opposing views could be bridged. However, recent facts and statistics from research and studies are encouraging. It appears that 93% of the population consider the smoke-ban law is just and good (WHO 112). What is even more encouraging is the fact that 80% of smokers also agree that the law is actually good and almost a full 100% , both smokers and non-smokers, think that workplaces are healthier now,(WHO 112). In regards those that claim economies suffer a shock from the tobacco money that are lots, it might be better to consider public health and common good on top of everything else.

Works Cited:

BBC News UK (2013). “Smoking ban considered for prisons”. Web. Sep. 19, 2013. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24170235> Cancer Research UK (n.d). “Smoking and cancer: Why do people smoke?”. Web. Sep. 18, 2013. < http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/smokingandtobacco/whydopeoplesmoke/smoking-and-cancer-why-do-people-smoke> Committee on Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Acute Coronary Events & Institute of Medicine (2010). “Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Cardiovascular Effects: Making Sense of the Evidence”. The National Academies Press. <http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12649&page=110 > Drug and Alcohol Services for South Australia. “Tobacco and the Law”. Page Last Modified: 24 Sep 2012. Web. Sept.19, 2013. < http://www.dassa.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=120> Jacobs Marjorie (1995). “From the First to the Last Ash: The History, Economics & Hazards of Tobacco, A comprehensive Adult Basic Education Curriculum”. Unit 3. Web. Sep. 19, 2013. <http://healthliteracy.worlded.org/docs/tobacco/Unit3/1why_people_smoke.html> Tomlin Jonathan (2009). “The Economic Impact of Smoking Ban”. Forbes Magazine. Web. Sep. 18, 2013. < http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/04/economic-impact-bars-restaurants-opinions-contributors-smoking-ban.html> World Health Organization (2007). “THE EUROPEAN TOBACCO CONTROL REPORT 2007». Book. ISBN 978-92-890-2193-7 <http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/68117/E89842.pdf>

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 2060

This paper is created by writer with

ID 287037316

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Hunter theses, human behavior theses, luck theses, hurricane theses, birth control theses, bilingualism theses, jealousy theses, csr college essays, example of course work on global health alert, free report on field trip, essay on hate, free discrimination against immigrant populations essay example, free the determination of youngs modulus e using strain gauge technique report example, good examining bell hooks contribution to debates about gender and race in the late critical thinking example, good analyzing payback period method essay example, free we live while we see the sun essay example, example of nutrition for the older adult essay, free essay on human resource bfoq, good research paper about breach of confidentiality, good research paper on salt of the earth sociological perspectives, michael pollans big organic essay sample, example of essay on native non western cultural practices and globalization, good numerical precision case study example, free burning of the gaspee and its effects on both sides of the atlantic essay example, good research paper on research and analysis questions, free research paper about white collar crimes, good example of relation between international trade and world output essay, ohio city essays, tamiami essays, gaspard monge essays, xi jinping essays, williford essays, women in lebanon essays, sicko essays, people group essays, emotional labor essays, chukwu essays, screwtape letters essays, the principles of scientific management essays, operations group essays, roman temple essays, guldberg essays, floppy disk drives essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Log in using your username and password

Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
Latest content
Current issue
Anniversary
BMJ Journals More You are viewing from: Google Indexer

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode

https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050811

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Six reasons to ban

The cigarette is also a defective product, meaning not just dangerous but unreasonably dangerous, killing half its long-term users. And addictive by design. It is fully within the power of the Food and Drug Administration in the US, for instance, to require that the nicotine in cigarettes be reduced to subcompensable, subaddictive levels. 2 , 3 This is not hard from a manufacturing point of view: the nicotine alkaloid is water soluble, and denicotinised cigarettes were already being made in the 19th century. 4 Philip Morris in the 1980s set up an entire factory to make its Next brand cigarettes, using supercritical fluid extraction techniques to achieve a 97% reduction in nicotine content, which is what would be required for a 0.1% nicotine cigarette, down from present values of about 2%. 5 Keep in mind that we're talking about nicotine content in the rod as opposed to deliveries measured by the ‘FTC method’, which cannot capture how people actually smoke. 5

The spectre of prohibition

Another objection commonly raised to any call for a ban is that this will encourage smuggling, or even organised crime. But that is rather like blaming theft on fat wallets. Smuggling is already rampant in the cigarette world, as a result of pricing disparities and the tolerance of contraband or even its encouragement by cigarette manufacturers. Luk Joossens and Rob Cunningham have shown how cigarette manufacturers have used smuggling to undermine monopolies or gain entry into new markets or evade taxation. 17 , 18 And demand for contraband should diminish, once the addicted overcome their addiction—a situation very different from prohibition of alcohol, where drinking was a more recreational drug. And of course, even a ban on the sale of cigarettes will not eliminate all smoking—nor should that be our goal, since people should still be free to grow their own for personal use. Possession should not be criminalised; the goal should only be a ban on sales. Enforcement, therefore, should be a trivial matter, as is proper in a liberal society.

Helping the industry fulfil its promises

In March 1954, George Weissman, head of marketing at Philip Morris, announced that his company would ‘stop business tomorrow’ if ‘we had any thought or knowledge that in any way we were selling a product harmful to consumers’. 21

In 1972, James C Bowling, vice president for public relations at Philip Morris, asserted publicly, and in no uncertain terms, that ‘If our product is harmful…we'll stop making it’. 22

Helmut Wakeham, vice president for research at Philip Morris, in 1976 stated publicly that ‘if the company as a whole believed that cigarettes were really harmful, we would not be in the business. We are a very moralistic company’. 23

RJ Reynolds president Gerald H Long, in a 1986 interview asserted that if he ever ‘saw or thought there were any evidence whatsoever that conclusively proved that, in some way, tobacco was harmful to people, and I believed it in my heart and my soul, then I would get out of the business’. 24

Philip Morris CEO Geoffrey Bible in 1997, when asked (under oath) what he would do with his company if cigarettes were ever found to be causing cancer, said: ‘I'd probably…shut it down instantly to get a better hold on things’. 25 Bible was asked about this in Minnesota v. Philip Morris (2 March 1998) and reaffirmed that if even one person were ever found to have died from smoking he would ‘reassess’ his duties as CEO. 26

The clearest expression of such an opinion, however, was by Lorillard's president, Curtis H Judge, in an April 1984 deposition, where he was asked why he regarded Lorillard's position on smoking and health as important: A: Because if we are marketing a product that we know causes cancer, I'd get out of the business…I wouldn't be associated with marketing a product like that. Q: Why? A: If cigarettes caused cancer, I wouldn't be involved with them…I wouldn't sell a product that caused cancer. Q: …Because you don't want to kill people? … Is that the reason? A: Yes. Q: …If it was proven to you that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer, do you think cigarettes should be marketed? A: No…No one should sell a product that is a proven cause of lung cancer. 27

Note that these are all public assurances , including several made under oath. All follow a script drawn up by the industry's public relations advisors during the earliest stages of the conspiracy: On 14 December 1953, Hill and Knowlton had proposed to RJ Reynolds that the cigarette maker reassure the public that it ‘would never market a product which is in any way harmful’. Reynolds was also advised to make it clear that If the Company felt that its product were now causing cancer or any other disease, it would immediately cease production of it. 28 To this recommendation was added ‘Until such time as these charges or irresponsible statements are ever proven, the Company will continue to produce and market cigarettes’.

Summary points

The cigarette is the deadliest object in the history of human civilisation. It is also a defective product, a financial burden on cash-strapped societies, an important source of political and scientific corruption, and a cause of both global warming and global warming denial.

Tobacco manufacturers have a long history of promising to stop the production of cigarettes, should they ever be proven harmful.

The most important reason to ban the sale of cigarettes, however, is that most smokers do not even like the fact they smoke; cigarettes are not a recreational drug.

It is not in principle difficult to end the sale of cigarettes; most communities–even small towns–could do this virtually overnight. We actually have more power than we realize to put an end this, the world's leading cause of death and disease.

Benowitz NL ,
Henningfield J
Hatsukami DK ,
Perkins KA ,
LeSage MG ,
Peretti-Watel P ,
Constance J ,
Muggli ME ,
Oreskes N ,
Giovino GA ,
Henningfield JE ,
↵ A Study of Cigarette Smokers' Habits and Attitudes in 1970. May 1970. Philip Morris. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jyx81a00 (accessed 4 Apr 2012) . pp. 13, 18, 39 .
Hammond D ,
Joossens L ,
Cunningham R
↵ Austin vs. State of Tennessee , Decided Nov. 19. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court , Book 45 . Rochester : Lawyers Co-operative Publishing , 1900 : 224 – 43 .
↵ Hill and Knowlton . Suggested approach and comments regarding attacks on use of cigarettes. 1953. Bates 3799, http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tao66b00 (accessed 1 Jun 2012).
Greenwald WF

Competing interests The author has served as an expert witness for plaintiffs in tobacco litigation.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Open Access This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Share full article

Subscriber-only Newsletter

The Mostly Persuasive Logic Behind the New Ban on Noncompetes

By Peter Coy

Opinion Writer

The Federal Trade Commission used two very different rationales to get to its near-total ban this week on noncompete agreements. One of them is a no-brainer. The other is provocative but not completely obvious. I guess I’d call it a brainer.

As you might have read, the F.T.C. commissioners on Tuesday voted 3 to 2 on a final rule against noncompete clauses in employment contracts, which limit the ability of an employee to quit and immediately go work for a rival. The commission determined that they are an “unfair method of competition.” The rule takes effect 120 days after its publication in the Federal Register, unless a court blocks it before then.

The easy prong of the ban for the F.T.C. to justify is the one that applies to nurses, hairdressers, truck drivers — actually, every kind of worker except for senior executives. For 99 percent of the American work force, the F.T.C. said, requiring workers to sign noncompete agreements as a condition of employment is “coercive and exploitative conduct.” The agency’s 570-page ruling cites articles in The Times and The Wall Street Journal in which workers came forward to say, in the F.T.C.’s words, that noncompete agreements “derailed their careers, destroyed their finances and upended their lives.” I agree. I wrote a piece in 2021 titled , “Why Are Fast Food Workers Signing Noncompete Agreements?”

But the “coercive and exploitative” rationale doesn’t work for senior executives, who aren’t so easy to coerce or exploit. They’re more likely to have lawyers look over contract offers. They typically have some power in the employment negotiation and know how to use it. Many won’t sign a noncompete agreement unless they get something in return, such as a sweetened pay package.

The F.T.C. defined senior executives as people earning more than $151,164 per year who are in a “policy-making position” and estimated that fewer than 1 percent of workers meet the description. Under the rule, existing noncompetes for senior executives can remain in force but most new ones are banned. The rule doesn’t apply to clauses that are related to the sale of a business.

For noncompetes involving senior executives, the F.T.C. fell back on another argument, which is that the agreements are “restrictive and exclusionary conduct” that harms competition in product, service and labor markets. (The F.T.C. says that this second argument also applies to other workers, but for them I think it’s overshadowed by the “coercive and exploitative” argument.)

This is a bit subtle. It requires you to think of the employer and the senior executive as being in cahoots rather than fighting each other. Together they cook up a noncompete that rewards the executive for agreeing to deprive other potential employers of her or his talents and depriving the customers of those other companies of potentially better products and services. In economists’ terms, noncompete signatories are maximizing their bilateral surplus at the expense of others.

The logic is that the company that can’t hire the executive might have better growth prospects, so holding it back is bad for society as a whole. Or, after leaving the old employer, the executive has to be (wastefully) inactive for six months or so to wait out what finance people call the garden leave. Or the new employer has to pay a large sum to buy out the noncompete clause — again, socially wasteful.

“There can be sizable gains from restricting these contracts,” Liyan Shi of Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School of Business wrote in a 2023 article in the journal Econometrica.

As I said, this is an interesting and even persuasive argument. But it’s not simple to make.

“If this becomes the approach,” Sean Heather, the senior vice president for international regulatory affairs and antitrust at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, asked me, will any contract that doesn’t take into account the interests of third parties be “no longer viable”?

Charles Tharp, a professor of the practice at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business, said that while banning the noncompete might benefit a future employer, it harms the current employer, so there’s no net benefit; it’s a wash.

But two other economists I contacted disagreed with Tharp and Heather. Evan Penniman Starr, an associate professor at the University of Maryland’s Smith School of Business who is an expert on noncompete agreements, wrote to me that governments shouldn’t always put third parties first, but shouldn’t ignore them either, citing smoking bans to protect third parties from secondhand smoke. As for Tharp’s point, he wrote, “If match quality is higher at the subsequent firm, it is not a wash. It’s an efficient move that would destroy value if it wasn’t made.”

Sandeep Vaheesan, the legal director of the Open Markets Institute, emailed me that companies could still retain senior executives through higher pay packages and fixed-term contracts. Noncompetes are a “stick,” he wrote. “Public policy should encourage employers to use carrots instead. The F.T.C. noncompete ban does exactly that.”

Vaheesan also sided with the F.T.C.’s argument that companies have other ways to protect themselves when a key employee leaves, such as trade secret protection and agreements that prohibit people from soliciting customers of the companies they used to work for.

There’s precedent for taking into account the interests of third parties, Starr told me. He cited an American Bar Association model rule on professional conduct that forbids restricting attorneys from working elsewhere not only because it harms the attorney but also because it “limits the freedom of clients to choose a lawyer.”

The strongest evidence against noncompete agreements is that Silicon Valley has thrived even though — or maybe even partly because — the state of California has long banned noncompete agreements in most circumstances, under a law passed in 1872. The prohibition does not seem to have discouraged companies from sharing valuable inside information with employees who might leave. And it has enabled the germination of ideas as people flit from company to company like pollinating honeybees.

“Noncompetes are a pain in the neck for us,” Dr. Stephen DeCherney, who is the chair of New York-based Helios Clinical Research, told me. “Overall I won’t be sorry to see them go.”

Still, this is going to be messy for a while. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit against the F.T.C. to block the rule, arguing that the agency doesn’t have the power to issue such a ban and that even if it did, a categorical ban isn’t lawful. Eugene Scalia, who was President Donald Trump’s secretary of labor for a year and a half, also filed a lawsuit, this one on behalf of Ryan L.L.C., a tax services firm in Texas whose chief executive, Brint Ryan , is a Republican donor who has advised Trump.

Even if the F.T.C. wins on the legality of its rule, enforcing it is going to be tricky. Let’s say a company gets rid of its noncompete clause, but it imposes a nondisclosure agreement that’s so broad and strict that it has the same functional effect of preventing someone from taking a job elsewhere. According to the F.T.C., “such a term is a noncompete clause under the final rule.”

Arguing over what’s the same functional effect is going to keep a lot of lawyers busy. Same for nonsolicitation agreements and trade secret protection. “‘You can’t work for a competitor for a year’ is a pretty clear rule; ‘you can’t use our secrets at a competitor’ will mean more lawsuits,” Matt Levine, a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, wrote Wednesday.

I admire the F.T.C. for looking at the entire economic landscape in evaluating the pros and cons of noncompete agreements, not just the interests of the employer and employee. It’s a bold step, though.

The Readers Write

You wrote that most right-to-work laws were passed in the 1940s and 1950s, when Southern states were solidly Democratic. True, but in the ’60s after the passage of the Civil Rights Act the Southern Democrats were wholly absorbed by the Republican Party. Right-to-work is an anti-union strategy implemented by the same power elite that discouraged workers in this most recent vote. Their failure is significant. When Southerners start thinking for themselves, I view that as a hopeful development.

Rebecca Bartlett Brattleboro, Vt.

I’m a 47-year union member enjoying my retirement with an old-fashioned, union-negotiated pension and lifetime medical coverage. As those Volkswagen workers told you, to a certain degree, it doesn’t matter who the president is when it comes to what union members are paid. But it does matter to all employees who the president appoints to critical agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and many more. Those agencies have real day-to-day impact on workers’ lives and futures.

Jim Griffin King George, Va.

Concerning your newsletter on Donald Trump’s economic agenda: He is clearly advocating an isolationist strategy. One does not have to look far to see that isolationism is a dead-end street. Is there anything to love about North Korea’s economy? How about Brexit?

Bob Kerst San Francisco

Quote of the Day

“Got no diamond, got no pearl Still I think I’m a lucky girl I got the sun in the morning and the moon at night”

— Irving Berlin, “I Got the Sun in the Morning” (1946)

Peter Coy is a writer for the Opinion section of The Times, covering economics and business. Email him at [email protected] . @ petercoy

IMAGES

200 words essay
Should smoking be banned in public places?
School paper: Effects of smoking essay
Should Smoking Be Banned?
Sample Argumentative Essay On Smoking
ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY 2.docx

VIDEO

essay on smoking in english/dhumrapan per nibandh
Oral Presentation
Essay on Smoking for students || Essay
Essay on smoking in public places should be banned || Essay writing in English|| essay writing
PROFOUND MGS ANTI SMOKING MESSAGE???? (GONE WRONG) (2SMART4U)
Should smoking be illegal? (Ace Attorney) (Objection.lol)

COMMENTS

Should Smoking Be Made Illegal: Argumentative
In the "should smoking be illegal argumentative" debate, one of the primary concerns is the well-known harmful effects of cigarettes on the human body. Many people are aware that smoking cigarettes is detrimental. Cigarettes contain numerous chemical substances such as cadmium, butane, acetic acid, methane, ammonia, arsenic, methanol, nicotine ...
Should Cigarettes Be Banned? Essay
Banning of cigarette smoking will be beneficial to all smokers regardless of their age (Society, 2010). Many cigarette smokers are at higher risk of being infected with different types of cancer. These include: "Lung, Larynx, Oral cavity, Esophagus, Kidney, Cervix, Bladder, stomach among other cancers" (Society, 2010, p. 1).
Should Smoking Be Banned?
Reasons Why Smoking Should Be Banned. One reason why smoking should be banned is that it has got several health effects. It harms almost every organ of the body. Cigarette smoking causes 87% of lung cancer deaths and is also responsible for many other cancer and health problems. Apart from this, infant deaths that occur in pregnant women are ...
Should Smoking Be Banned in Public Places? Essay
Thesis statement. Smoking in public places poses health risks to non smokers and should be banned. This paper will be discussing whether cigarette smoking should not be allowed in public places. First the paper will explore dangers associated with smoking in public and not on those who smoke, but on non-smokers.
Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition
Those two mandates alone would do more for public health than any previous law in history. 5. Death and product defect are two reasons to abolish the sale of cigarettes, but there are others. A third is the financial burden on public and private treasuries, principally from the costs of treating illnesses due to smoking.
Examples & Tips for Writing a Persuasive Essay About Smoking
Persuasive Essay Examples About Smoking. Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death in the world. It leads to adverse health effects, including lung cancer, heart disease, and damage to the respiratory tract. However, the number of people who smoke cigarettes has been on the rise globally. A lot has been written on topics related ...
Cigarette Smoking Should Be Banned Argumentative Essay
Just 1 year after quitting smoking, your risk for a heart attack drops tremendously. Another reason why cigarette smoking should be banned is because of how much money people are wasting for these tobacco products. Tobacco companies are getting richer by the day, and are swimming in pools of cash while tobacco users are gradually dying.
Conclusion of Smoking Should Be Banned
In conclusion, smoking should be totally banned in campuses and colleges because of its severe health risks to both smokers and non-smokers. The health risks are much more to non-smokers because they may double up especially to those who already suffer from other ailments such as heart and lung problems.
Uncovering Whether Should Smoking Be Illegal in the Modern Society
The question is still 'Should smoking be illegal?' and in this argumentative essay we will explore why is smoking illegal in our society today. The effects on smoking on a person are so awful and extreme, that there really is no reason it should be legal for anyone.
Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?
Smoking poses a threat to individual liberties, and as a result, it should be discouraged. Prohibitions are dismissed as impractical or totalitarian by the industry, which has been the case for many years. On the other hand, the freedom argument falls short when taking into account how individuals experience addiction.
Smoking bans are coming: what does the evidence say?
Smoking rates have declined globally over the past few decades. ... who led a study 1 that suggested vaping safely helped pregnant women to stop smoking. But illegal vaping is still surging among ...
14 Central Pros and Cons of Smoking Bans
1. They take away freedom from people. Some critics see smoking bans as a violation on one's personal liberty. They argue that people should have the autonomy to decide on what kind of lifestyle they will have. Although they are not totally against banning smoking, they say that it should be a personal choice. 2.
Should Smoking Be Banned In Public Places Essay
Refer to the first sample below, which has three parts - 1. agree in favor of why smoking should be banned 2. disagree in context to why smoking should not be banned 3. your own opinion. If you are using any facts or statistical data, you need to be sure about them. Idioms make your write-up colorful and accurate.
Free Argumentative Essays About Smoking Should Be Banned In Public
It will decrease the number of smokers in public areas itself. The smoking in public areas should be banned, as it is one of the best ways to make people healthier and encourage a healthy way of life. The 31st of May is the international no tobacco day. In this day you can learn more about the bad influence of smoking, but we have to do ...
Smoking cigarette should be banned
Cigarettes smoking as a cause of illnesses and premature deaths become the first preventable cause to be controlled through imposing bans (Congress, 2005). Cigarettes have nicotine which is responsible for addiction and is attributed to coronary illnesses and nerve impairment hence, declining people's life expectancy.
Should Cigarette Smoking Be Banned In Public Argumentative Essay
Argumentative Essay On Should Cigarette Smoking Be Banned In Public. Type of paper: Argumentative Essay. Topic: Law, Cigarettes, Smoking, Countries, Tobacco, Events, Medicine, Health. Pages: 4. Words: 1100. Published: 02/14/2020. Over the last few years, people tend to notice an increasing number of "no smoking" signs in public places. Many ...
Argumentative Essay Sample on Smoking in Public Places
Extra Tips on How to Present Arguments in "Smoking in Public Places" Argumentative Essays. If you start writing the "Should smoking be banned" essay, you will notice that there are a lot of for and against arguments, so the problem can be analyzed from different perspectives. Use this essay to express your opinion regarding this topic.
Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition
Tobacco manufacturers have a long history of promising to stop the production of cigarettes, should they ever be proven harmful. The most important reason to ban the sale of cigarettes, however, is that most smokers do not even like the fact they smoke; cigarettes are not a recreational drug. It is not in principle difficult to end the sale of ...
Essay on Why Smoking Should Be Banned in Public Places
If smoking is banned in public locations it safeguards the lifestyles of the smoker in addition to that of the general public. Studies have validated that 2d hand smoke kills. Secondhand smoke motives unexpected infant loss of life syndrome (SIDS), respiratory infections, and allergic reaction attacks in youngsters.
Argumentative essay
Another reason why smoking should be banned in public places is because of the garbage problem. Not many smokers throw away their cigarette butts into the trash cans. Most of them just toss it on the streets. The streets will be much cleaner if smoking is banned. In my opinion, smoking should be banned in public places.
The Mostly Persuasive Logic Behind the New Ban on Noncompetes
The F.T.C. defined senior executives as people earning more than $151,164 per year who are in a "policy-making position" and estimated that fewer than 1 percent of workers meet the description.

Should Smoking Be Made Illegal: Argumentative

Works Cited

Video Version

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Smoking

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition

Six reasons to ban

The spectre of prohibition

Helping the industry fulfil its promises

Summary points

Persuasive Essay About Smoking - Making a Powerful Argument with Examples

What You Need To Know About Persuasive Essay

Persuasive Essay Examples About Smoking

Argumentative Essay About Smoking Examples

Tips for Writing a Persuasive Essay About Smoking

Choose a Specific Angle

Research the Facts

Make an Outline

Use Persuasive Language

Introduce Opposing Arguments

Finish Strong

Keep reading

Cigarette Smoking Should Be Banned Argumentative Essay

Related Samples

Uncovering Whether Should Smoking Be Illegal in the Modern Society

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Why Should Smoking Be Illegal?

Works Cited

Smoking bans are coming: what does the evidence say?

Smoke-free generations

Modelling smokers

Vaping bans

Global policies

Updates & Corrections

Related Articles

W2 Professorship with tenure track to W3 in Animal Husbandry (f/m/d)

W1 professorship for „Tissue Aspects of Immunity and Inflammation“

W1 professorship for "Bioinformatics and artificial intelligence that preserve privacy"

W1 professorship for "Central Metabolic Inflammation“

W1 professorship for "Congenital and adaptive lymphocyte regulation"

Quick links

14 Central Pros and Cons of Smoking Bans

List of Pros of Smoking Bans

List of Cons of Smoking Bans

Top Streams

Top Specialization

Top Universities

MBA in Healthcare Management in UK

Top Resources

Best Universities in Germany

Colleges & Courses

More About France

About Finland

IELTS Reading Answers Sample

IELTS Speaking Cue Card Sample

IELTS Essay Sample Sample

GRE Exam Study Material

Other Resources

Free GRE Ebooks

GMAT Exam Study Material

Free GMAT Ebooks

TOEFL Exam Study Material

Free TOEFL Ebooks

PTE Exam Study Material

Free PTE Ebooks

Duolingo Exam Study Material

Free Duolingo Ebooks

NEET & MCAT Exam

SAT & ACT Exam

USMLE & OET Exam

PLAB & LSAT Exam

Application Process

Career Prospects

Trending Topics

Country Guides