Fundamentally, there is one big reason why people protest smoking both on campus and everywhere else in the world: its dangerous. Cigarettes have long been known to be a health hazard. As early as the 1970s the United States has been putting surgeon general warnings on all packages of cigarettes, informing people of the dangers they bring. Ingredients in cigarettes include rat poison, known carcinogens and an ingredient found in napalm. This leaves little question as to whether cigarettes are harmful to a person’s health, the answer is clear: yes they are harmful, both to the smoker and those around them.
But to some this doesn’t matter. They say that smoking is a personal choice, and one that must be respected. There is however, a point at which the government is obligated to step in. When someone’s actions endanger themselves or someone else it is the duty of the government to step in. As the idea goes someone’s freedoms can exist unrestricted up till the point when that freedom infringes upon someone else’s rights. To use the classic example this is why someone can’t shout fire in a crowded theater, for while an individual does have a right to freedom of speech using it in that way endangers the lives of others, making it a dangerous and immoral act. This is why government sets law in place to protect the rights of other citizens.
What does this have to do with OWU? Well look at it this way: OWU is in effect a ruling body, much like a government, which has a responsibility to protect students. Currently, this isn’t happening. Presently students who smoke are asked to do so at least twenty feet from the building, but lets face it they don’t. Just the other day I was walking out of the main doors at Smith and practically ran into a student smoking, right there on the step. This person couldn’t have been more then a foot away from the door, and I got a lovely face full of smoke because of it. Ahh the joys of second hand smoke. I had just been exposed to a garden variety of toxins because this individual chose to smoke. Second hand smoke can be just as dangerous as actual smoking if there is continued exposure. While I doubt I will ever inhale so much second hand smoke to suffer consequences from it I still do not appreciate having someone else infringe upon my right to a healthy smoke free life style. Because second hand smoke is dangerous, and exposing student to it unwillingly violates their right to a healthy smoke free life style, OWU should enforce a ban on smoking.
Furthermore the need to protect the health and rights of non-smokers is already being recognized in society. I’m originally from Ohio, and a few years ago now Ohio passed its own smoking ban prohibiting smoking in public places. Now obviously since OWU is a private institution that doesn’t apply here, but logic behind it does. OWU is a community, or society unto itself. Right now public places on campus, where everyone comes and goes, can be smoked in. This inherently infringes on the rights of students to live healthily smoke free lives, by putting toxic smoke in areas where they have to be (for example the Jaywalk).
I’d like to conclude with a cost benefit analysis. If OWU enforces this ban on smoking, students will be able to live and learn in a healthily and safe environment, but be unable to smoke. On the other hand, allowing the status quo to continue endangers the health of many, smokers and non-smokers alike, but allows students to freely smoke. When weighing the health of our student body against the right to a dangerous choice made by a few, but which affects everyone, the answer is clear. The health of all students, smokers and nonsmokers alike, is more important then letting students smoke on campus.
There are a lot of things harmful to one's health. But people have the right to choose what they partake in. It's unacceptable for a student body to tell me what I can and cannot put in my body. And I haven't seen any movement to ban beer or liquor on campus. Both of these substances, like cigarettes, are legal to Americans past a certain age, have negative long-term physical effects, and can make the user dependent or addicted.
ReplyDeleteAs a non-smoker, I'm incredibly upset with WCSA's attempt to ban cigarettes on campus. What about my rights as an individual to CHOOSE?
It is true that individuals have the right to choose, however there are times when that power must be limited. The difference between smoking and the other examples of beer and liquor you mention is that with smoke, more then just one person's health is affected by the drug. If someone drinks the effect of the alcohol is only on them. With smoking though, toxic by products (the actual smoke) are released into the air which other people have to breath, especially when smoking is done in public places. In this case then the right of others to chose to avoid smoke is violated, and since we dealing with a substance which is known to be harmful the right to avoid it should be valued over the right to indulge in it.
ReplyDeleteAlcohol use can be restricted by the government by assessment of age or threat (driving while under the influence). A smoker is within his rights when he inhales, when he exhales second hand smoke becomes a threat.
ReplyDelete