Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A free and responsible press serving the UMass community since 1890

Massachusetts Daily Collegian

A tobacco ban fiasco

A new year comes with new resolutions. Some people may have decided to eat healthier and some may have decided to quit smoking. There is good news for potential cigarette quitters who live in Great Neck, NY. Smoking has now been banned on the public sidewalks outside of businesses.

On Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2011 the Great Neck Village Board approved the smoking ban on the public sidewalks leaving smokers in disbelief. If caught, smokers could receive a fine of up to $1,000. The local business owners and their customers complained to officials about smoke outside of their doors leaking in. These complaints led to the ban. Several residents believe the ban is good for the environment and allows non-smokers to refrain from having to hold their breath in the presence of harmful second-hand smoke.

However, some believe this is a violation of human rights. According to CNN, Bruce Zipes, owner of Bruce’s Bakery said, “Their intentions are good but it is another right and another privilege that the government has taken away from us.”

Likewise a worker in the village of Great Neck who only identified herself as Sophia to CNN said, “If my smoking bothers people then why not turn off the engines of cars? You breathe in carbon monoxide from the cars don’t you?”

Although Sophia makes a good observation, the majority of people do not have to deal with being engulfed in car exhaust the way they are by cigarette fumes. Village Mayor Ralph J. Kreitzman, the one who pushed for the ban, told MyFox New York “I have no problem with people smoking. They just shouldn’t do it in a place that harms other people.”

Well said. That is, if we are all looking out for the health of others, but if this is the case, wouldn’t it be more fitting to ban smoking in any public area period? Second hand smoking has been proven to be harmful to those who inhale, so on these grounds smoking would eventually only be allowed in private places.

New York City is now considering a stricter smoking ban, extending it to public parks, beaches and malls. So is this a violation of rights or is it protecting the general public? Sure smoking is an individual’s personal lifestyle choice, and they have the right to do as they please with their own health, but what about those around them? Is it fair to endanger the lives of others because you decide you want to intoxicate your lungs to relieve stress? If we take a look at the cancer fact sheet we can see that lung cancer is clearly the leading cause of death in the United States. In 2010, 157,300 men and women died from lung cancer. In addition, every year 3,400 non-smokers die from lung cancer and second-hand smoke inhalation is identified as the cause in many of these cases. There were also 46,000 deaths of non-smokers who had heart disease in part or entirely because of their breathing in of second-hand smoke. So while banning smoking in public places may seem like a ridiculous notion, the ban would reduce these death rates considerably. Is it wrong for the government to attempt to ban a personal decision that inflicts harm on the public?

The proposed New York City smoking ban could be the start of a movement nationwide that would decrease health risks of our public environment. With the tobacco industry being a major source of income for the government, is it possible for them to hinder their sales? Issuing bans would most likely affect tobacco sales. Making the issues surrounding such bans, not only moral ones, but also financial ones.

With smoking bans gaining popularity, this trend could mean a possible ban on campus as well. How would our local smokers consisting of students and professors, some of whom smoke, feel about a possible smoking ban? They probably would not be the least bit happy, but is it fair to ban a person’s personal lifestyle choice? On the other hand is it fair to put another’s health at risk?

Only time will tell what the decision on the potential bans will be, and it is sure to cause an uproar and division of our campus community. This could be the start of a nationwide tobacco ban fiasco.

Curtis Bloomfield is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected].

View Comments (3)
More to Discover

Comments (3)

All Massachusetts Daily Collegian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • L

    LuciaJan 20, 2011 at 5:00 am

    ^ I live in a country where chewing gum is already banned.. smoking laws here are strict, but do-able. Being a smoker myself, I do actually appreciate strict smoking laws as I’m apparently too stupid to stop for the time being and need some external factors to force me to smoke less. But an overall point blank ban as is the case in Bhutan would definitely upset me (or maybe be the best solution..).
    I don’t know, it’s definitely okay to restrict smoking to limited places in public – that way, smokers still do have an option and non-smokers are not terribly bothered.
    But it’s definitely true, as the woman in the article points out, that second hand smoke is not the worst offender when it comes to lung/heart problems of non smokers (unless it’s a person who has to breath lots of it literally day in, day out). But granted, it’s easier to reduce and more avoidable than general air pollution, car fumes etc. But do leave a little square meter for smokers as well please.

    Reply
  • C

    Curtis BloomfieldJan 20, 2011 at 3:15 am

    I agree that smoking should be banned all over in the US. It is the governments duty to protect and serve it’s residents but cigarette smoking affects smokers and non-smokers all at the same time. I do not know why something that can be so harmful to the person doing it and the people around them has not been made illegal as of yet.

    Reply
  • M

    Marilyn BliokJan 19, 2011 at 9:19 am

    After 40 years of smoking (started in college) I found myself with lung cancer
    (1994). In 2001 another bout was finally discovered at stage IIIA or IIIB, I will not tell of the horrors of misdiagnosis I endured for the previous year, while forced to retire from a wonderful career in teaching. Chemo and no promises for survival from the benefits of removing the second cancerous lung lobe has brought me to almost 17 years of survival (cumulatively). It was and is a horrible experience and I am not promised a cure. So my question is why not ban smoking all over the US? However, coming from a village that has recently banned the congregating of five or more meeting and greeting on the streets while hoards of people continue to crowd the sidewalks after religious services from the many houses of worship and making sidewalks and roads impassible, I find these laws ludicrous. Next we will ban chewing gum and gossip.

    Reply