Earlier this week, a measure was put in place banning the use of tobacco products in public parks and playing fields in my hometown. Those caught using tobacco products will be subject to a $300 fine and a ticket issued by the town.

The article began as a petition created by a resident who was sick of not being able to control the smoke at the playground where her young toddler played. She said there was no way she could prevent her child from breathing in the smoke, and she would have no choice but to take her child home to avoid smoke.

While this law only affects my small town, there are many people for or against laws like this around the country, as laws pertaining to where tobacco is permissible are grabbing more public attention. As time goes on, people are increasingly against allowing smoking in public.

There are several main problems with this type of rule, the biggest being enforcement. There is no easy way to enforce a rule when law enforcement officials need to be called to the scene and it is easy for a smoker to simply walk away. Also, smoking is still allowed on sidewalks and areas around parks and recreation facilities, meaning that airborne smoke can still find its way into a park.

This problem will always arise when smoking is banned in an open public area. There is the old “pee section in a pool” expression that seems to work for smoking too – smoke in a specific area in an open space will move to the other air. But beyond the fact that air moves and smoke happens when people smoke outside, would a law like this stop people from smoking altogether?

People obviously have a right to smoke if they wish, despite the numerous health concerns blared in every type of media imaginable in today’s society. Rules like this one in small towns and cities make it harder to smoke, but can they really stop people from smoking in totality? Would a person actually quit because they couldn’t smoke as they walk their dog in the park?

I am not a smoker, nor do I plan to become one, yet I have several friends who do smoke. In this generation of college students, it is pretty much implied that smoking is not allowed indoors, near air vents that lead to buildings, and around schools. Many people, I think, would agree with these rules, simply because it is understood that when people are inside it is harder for smoke to escape. Yet it seems banning butts outdoors is like saying that there is nowhere to smoke but one’s own house or specifically designated areas outdoors.

This idea seems to make a lot of sense; after all, we don’t allow people to consume alcohol anywhere they wish. Yet at the same time, with no way to really monitor people smoking outside all the time, along with the idea that smoke drifts, how can something like this or any law prohibiting tobacco outside really work?

Then there is the mother and the child outside at the park who both have to deal with the person smoking near the playground. It is clear that they shouldn’t have to be exposed to second-hand smoke. Smoke does wander, but wouldn’t eliminating it near the playground itself make a big difference? The law isn’t so much to stop smoking period necessarily in this aspect, it is just to eliminate its byproducts from affecting other people.

With the personal freedoms of the cigarette smoker, the concerns of the parent for their child, and the person simply passing through the park with their dog, banning smoking in parks makes a whole lot of sense. Figuring out ways to monitor and make sure people are respecting the rule is difficult, but making smoking taboo in another public place will change the way people see the appropriateness of smoking.

Tackling the issue of youth and tobacco use is a separate issue which cannot be solved as simply as eliminating smoking at the park. Yet this measure, despite its criticism, seems to be a step in the right direction.

Personal freedoms are, of course, at the core of American values and laws. Yet when personal freedom affects other people who cannot choose whether or not to be involved, the freedoms of others are compromised.  In today’s society, with all we know about tobacco use and its health risks, why shouldn’t we be making rules like this one?

Alison Bowler is a Collegian columnist. She can be reached at [email protected].