I am doing a report on pros for the non smoking laws can you help me?

Answer 1

Well, I think the pros are pretty easy.
Cons:
1. smokers account for a large amount of tax revenue - if they make it so hard to smoke that we all quit they would loose billions of dollars a year in ciggarette taxes.
2. There are 90 year old smokers in every nursing home; is it really as dangerous as they say?
3. they're getting to the point of infringing on our rights - tabacco is NOT an illegal drug - restaurants/stores.etc..should have the right to decide for themselves if htey will allow patrons to smoke - it is not the governments responsibilty, nor does it make sense, to outlaw a legal activity!

Answer 2

Yes
Your hair no longer stinks
You can eat a meal in public without being assaulted by that nasty smell
You can go out for a drink and not have to strip at the washer and dryer and take a shower so you can sleep without that smell on your body
Your chest will not hurt the next day
You will no longer have burns in your clothes
You will no longer have burns in the furniture
No more cleaning ashtrays
You will save a ton of money
You will get rid of that awful cough
You will start your skin back on the path of repair and hopefully before the lip wrinkles have started.
Your fingers will no longer be yellow
No more tobacco at the bottom of your purse.
You car will no longer stink and you will no longer offend any who ride in it.

At least this is what I experienced when I quit.

Answer 3

if you take enough freedoms from the people,pretty soon the government will be telling you which classes to take and then it wont matter.but seriously,i think they have stretched the law on this issue far enough.from a parental point of veiw,im happy with the laws.seeing adults engagged in bad habits such as smoking and others are terrible on children in the long run.what do you think bar owners think.i would bet theyre saying"i thought this was america,land of the free"

Answer 4

The public has an interest in being protected from the health hazards of second hand smoke, shown to cause many health problems, and in that public interest the legislators can pass rules to ban smoking in the public arena.

Answer 5

Yes look up the number of deaths by asthma attacks, number of asthma attacks caused by tobacco smoke, then compare and contrast with the number of injuries caused by accidental gun discharge. Asthma is always lethal in the end. Smoke will permeate an entire room. A bullet only tracks a single path.

Answer 6

Here is a cite where you can get some of the arguments and impressions of these laws from a libertarian perspective: http://girlinshortshorts.blogspot.com/2007/03/second-hand-smoke-police.html

Answer 7

It provides people the right to tell owners of businesses that they can not make the rules in their own establishments. If it is a restaurant, they will soon tell them something off the wall like what oil they have to use in their family recipe, or what kind of meat is "good" and which one is not.

Answer 8

i am answering this as a smoker...
if ciggs..are as dangerous(i know they are by the way)..and if the govt..has our (the public) best interest at heart...why not just out-law ciggs and be done with it?...
i wish i had never started smoking... i try to be courteous to non-smokers..but i realize that some smokers don't...i can see banning smoking in public places....
but i think it should be up to the individual places to ban smoking..not up to the government....

Answer 9

Look at the issues relating to second-hand smoke, and the health risks that it causes. Those health concerns form the legal basis that allow cities, counties and states to regulate smoking in public.

Answer 10

Here's a question. Which is healthier, smoking or tyranny?