Banning smoking?

Question

I was wondering if somone could elaborate on banning smoking and self-ownership which is condition where an individual has the exclusive moral right to control his or her own body and life. I am looking for points where banning smoking negates self-ownership.

i specifically am looking for arguments that would say that it would affect self ownership. Thanks for all your posts

Answer 1

Man in civil society has never had complete self-ownership. It's against the law to commit suicide, for example. The operative word is civil. In most cases, you can smoke when you're alone. For civility sakes, though, sometimes we see restrictions to smoking around others. It's a civility issue, not a self-ownership issue.

Answer 2

The arguments for banning smoking tend to focus on the individual's effect on others, specifically so as not to implicate self-ownership. As such, successful attempts to ban smoking have related to the imposition of secondhand smoke on others - workplace bans, public smoking bans, etc. In going beyond bans related to this, one would need to focus on increases in health care costs, effect on productivity, and the like. Simply put, smoking bans get around the notion of self-ownership by focusing on what smoking may do to other people, who cannot otherwise control whether a smoker will choose to smoke.

Answer 3

I think that banning smoking does not affect self-ownership, as long as it only bans smoking in public places. What about the people that don't want to smoke, but have to be effected by the second hand smoke? Does that not take away that person's self-ownership?

If you are talking about making smoking (cigarettes) illegal, then you would have to argue that doing illegal drugs are taking away self-ownership.

Answer 4

What has happened in Oregon is to ban public smoking while at the same time putting a tax on tobacco for health care for children. What they want is no smoking and when the tax does not pay for the health care they can switch it to the general fund. If they did the same thing to gas, durable goods, or food there would be such a out rage. Smokers are easy targets.

Answer 5

Banning smoking, in my opinion, punishes us smokers for
creating the possibility, however remote, of offending, injuring, influencing, etc. other people with sidesmoke. If this
makes sense; we need to actively ban sounding of any sort.

You can own yourself; just don't say anything or smoke.

Maybe we can find some some other activities to ban. We're
on a roll :)) .

Answer 6

They will never ban smoking. It is a cash crop thats why the Americas have always had it and will contiue to have it until everyone quits.