The Pros And Cons Of Smoking Bans

Smoking is a controversial topic around America for centuries. The public faces issues that question the policy of smoking, such as, should smoking bans be placed or not? In the late 1800s, smoking companies had cigarettes cheaper, which boosted sales for the company. Also, in 1965 all cigarette packages must include, "Cigarette Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your Health" which sparked some questions to the public. The real question is, should smoking bans be controlled and managed by whoever and however. A simple answer is no, smoking is a right to anyone above the age of 18 in America and no one should have that taken away. Only in certain situations and places should smoking be prohibited or regulated by a higher power. Showing examples as to why placing smoking bans are ineffective will prove that smoking is becoming invincible.
Joe Jackson wrote an article titled, Addiction. He discussed facts about how smoking bans can 't change tobacco addiction and the proof behind it. Many citizens believe smoking bans are helping, when in reality, smokers are just smoking elsewhere. New York placed smoking bans in bars and clubs, which now has a bad reputation. By not allowing smoking, certain areas with smoking bans are decreasing in sales and not reaching to their potential. …show more content…
Smoking bans has become a widespread issue across the country. When the government gets involved and places smoking bans the only justified as market failure and shaping preferences. Shaping the community to the point where smoking in public will be priced at a higher cost. People believe smoking bans has been warranted because indoor smoking involves a "negative externality"(Lambert 34). Meaning customers and employees of the establishment have to deal with the costs of smoking. At the bottom of the argument, non-smokers rights haven 't been violated. The reason is, they are compensated for the risks they suffer. ( Lambert