The Instigator
FlamePhoenix
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Ethankershner
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

National Smoking Ban to be forced accross the US

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/31/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,352 times Debate No: 43163
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

FlamePhoenix

Pro

Hello, I'm not going to fully put accross my argument in this post, simply outline the terms and topic.

I believe there should be a forced nationwide smoking ban all over the USA, to cut smoking for both health and pleasure reasons.
During this debate, I will not be placing huge emphasis on sources, as it is much opinion more than fact. Please do participate in the comments, it would be nice if we could have some resident experts sit in and watch. I've made the time to argue short (24 Hours), so that we can have quite fast paced debating.

I'm new to DDO but I'm looking for a challenge so I can truly become a full community member!
Ethankershner

Con

I accept your debate; though I am still unclear as to the details of your smoking ban, but I will outline a few reasons to oppose a smoking ban in the United States, in the limited space I am given. (Why the minuscule character limit?)


Individual Liberty

Perhaps the most obvious reason to oppose a ban on smoking is the fact that it deprives people of their individual freedoms. Though it is harmful to the user, the choice of whether to smoke or not should be an individual's choice, and not the government's. This kind of handing power to the government leads to what is known as a "nanny state" in which the state decides what is good and bad for individuals and makes decisions on behalf of them, destroying their liberty.

While smoking is indeed bad for your health, many people enjoy it and seeing as it harms no-one but the user primarily (Besides in cases of second-hand smoking, in which case restrictions are already in place, and the ban would ban smoking in public and private.), the ban cannot be construed as anything but an infringement of individual liberty.


Cigarette Taxes

Taxes on cigarettes are a major source of income for both the federal government and state governments. By banning cigarettes, a significant amount of money will be taken from state and federal budgets covering everything from veteran's benefits to education. To compensate for this, much will have to be cut, or taxes will have to be raised; both of which are unfavorable and harm people.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...


Incarceration

Because of the war on drugs, the United State's incarceration rate has risen to the highest in the world. This is evident due to the rapid increase in incarceration that began in the 1970's, when the war on drugs kicked into full swing.

Due to the massive demand for cigarettes that is unlikely to go away (addiction), there will inevitably be a huge amount of people incarcerated for both using and distributing cigarettes. To mandate the ban, incarceration of many people will be required. This will lead to an even bigger jump in the incarceration rate, and will cause the debt (already growing from removed cigarette tax) increasing enormously due both to money needed to pay for the prisoners (25,000 per prisoner per year) and an even further loss as prisoners are unproductive, and don't earn taxable incomes, which will lead to yet more economic woes. Productivity bolsters our economy, and a cigarette ban will detract significantly from that.


Source (Current Incarceration Rate): http://en.wikipedia.org...
Source (Graph): http://en.wikipedia.org...
Source (Cost for prisoner): http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
FlamePhoenix

Pro

FlamePhoenix forfeited this round.
Ethankershner

Con

My opponent has forefitted the previous round, so I don't have much to argue against.

I would just like to point out that a smoking bans (The type of smoking ban was not specified by my opponent) oftentimes ban smoking altogether, whether in public or private. Since this distinction was not made by my opponent, I have demonstrated why bans like this (as in the case of the Smoke-Free Arizona Act) are harmful to personal liberty, and the economy.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
FlamePhoenix

Pro

FlamePhoenix forfeited this round.
Ethankershner

Con

Once again, my opponent hasn't responded. Since there really isn't much else to say, unless my opponent revives during the next round, I consider this debate done.

As such, please don't consider my forefit next round to be rude or uncalled for, thanks.
Debate Round No. 3
FlamePhoenix

Pro

FlamePhoenix forfeited this round.
Ethankershner

Con

Not much to say. Vote pro.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Ethankershner 3 years ago
Ethankershner
From the same Wikipedia article you quoted that from: http://en.wikipedia.org...

"Legislation may also define smoking as more generally being the carrying or possessing of any lit tobacco product."

Because you didn't specify what kind of smoking ban you advocate, I simply went with a more general ban on smoking, as the article says, of possessing any lit tobacco product.
Posted by FlamePhoenix 3 years ago
FlamePhoenix
Smoking Ban- "Smoking bans are public policies, including criminal laws and occupational safety and health regulations, which prohibit tobacco smoking in workplaces and other public spaces." For this instance we will assume that this is a full ban in all public workplaces, hospitality areas, etc.- all public places.
No votes have been placed for this debate.