The Instigator
KiwiJudas
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Smoking cigarettes should be illegal in public places

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 2 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,647 times Debate No: 16816
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

KiwiJudas

Pro

Hello, good luck to the opponent and hope this debate can be of benefit to us both.

Definitions:

Smoking - a visible suspension of carbon or other particles in air, typically one emitted from a burning substance.

Cigarettes - a thin cylinder of finely cut tobacco rolled in paper for smoking.

Illegal - contrary to or forbidden by law.

Public - of or concerning to the people as a whole.

Stance:

Pro - I will choose pro, meaning I believe it should be illegal to smoke in public places. To be more specific I believe there should be private places where smoker's can smoke amongst themselves.

Con - Obviously will be chosen by my opponent he/she will protect the rights that smoker's have now which is to be able to smoke anywhere. (With some exception of private places where is not permitted, such as restaurants, movie theater's etc.)

First round will be for acceptance, then we will move on from there.

If my opponent should have any questions I ask him/her to leave a comment or send me a private message.

Side note, I will like someone responsible someone who will start and finish a debate a ton of people start but never end it and It's quite irresponsible and annoying.

Thank you and good luck.
Ore_Ele

Con

I wish to offer alternative definitions, but I will leave it to my opponent to make the final decision of to use his definitions or mine (and I will respect whatever set he chooses so long as he announces it at the start of round 2).

Smoking - the action of intentionally inhaling the fumes of a burning substance, typically done through the burning of tobacco in the form of a cigarette (though not limited to that).

public place - any location which is owned by the government and so, the people. Not privately owned.

As for "cigarette" I accept that definition (though suggest that it be expanded to include all smoking tobacco products, like cigars).
Debate Round No. 1
KiwiJudas

Pro

Thanks to the opponent for accepting this debate, I accept all his definitions over mine. To make it all clear, of the positions the opponent and I carry.

Pro - I am pro for this debate therefore I have the burden of proving that "Smoking should be illegal in public places." Such as the streets, parks, etc.

Con - The opponent will have the burden of proving that "Smoking should be legal in public places." Such as the streets, parks, etc.

Under his/her definitions and these positions we both accept the debate and I will let the opponent make his opening statement.

Thank you and good luck.
Ore_Ele

Con

I wholeheartedly reject the notion that BOP should be shifted to the person maintaining the status quo. If anything, BOP should be equally responsible, especially since no BOP guide was established in round 1. Typically, even when BOP is equal, the instigator goes first, since it would be highly unfair for me to have both the first word and the last word. However, since we are running low on rounds, I will begin with my argument.

Smoking should remain legal in some public places, namely in designated areas in open parks and wildernesses. In open areas, the is more wind and light, and so, smoke disperses much quicker [1]. By quickly dispersing, there is less risk of damage from passive smoke. By also having designated smoking areas, the risk of accidental passive smoke damage further drops. This limits any damage caused by smoking to be experienced by the smoker alone, so they can take personal responsibility for their own actions.

Under the basic rights of self-ownership, individuals have the right to do what they want to themselves, so long as they don't cause harm to others. If smoking in public can be limited so that only the smoker suffers the damage of their choices, then the right to smoke should not be infringed.

I'll leave this at that for now and await my opponent's argument.

Thank you,

[1] https://fp.auburn.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
KiwiJudas

Pro

KiwiJudas forfeited this round.
Ore_Ele

Con

Extend arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
KiwiJudas

Pro

KiwiJudas forfeited this round.
Ore_Ele

Con

Poo monkeys.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
KiwiJudasOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.
Vote Placed by Danielle 5 years ago
Danielle
KiwiJudasOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: fdfdkfjdf