Smoking in public should be illegal
Debate Rounds (3)
K- Non-smokers do not really get "secondhand smoke" There is no proven evidence to provide such statistics that second hand smoke causes the effects listed above. People used to smoke inside buildings, hospitals, airlines and no such evidence can still be provided.
K- Non smokers are said to have been sick from second hand smoke. It is said that people who are around smokers are twice as likely to die from heat disease than any other person. (ec). http://www.reuters.com... Times were very different when people were allowed to smoke in restaurants and inside other buildings. Now everyone's health is at risk and that is why smoking is banned inside buildings. (s) Therefore I think it should be banned in all public places. (c)
Another reason why smoking should not be banned is because the government is ultimately telling people what to do and when to do it. It is actually a little scary to understand what will come next? Will fast food be banned because it causes people to gain weight and lead to obesity or the fact that heart disease is the 2nd killer in America. It will only give the government more control to tell citizens how to live.
K- Considering that smoking in general is bad for your health, it should be left up to the smoker, fast food eater.
I think alcohol has a very different effect on people than smoking cigarettes do.(ri)ultimately smoking has bad effects on people and it should be banned in public areas. If people would like to smoke they should do it in their own homes and away from the general public to keep them away from health harms. (ri)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Doulos1202 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were fueled by conspiracy and weightless with little to no evidence. Pro's arguments could have been a lot stronger but were enough to trump Con's.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.