The Instigator
emowl
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Smoking should be banned in all public places

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/21/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,531 times Debate No: 23038
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

emowl

Pro

First round is an acceptance round
2 and 3 are for the debate
I wish my opponent good luck
Multi_Pyrocytophage

Con

I thank my opponent for starting the debate, and wish her good luck.

I will define a few things for this debate.

Smoking: to draw into the mouth and puff out the smoke of tobacco or the like,
as from a pipe or cigarette.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Banned: the act of prohibiting by law; illegalizing.
http://dictionary.reference.com...


Basically, I will argue that smoking should not be illegalized in public places, while my opponent will argue that it should be illegalized in public places.

With that, I hand over the next round to Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
emowl

Pro

Smoking should be banned in public places. Smoking causes a major health concern not only for the smoker, but for the people around, too. About 53,800 people die from 'secondhand smoke.' Secondhand smoke is smoke from a cigarette, cigar, or pipe that is involuntarily inhaled, especially by nonsmokers. Some 126 million nonsmokers are exposed to secondhand smoke involuntarily every year. There are over 4000 chemical compounds in secondhand smoke; 200 of which are known to be poisonous. Do we really want our children, our family, our friends, and us to be exposed to secondhand smoke?
http://www.no-smoke.org...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
Multi_Pyrocytophage

Con

What my opponent says is true - for a standard cigarette. With an e-cigarette, the problem can be averted.

Smoking an e-cigarette is technically smoking. It contains fewer chemicals than the normal cigarette does, and it releases a tiny amount of smoke. This greatly reduces the risk for the smoker and the people around them. With the e-cigarette, is it really necessary to ban smoking in all public places?

E-cigarette smoking can also help the economy. They are taxed, and this helps generate money for the economy. With little health risks, the e-smokers don't have to make the economy lose the medicare bills, resulting in a net gain. With places like the US in debt, can we really afford to lose this, given most smokers smoke in public areas?

Illegalizing e-smoking has a down-side. Addicted people would still smoke in public places, defeating the purpose of illegalizing it. Cigarette taxes would go away, removing the economic support it brings us.
Is illegalizing smoking the best thing to do?





Debate Round No. 2
emowl

Pro

emowl forfeited this round.
Multi_Pyrocytophage

Con


Multi_Pyrocytophage DID NOT forfeit this round.


Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Multi_Pyrocytophage 4 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Lol a good job indeed.
Posted by Multi_Pyrocytophage 4 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Sorry, the sources didn't go in the argument. Here is the round 2 sources:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
2. http://www.investopedia.com...
3. http://musebaby.hubpages.com...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by PeacefulChaos 4 years ago
PeacefulChaos
emowlMulti_PyrocytophageTied
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: Good job, Con. You didn't forfeit.
Vote Placed by IFLYHIGH 4 years ago
IFLYHIGH
emowlMulti_PyrocytophageTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: FF