The Instigator
DrumGuy18
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
hellywon
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Student smokers deserve a smoke break during school hours.

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...
hellywon
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2015 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 544 times Debate No: 79111
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

DrumGuy18

Pro

I think that students do deserve to have at least a 10-15 minute break during school to go to a designated area, and smoke on campus, between lunch and the period after. This is my opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
DrumGuy18

Pro

I think that students do deserve to have at least a 10-15 minute break during school to go to a designated area, and smoke on campus, between lunch and the period after. This is my opening argument.
hellywon

Con

I do wish my opponents best luck towards this debate.

Let me remind you that if I show you only one harm of allowing student smokers to deserve a smoke break during school, it will override all the benefits. Harms may result in death and health issues. Benefits only allow. For this, if I only show one harm this must mean that all benefits are lowered. You may refute if you wish.

My opponents state: "I think that students do deserve to have at least a 10-15 minute break during school to go to a designated area, and smoke on campus, between lunch and the period after. "

This claim does not show us any benefits of smoking during breaks in school. It has only simply glazed over some important factors hidden in this statement. This also entitles an opinion. "I think..." For that, this claim is completely unimportant and should be dropped immediately. I also request further in-depth explanations please.

Arguments:

C1) Increase of availability

Having cigarettes on campus increases availability (This also makes a bad learning environment for all students to be in)
Having students who smoke sets off the wrong notion that school is a place where you can smoke anything, rather than the whole education itself. This pretty much speaks for itself. When aforementioned seniors[1] have cigarettes on them, and are free to smoke them on campus, this only allows the freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and the under-age seniors more access to cigarettes which is clearly against the law. As a school, their job is to ensure each student is safe and productive but allowing smoking environments completely undermines that duty. By allowing cigarettes on campus, the school is indirectly condoning the use of nicotine, which violates the law.

C2) Smoking enables advocacy
Smoking is not okay, but if schools -a place that ensures safety of students and has a great learning environment- now allows people to smoke in buildings, this not only suggest that smoking is always okay but that this brings a very bad image to our society that schools now allow smoking. It sets off the wrong notion that smoking is okay anywhere. If a school allows smoking, it sends the signal that smoking is an okay activity, which, referring to the health programs (such as D.A.R.E. again)[2] we know it's not. Cigarettes are the only legal drug that has been banned from advertising on TV. For example, if we allow day care for teenagers who have given birth to their babies in schools, this now advocates that it is an okay activity to have sexual intercourse or unsafe sex (aids,) which is the complete opposite of what we are teaching. This implies for smoking as well.

C3) Hypocritical notions

Several school programs (D.A.R.E. for example)[2] advocate against cigarettes. Health classes warn of the dangers of smoking, and now a school is going to say "Okay, you can smoke."? This is wrong and hypocritical, and teaches children to disregard everything the school does. This destroys the value of an education, and leads to a semi-anarchist government within the school. Because this is defined as on campus, this allows us to think that smoking is okay anywhere on school grounds, which is completely what schools should not be offering, rather they should put more thoughts and ideas in investing more "beneficial" ground for students than "enforcing smoking rules."

C4) Second hand smoking

[3] From the website I have put in my source, it states: "There is no safe exposure to second hand smoke. When you are around a person who is smoking, you inhale the same dangerous chemicals as the smoker. Breathing even a little second hand smoke can be dangerous. Inhaling second hand smoke can cause lung cancer in non smoking adults. In the United States, approximately 3,000 adults die each year due to lung cancer from second hand smoke exposure. According to the U.S. Surgeon General, living with a smoker increases a non smoker"s chances of developing lung cancer by 20% to 30%. Exposure to second hand smoke can also cause coronary heart disease and have negative effects on your blood and blood vessels, increasing your risk of a heart attack. Heart disease caused by second hand smoke kills approximately 46,000 non smokers every year. People who already have heart disease are at an especially high risk of suffering negative effects from breathing second hand smoke and should avoid even brief exposure to it."

This indicates how dangerous it is for freshman, sophomores and juniors to be around seniors who smoke. It make our whole school environment unsafe due to the enforcement put in from the resolution.
Our status quo should not change, for it is rather doing so much more good than allowing seniors to smoke around people underage.

As I said in the beginning, our harms may lead to death of others. They have repeated their same argument from last round, given no specific reason nor source and they have not proved any benefits.

More arguments to be posted next round.

1) http://findlaw.co.uk...
2) http://www.dare.org...
3) http://betobaccofree.hhs.gov...
Debate Round No. 2
DrumGuy18

Pro

Due to no time to post arguments, I concede from this round.
hellywon

Con

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Lee001 1 year ago
Lee001
Lmfao..
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
That being said, I must decline.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Dude, I agree with you on this one, though. Make it an open challenge and debate someone new, dawg!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by letsdebate1 1 year ago
letsdebate1
DrumGuy18hellywonTied
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: No comment
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
DrumGuy18hellywonTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments weren't refuted and thus Con wins the debate.