Contrary to recent popular and misguided beliefs, tobacco use is a deadly and serious problem that plagues our nation and campus.
Tobacco is the “single most preventable cause of disease, disability and death in the United States,” causing more deaths than HIV, illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries and murders combined, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
Unlike alcohol, which when used correctly and in moderation is fine, tobacco use, no matter the amount, can cause serious health hazards, including coronary heart disease (the leading cause of death in the U.S.), lung cancer, stomach cancer, pharynx cancer and even death.
Secondhand smoke is just as bad, because when you inhale smoke from a cigarette, you are breathing in all the same chemicals breathed in by a smoker. A cigarette and its smoke produces more than 4,000 chemicals, including: napthalene (moth balls), butane (lighter fluid), arsenic (rat poison), acetone (nail polish remover) and lead (batteries) just to name a few.
Mind you, this deadly product comes from the same tobacco companies who said, under oath, that “cigarettes were just as addictive as gummy bears.”
If a tobacco ban wasn’t justified, we wouldn’t see places making great strives to increase public health, including bans at airports, public parks and the work place, increased insurance premiums for smokers and the immediate cultural shift.
If a person wants to smoke, that is his own personal choice. However, the health effects that come with it affect nonsmokers, from the secondhand smoke to litter, and cause just as much damage to the people around them, something that cannot be ignored.
Lastly, tobacco use is not protected by the Ninth and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court ruled only implicit rights are guaranteed personal liberties — something tobacco use is not.
In addition, smokers are not a protected group of people, which the Supreme Court has also said, with respect to the equal protection law, because smokers are not born as smokers.
Every ruling in the courts has gone against tobacco users’ claims, making tobacco and smoking bans legal and constitutional.
“Ignorance of the law” is not a good excuse to be ignorant of health hazards and the people around you.
Tobacco bans are necessary for health and, as shown numerous times, would be upheld in the courts.
Joshua Trope, political science and history senior
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
briareus 6 months, 1 week ago
The author claims (incredibly) that second-hand smoke is "just as bad" as first-hand smoke, because second-hand smoke has "all the same chemicals." It does, but the concentrations are greatly reduced and thus the toxicity. If we were to take the writer's logic literally it would imply that one cigarette smoked by a man in China would have the same effect on the smoker as on every man, woman, and child in the US. In effect, the writer has ignored the conservation of mass.
oudaily99 6 months, 1 week ago
For the record, I do not oppose the tobacco ban. I just disagree with the approach of the author of this article.
oudaily99 6 months, 1 week ago
Who determines what is "correct" use of alcohol? I see no reason to defend alcohol, except that it is the most widely available legal recreational drug, with no real legal alternative. Other than that, alcohol is a dangerous drug, one of the worst, with a very low LD50. Cannabinoids (found in marijuana) are much more deserving of praise.
"Secondhand smoke is just as bad" This inaccuracy has been addressed in a previous comment.
"smoke produces more than 4,000 chemicals" The number of chemicals is not a measure of danger.
"If a tobacco ban wasn’t justified, we wouldn’t see places making great strives" Argumentum ad populum fallacy? (Appeal to the majority)
"because smokers are not born as smokers" So if "born this way" theory of sexual orientation were disproved, self-identified gays and bisexuals would no longer be protected? This may be true.
"The Supreme Court ruled only implicit rights are guaranteed personal liberties — something tobacco use is not." What case are you referring to?
ved12 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Smoking should be banned. because the smoking addiction is increasing the number of health issues. The smoking or Tobacco addiction is the very common issue in all over the world. It also affects on the social health and increase the health cost of the countries. It is also like a drug addiction which is dangerous and cause of death in many countries. http://www.controllingaddiction.net/articles/tobacco-addiction