Tobacco Facts.

A new year comes with new resolutions. Some people may have decided to eat healthier and some may have decided to quit smoking. There is good news for potential cigarette quitters who live in Great Neck, NY. Smoking has now been banned on the public sidewalks outside of businesses.

On Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2011 the Great Neck Village Board approved the smoking ban on the public sidewalks leaving smokers in disbelief. If caught, smokers could receive a fine of up to $1,000. The local business owners and their customers complained to officials about smoke outside of their doors leaking in. These complaints led to the ban. Several residents believe the ban is good for the environment and allows non-smokers to refrain from having to hold their breath in the presence of harmful second-hand smoke.

However, some believe this is a violation of human rights. According to CNN, Bruce Zipes, owner of Bruce’s Bakery said, “Their intentions are good but it is another right and another privilege that the government has taken away from us.”

Likewise a worker in the village of Great Neck who only identified herself as Sophia to CNN said, “If my smoking bothers people then why not turn off the engines of cars? You breathe in carbon monoxide from the cars don’t you?”

Although Sophia makes a good observation, the majority of people do not have to deal with being engulfed in car exhaust the way they are by cigarette fumes. Village Mayor Ralph J. Kreitzman, the one who pushed for the ban, told MyFox New York “I have no problem with people smoking. They just shouldn’t do it in a place that harms other people.”

Well said. That is, if we are all looking out for the health of others, but if this is the case, wouldn’t it be more fitting to ban smoking in any public area period? Second hand smoking has been proven to be harmful to those who inhale, so on these grounds smoking would eventually only be allowed in private places.

New York City is now considering a stricter smoking ban, extending it to public parks, beaches and malls. So is this a violation of rights or is it protecting the general public? Sure smoking is an individual’s personal lifestyle choice, and they have the right to do as they please with their own health, but what about those around them? Is it fair to endanger the lives of others because you decide you want to intoxicate your lungs to relieve stress? If we take a look at the cancer fact sheet we can see that lung cancer is clearly the leading cause of death in the United States. In 2010, 157,300 men and women died from lung cancer. In addition, every year 3,400 non-smokers die from lung cancer and second-hand smoke inhalation is identified as the cause in many of these cases. There were also 46,000 deaths of non-smokers who had heart disease in part or entirely because of their breathing in of second-hand smoke. So while banning smoking in public places may seem like a ridiculous notion, the ban would reduce these death rates considerably. Is it wrong for the government to attempt to ban a personal decision that inflicts harm on the public?

The proposed New York City smoking ban could be the start of a movement nationwide that would decrease health risks of our public environment. With the tobacco industry being a major source of income for the government, is it possible for them to hinder their sales? Issuing bans would most likely affect tobacco sales. Making the issues surrounding such bans, not only moral ones, but also financial ones.

With smoking bans gaining popularity, this trend could mean a possible ban on campus as well. How would our local smokers consisting of students and professors, some of whom smoke, feel about a possible smoking ban? They probably would not be the least bit happy, but is it fair to ban a person’s personal lifestyle choice? On the other hand is it fair to put another’s health at risk?

Only time will tell what the decision on the potential bans will be, and it is sure to cause an uproar and division of our campus community. This could be the start of a nationwide tobacco ban fiasco.

By Curtis Bloomfield, [email protected]