Smoking Ban Thirty years passed after Minnesota State became the first, who restricted smoking in public buildings. Now it seems that the majority of Minnesotans support the wider ban and consider smoking in restaurants should be restricted. At the same time they worry about what a ban on smoking in certain areas will do to the city’s economy. In this paper positive and negative effects of a statewide smoking ban in Minnesota are examined. Introduction Thirty years passed after Minnesota State became the first, who restricted smoking in public buildings, and now its key politicians are staring at a much wider ban. Since 2000 four Minnesota counties and seven cities have adopted restaurant smoking bans, and some furthermore have banned smoking in workplaces and bars.
(SpeakUp MN) Now in Minnesota is gaining force a statewide movement to ban smoking in public spaces, mainly restaurants. Governor Tim Pawlenty has said that he will sign a smoking ban bill if it comes to his desk. (The Associated Press) Smoking Ban Country- and Statewide Presently, 11 states in U.S. are already smoke-free: Utah and California since 1994; Delaware, South Dakota and Florida in 2002; Maine, Connecticut and New York in 2003; and, Rhode Island Massachusetts and Idaho in 2004. (Smoke-free Ordinance Lists).
And it seems that the majority of Minnesotans support the ban as well. The Community Opinions on Secondhand Smoke research project, a mutual effort involving the University of Minnesota and Minnesota Youth Tobacco Prevention Initiative, shows that 98 percent consider smoking in restaurants should be restricted.
The Essay on Smoking Ban in Public Places
Whether you smoke or not, how bad is it when as you walk into a restaurant to eat a nice meal, you’re greeted with a cloud of smoke in your face. This is the biggest issue with a smoking ban for Northern Kentucky. Supporters say the ban is needed for protection against the hazards of secondhand-smoke. Opponents call it unnecessary and say it infringes on the rights of business and property ...
(University of Minnesota Research) As well, 80 percent of those who dine out prefer smoke free restaurants. Moreover, the Minnesota House of Representatives conducted an unofficial study at this year Minnesota State Fair. Answering question if there should be a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants and bars, 59 % said yes. (2004 State Fair Poll Results) Some local regulations have been approved recently and several others, including Bloomington and Minneapolis, will take force in March 2005. These restrict smoking in pubic places to address the problem of second hand smoke. While smokers have the right to ingest substances which we all know now to be dangerous, other people should not be forced to breath the dangerously polluted air they create. (SpeakUp MN) Effects on Health The assumption that smoking is dangerous to one’s health has been researched for decades. Researchers have concluded that smoking is harmful both to a smoker and the innocent spectator. Tobacco and its smoke can trigger cancer, asthma, and allergies.
Cigarette smoking causes a number of health problems that are very costly to treat. Increased risks of respiratory diseases are a very common problem for smokers. These researches have led many people to stay away from tobacco and its smoke in order to remain healthy. No one should be subjected to potentially harmful practices. Because of this, the government has a duty to protect its citizen’s health from such behavior. Very few people enjoy choking on tobacco smoke while trying to eat lunch or dinner with their family at a restaurant. Fewer wish to have the tobacco smell clinging to their clothing after grocery shopping or studying at the library. People who smoke have that right. No one is trying to take away a smoker’s right to smoke. Minnesota state government is simply regulating places where smoking is allowed in an attempt to control the damage smoking causes to people’s health.
Smoke Shop Business Plan
If you dare to dream we will create it. The words of our mission statement reflects our commitment to excellence in the craft and artistry of blowing glass and enables us to deliver elegant artistically decorated glass pipes and bongs that look superb. Our products will exceed local stores and franchise competitors by possessing a flare and artistry that most do not have in order to achieve the ...
Smokers are free to light up a cigarette or cigar outside, in designated areas, or in private homes. Economic Effects At the same time, Minnesota state council members and citizens have expressed worry about what a ban on smoking in certain areas will do to the city’s economy. Business owners state that patrons will go where they can smoke. Some patrons say that a ban will infringe on their personal rights and they would rather take their business elsewhere. Both may happen, but a smoker’s rejection of the smoking ban probably will be short lived. People will get tired of commuting to an area where they are allowed to smoke in restaurants and businesses.
Smokers will also begin to miss the service and food at some of their favorite eateries. Smoking patrons may decide to stay away from Minnesota restaurants for a short time, but soon will swallow their pride and come back. There is an undeniable possibility that a ban on smoking will not greatly affect the states economy. That is the reason why the city council believes the importance of the issue of public health is more serious than the possible economic effects. One of the main opponents to public smoking bans is the coalition of restaurant and bar owners. A common concern among businesses is the fear that smoke-free by-laws will cause financial loss.
However, study after independent study, based on sales tax receipts confirm that the hospitality industry does not lose business when bars and restaurants go smoke-free. (Smoke-Free Laws Good for Business) Smoke free laws similarly protect bar and restaurant employees and clients from the smoke health damage. Actually, the only business negatively affected is tobacco. (The Economic Impact) In addition, studies show that after going smoke-free, insurance costs are lower, cleaning costs are reduced, there is less damage to furniture and equipment and there is less risk of fire. While it is true that just after smoke-free by-laws are implemented, some businesses feel the effects, but after a short adjustment period most businesses get back to their usual level of sales and many even increase sales, based on a whole new market of people who were staying home because they don’t like or can’t tolerate second-hand smoke (Smoke-Free Laws Good for Business) So now, not only did the smoking ban cause an increase in sales it also helped these places gain repeat customers mostly with the people who had stopped going there explicitly because of the prior amount of smoke. This ban also helped to reduce the amount of people who smoke, because at least fifty percent of college students that smoke consider themselves “social smokers.” So by removing the pressure to have a cigarette when they go out to have a drink by smelling the cigarette smoke or being around someone that is smoking, these people say they are more than likely to stop smoking altogether. Conclusion Almost everyone seems to be thinking negatively about how the ban will affect the Minnesota economy; however, no one has been able to back up his or her concerns with facts. Many other states and cities in the United States have banned smoking in public areas, yet no one has presented statistics to help prove a negative change in the economy will happen.
The Essay on Smoking Ban 2
Smoking ban in almost all work places and public areas has made hotly debated issue of late. While many people approve of this legislation, some take issue with it for fear of their freedom being restricted. Nevertheless, from my personal standpoint, I am convinced that banning smoking has its pros and cons for the reasons illustrated below. On the one hand, it is irrefutable that cigar ...
There is also a possibility that the Minnesota economy could go in the opposite direction altogether. Many Minnesota area residents may be so pleased with the cities ban on smoking that they visit area restaurants and businesses where they normally would not go. No one can definitely say how a smoking ban will affect area economics. Surely, the affects will not be long lived. On the other hand, the Federal Government has regulated many other harmful substances such as foods, drugs, and alcohol. The simple fact is the government regulates these substances for a specific reason. The reason is that these substances can be potentially harmful to one’s health.
The government regulates the production and sale of tobacco products; therefore, they should have the authority to regulate usage also.
Bibliography:
Supporters of statewide smoking ban see reason to hope. The Associated Press, 11 November, 2004 Smoke-Free Laws Good for Business. Minnesota Smoke-Free Coalition, 2004 Smoke-free Ordinance Lists. Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, July 2004 Support Statewide Smoking Ban in Public Buildings. SpeakUp MN. The DataBank, Inc., 2004 The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Ordinances: Case Studies. Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, July 2004 What do Minnesotans think about secondhand smoke? Research.
The Essay on Banning Smoking in Public Places
Millions of nonsmokers all across the globe are in danger of serious health risks because of smoking, banning smoking in public places is the only rational way to avoid such risk. Smoking is the number one leading cause of preventable death. This killer is responsible for painfully taking the life of just under a half million people a year according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC.gov; ...
University of Minnesota, 2002 2004 State Fair Poll Results. Minnesota House of Representatives, 2004 .
