On Jan. 2, a smoking ban was instated, prohibiting smoking in all bars and restaurants in North Carolina. This ban was meant to help protect people from the horrid health effects that secondhand smoke causes. The violators of this ban are fined $50 for continuing to huff and puff after they have walked into an establishment which enforces this law.
Now, this ban is very beneficial in many ways, like keeping the filtered air inside clean and safe to breathe and protecting us from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke. However, there is also a very important downfall to this ban, one that has been severely overlooked and almost forgotten. That downfall is the question of morality.
We, as American citizens, live in a free nation. This nation is one of religious tolerance and opportunity. It is one of the many reasons why people ever came to this country in the first place all those years ago. This freedom, however, is taken away when morality is forced upon us. There have been many examples of this throughout history, one of the most famous being prohibition. One would think after that epic failure, people would have learned that it is impossible to impose morals upon others.
At CarolinaEast Medical Center in New Bern, N.C., smoking is not allowed on the grounds, which forces people to stand out by the busy highway and smoke. This is the part of the smoking ban that I feel has gone too far. I can understand not being able to smoke in a restaurant due to the simple fact that people have a right to not choke on smoke while having a nice dinner with the family, but not being able to smoke in bars or having a designated smoking area at a hospital is just going too far.
When at a hospital, many become stressed and must step out for the soothing nicotine-induced comfort they have become accustomed to. The fact that these people are forced to leave their loved ones and go to the edge of the highway is completely unreasonable. Who says there can’t be a designated area for smoking that is far enough away that it does not interfere but close enough so if something major happens, they can get to their loved ones in a reasonable amount of time?
Now, let’s talk about the ban on smoking in bars. Throughout history, people have smoked when they drank. It is just a part of the whole bar scene. Lately there have been people complaining about coming home after a night out on the town and smelling like smoke. The solution to this was to ban smoking except outside.
Why? Because a few people don’t want to smell like smoke but do want to kill their liver with alcohol? If you can drink somewhere, you should be able to smoke there. End of discussion. People have the right to enjoy themselves, and if you have a problem with it, then don’t go there. It is that simple.
In conclusion, morality is being forced upon us at an alarming rate. Today it is a ban on smoking in bars and outside of certain buildings, but tomorrow it could be a limit on what we have the freedom to believe or say. It is a slippery slope we are on and we need to put the brakes on it fast, or soon all of our rights will be taken away and the whole reason this nation is great will just be a memory.
indieregister.wordpress.com 
I used to smoke. I know that it is hard when you want to smoke and there are only certain areas that you can smoke and you are either limited by time or circumstance that keep you from “enjoying” that cigarette. Heck, I finally quit smoking because of all the restrictions that I faced, it was more work that it was relaxing to get that “fix”.
Now some of my restrictions were in place because of what the public put on me. Designated smoking areas on the college campus. I couldn’t smoke in restaurants, malls, stores and many other places. This within itself was annoying. But I also had young children and being a “responsible” smoker, I would not smoke in my car, around my kids or other people who didn’t smoke. Wow, that really reduced my smoking time. I didn’t want my kids seeing me smoke because I didn’t want them thinking it was an OK habit and I didn’t want to harm their health either. I also didn’t smoke in front of my Mom. Yep, closet smoker when it came to her. Again, my problem. Then it was also, I didn’t like smelling like heavy smoke so I would have to clean up after each time.
So some of the restrictions were imposed by others (laws) and then the rest by me either because I was being polite or not wanting others to know I was smoking. (my issues)
But when you are a smoker you have to consider that you are invading on others. You are introducing something into the air that was not there and others have to inhale this. It is not your right to complain when someone is saying they don’t want to smell like it or have to inhale it. Some of it is do to health and some of it is due to preference.
I know we want to keep our freedoms. I hear the complaints about wanting to still smoke in a bar. I think that if a bar wants to be a smoking bar, so-be-it. But what if the bartender is a non-smoker? So you are telling them they have to deal with the smoke if they want to work there? It IS a slippery slope because the non-smoker has the right be in a smoke free environment and the smoker should have some places to go and “relax”. So who do we defend? The workers? The patrons? Who?
I am beside myself on this one. I would like to say there should be some bars that allow smoking but that means that if a non-smoker applies there, works for years on end, gets lung cancer, they can sue, unless there is some kind of contract signed ahead of time.
Thus the reason that I quit smoking so I don’t have to worry about being part of the tougher part of this equation. I just don’t think smoking is worth it.
No one “forces” a smoker to smoke anywhere. That’s freedom.
I’m going to take this one step further. Let’s say this government health care bill passes Congress. Let’s say the costs associated with this government health care become too costly. What’s the government to do? Raise the cost? Probably. But what I am most concerned with is the government enforcing new regulations/laws on everything having to do with a person’s health – for the greater good of people (so they’ll say). Think about that. Smoking bans? Just the start. Think about how many things in this world affect a person’s health. Everything? Yes, I’d say everything. Your freedom will not exist.
People laugh at me because of this theory. But it is really so far-fetched? Scares the crap out of me.
Well, why take it further? Seriously, smoking kills there is no study that says otherwise. It isn’t like eggs in where they are good for you one week or bad for you the next week. Plus, north carolina is already implementing action for state employees in where if you smoke you have to pay for a higher plan. Also, though private insurance gives you a hike or just drops you if they know you are smoking. You are getting it from both the private and public sector. And as a smoker I don’t mind walking a few yards to the side walk of the hospital beside the road to light up since I’m at a hospital where people coming in and out probably don’t need my cig smoke in the first place.
I like freedom, and I dislike the idea of a government enforcing morality, but why are we looking at cigarettes as a morality issue? Is it immoral to smoke? Nope, not a bit. Not unless your smoking affects the health of another individual. If anything, alcohol is more immoral than smoking – drunk driving kills plenty of innocent people, but smoking usually only kills the smoker. Except in the case of second-hand smoke. The government isn’t telling smokers to quit smoking – it’s telling them they can’t smoke in an enclosed public space where others would have to breath in the carcinogens.
I do agree that the anti-smoking measures seem a bit draconian at times. However, let’s reflect on this: if someone smokes, and then they get emphysema, someone has to pay for the medical care. I don’t smoke – I never have. Should my own money go to covering the medical bills of someone who does smoke?
Honestly, smoking isn’t a morality issue – it’s a public health issue. It’s an addiction issue. We have millions of people who are hooked on cigarettes, and it’s unreasonable to expect them all to suddenly quit. And it’s immoral to simply let someone die of emphysema for the simple “crime” of have been addicted to nicotine. So I think it’s reasonable that there’s no smoking inside enclosed public spaces. You still have the freedom to smoke, and your medicare still covers you when private insurance won’t pick up the tab for twenty years of cigarettes, but others who would also enjoy the freedom of hitting the same bar won’t have to worry about breathing in all the smoke you exhaled.
One thing I’ve always wondered, if it’s truly all about secondhand smoke – why is chewing tobacco usually included in these bans?
As far as restaurants bars and clubs are concerned, I think it is individual businesses that should be allowed to choose if they allow smoking or not, and there should be a provision given to businesses to make the transition so that both non-smoker and smoking customers can be accomodated. I myself have switched to an e-cig, so I dont have to worry about the bans. But I still think smoker’s and business owners rights should not be trampled on. The brand that I like has a lot of info about e-cigs in general on their website – thevapormaster.com