54
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 19:
Line 19: + +
Debate:Should government restrictions on smoking be tightened or rolled back? (view source)
Revision as of 18:24, July 22, 2008
, 18:24, July 22, 2008→Yes, They Should Be Tightened
To recap, there is no overall benefit to society from allowing smoking, but every American suffers from the negative impacts in an economic sense. When the voluntary actions of some citizens cause harm to all, there is no rational justification to roll back regulation of the action. Regulation should be tightened with a national goal of ending tobacco sales in this country in the next couple of decades. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 13:47, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
To recap, there is no overall benefit to society from allowing smoking, but every American suffers from the negative impacts in an economic sense. When the voluntary actions of some citizens cause harm to all, there is no rational justification to roll back regulation of the action. Regulation should be tightened with a national goal of ending tobacco sales in this country in the next couple of decades. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 13:47, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
:Good points. I basically agree. Also, to respond to the inevitable point that this would infringe on the smokers' freedoms, I would point out that government restrict our freedoms all the time to prevent situations where we might otherwise put other people at risk. Even if you own a gun, you're not permitted to go around shooting it just anywhere. Or you may have a license to drive a car, but you atill have to observe speed limits and other traffic regulations. And so forth. Smoking really seems no different - you're welcome to smoke in your own home or in the open air, but not in circumstances where you put other people's health at risk through second-hand smoke. --[[User:AKjeldsen|AKjeldsen]] 14:24, 22 July 2008 (EDT)
== No, They Should Be Rolled Back ==
== No, They Should Be Rolled Back ==