Should the city of Richardson ban smoking in businesses?
For what the city council decided see here
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Our goal here is to have intelligent, respectful conversations about controversial topics. If someone says something with which you disagree, please either ask questions of the person speaking or state your own position, using facts, reasons, and evidence.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(104)
-
▼
May
(31)
- Freedom of the Press and XXX-Rated Movies
- Establishment of Religion
- Judges
- Iraq War
- Illegal Immigration
- HPV Vaccine
- Affirmative Action
- Money
- Japanse Research on Stem cells
- US Spending on Medical Care
- Smoking
- McCain's Mistake
- Pastor Wright
- Israel
- 2000 Election
- Getting the US out of Iraq
- Gas Prices
- Weird Science
- Diplomacy
- Marriage between Homosexuals
- Iran and Nuclear Weapons
- The US and Israel
- Digging Deeper
- Iraq War
- Health Insurance
- Death Penalty
- Illegal Immigration
- Waterboarding
- Surveillance without a Judge's Approval
- The Right to Vote
- High Gas Prices
-
▼
May
(31)
18 comments:
I beleive that if richardson removed smoking from its city, this will be a loss for them and not for the people. People will simply find another place to get cigaretts. Also this can be an issue because we are suppose to be a free country and smoking is ones right. If people smoke it is because they want to smoke, nobody is making them smoke. Richardson should let the people smoke if they want to smoke.
I believe that city of Richardson should ban smoking in businesses “...primarily [because of] health as Richardson Mayor Pro Bob Townsend said. There are people who suffer of medical conditions –such as Asthma- and being second hand smokers puts in risk their health. However, is it fair for the smokers to deny them the entrance to most businesses or to smoke within 50 feet of an entrance? As council member Dennis Stewart says: "There's a delicate balance between the rights of the smokers and the rights of the nonsmokers," so what is the right decision?
Ana M
I think that the city of Richardson should post a ban on smoking in businesses.First of all it's very annoying for people who don't smoke to be walking by and breathing in the second hand smoke. Also, this could cause lung problems for innocent people, including children, who have never smoked in their lives and this isn't fair to them.
No i do not think that the city of richardson should ban smoking in business. First off, people have a choice in the type of places that they associate themselves with.If they don't want to smell smoke they shouldn't go to places where they know people smoke. Secondly it will cause various business to lose money. So i son't think that this preference by others should cause the city to ban smoking.
I think the city of Richardson should ban smoking in businesses, mainly from a health standpoint. Smoking not only causes harm to you but also to the people around you. If restuarants have a smoking section then it needs to be on the complete opposite side of the restaurant with filters. Personally I don't think it's that hard to step outside when you do want to smoke.
Sarah M.
I think we should ban smoking in Richardson establishments because it can affect one's health. Smoking not only affects the smoker, but also those around the smoker. Yes, it is a free country and people can smoke if they want, but one should also be free to breathe in clean air when at a restaurant. Smoking is bad for you. That is a fact, so why should non-smokers be punished for poor choices on other people's decisions? I think if someone wants to light up, they can do that elsewhere and not have to subject others to their smoke. According to the American Lungs Association, in 2005, an estimated 21% of adults were current smokers. Supposing this percentage is near what it is today, why should the other 79% of adults and 100% of children have to be subjected to smoking in public establishments?
Cristy V
Arafath I.
I think that the city of Richardson should ban smoking in business because it would benefit the business.It would attract more customer. Smoking or being next to a person who's smoking is the same thing. It does the same damage to your lung. I don't smoke so why would I want to be in a place where it would harm me the same way if i was smoking. I believe there's more non smokers then the people that smoke and they would prefer to be in non smoking area. It would also benefit the people if they stop smoking, it would put that money in their pocket or to be spent on something else or savings.
I believe that the city of Richardson should ban smoking in business because, first of all, second hand smoking leads to cancer. I definitely don't smoke, and to me it's very uncomfortable for me to smell smoke when someone is smoking. It's also more professional to establishment. And lastly it slowly decreases global warming.
I think it would be great for the city to ban smoking. Looking at an example, Dallas was successful with the ban and businesses have continued to run smoothly and have been successful economically.
I think that every city should ban smoking if I am honest. I think it makes for a much better environment to work in as well as eat in. Second hand smoke is a leading cause of death in the world and I think it is important for all businesses to put that into consideration for their restaurants and businesses everywhere.
All in all, I don't thing businesses will suffer at all as a result of this ban, if anything I think that business should increase for many places where non smokers would not have gone before.
I think if the city of Richardson were to ban smoking in public places it would not be right. For one because i think if you dont want to be around smoke you should not go to places were you know there will be smoking. I mean i know if i dont want to be around drinking i wont go to a bar or i wont sit in a bar were there is drinking. So i think no they should not ban it. Oh yea and i dont smoke.
If Richardson bans smoking from major businesses such as restaurants and bars, I think that not only business will go up but many more people will be satisfied with a smoke free environment. There are many issues involving restaurants and smoke free areas, because many restaurants don't have blocked off rooms and still causes the smell to go throughout the whole building. Owning a restaurnt myself, it has created a better, safer, and cleaner environment not only for customers but also the staff. Second hand smoking is actually more harsh than smoking yourself and can be unsanitary in many standards. It is up to people to smoke if they choose and if they have to have that one last puff outside the restaurant before entereing then that is what they will have to do. Being a non-smoker myself I feel better when I am not surrounded by it and I do believe it will give people a reason to not smoke.
I think that the city of Richardson should through their representatives to decide if a smoke ban is what the people of Richardson want; this would promote self-government.
My personal opinion is that it is a good idea for smoking to be banned at public places because second-hand smoke can lead to significant problems; just think about the waiters who have to be exposed to that all day. The consequences will not show up right away. My Mom just discovered that she has bad asthma because her mom, about forty years ago, smoked constantly. My mom has never smoked but she got asthma from the second hand smoke. I think it is best for the people who choose not to smoke to be spared from the bad consequences that come from second-hand smoke because of choices other people make.
I definitely think Richardson has every right to ban smoking. It has been proven that second hand smoke is dangerous to others. As much as Americans have the right to smoke cigarettes and possibly kill themselves, they do not have the right to affect others that have chosen not to poison themselves. It's a nasty habit that only leads to the pollution of clean breathing air and litter- rarely do smokers deposit of their cigarettes properly. For the sake of equality, Richardson needs to make sure that they do a blanket ban so some businesses do not benefit from being able to allow it. For instance, in the beginning of Dallas ban they allowed bars to continue with smoking. This hurt restaurants, as many smoking patrons left the restaurant to move to a smoking- friendly bar. Therefore, the restaurant lost the revenue on coninued consumption of alcohol after dinner.
A smoking ban would make Richardson a cleaner and nicer city. If that's what the residents vote for, thats what should happen.
I think Richardson is doing the correct thing to ban smoking in public places. For those who smoke, the city is not prohibiting them to stop smoking, all that is ask is to stop smoking in public places so it won't harm other nonsmokers. If this ban is passed, the people would have a safer, cleaner environment. It would be unfair for those people who don't smoke to die or get sick for the consequence of other people's decision.
I think there should be a ban on smoking in some cases. At public parks and office building I can understand, but I believe that if it is a resturant or bar the bussiness owner should decide.
Andrew W.
I believe that a smoking ban in the city of Richardson is a good idea. Not only is second hand smoke a health problem, but the attitudes towards smoking in recent years has changed dramatically. The idea that the business will some how be hurt by this provision to me is looking at it in the wrong way. I see this as a good thing for these businesses and knowing Richardson restaurants are smoke-free will invite more customers.
Brian H.
I think they should. I shouldn't have to smell or be around smoke if I don't want to. It is not fair that in order to stay away from it I must not go out or not o somewhere. It is someone choice that is effecting me. It is easier for a smoker not to smoke for a meal or for a few hours in a bar than it is for me to hold my breath some I to can enjoy the privileges and immunities that have been given to us.
I think that this basically comes down to a moral point of view. Should non-smokers be subjected to the smoking hazards of smokers? I don't think it's right. Everyone should have the same opportunities to be healthy. This is not a question of business or economics- it's a question of ethics. If a smoking ban is passed, everyone (smokers and non-smokers) still has the right to go to the restaurants and bars. The only difference would be that the smokers can't smoke while they are inside. In my eyes, this is the only ethical solution, but that's just my opinion.
Kevin V
Post a Comment