Smoking is a personal decision and needs to remain just that: personal

This is the final draft of my second editorial for class, which was supposed to focus on a state or regional issue. The smoking ban is something I feel strongly about, and for some reason, I found it hard to write this editorial because I had to narrow down my reasons. If you want to read the long rant I posted earlier, complete with full arguments and a list of links, go here: Nebraska's smoking ban.

If you want to read the bill itself, go here: LB395.

On February 26, 2008, Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman signed into law a statewide smoking ban that will go into effect starting June this year, outlawing smoking in bars, restaurants and most other workplaces. The signing came as a victory to advocates of the bill, which had been turned down time and time again in the past.

However, since the bill has passed, there has been both an outcry and a sigh of relief from various individuals and businesses around the state, and the idea of a strict statewide smoking ban has been controversial, to say the least. There have been exceptions, then rewrites, then more exceptions, then law suits – and the ban hasn’t even gone into effect yet!

Despite the arguments from both sides, no argument is more valid than this: there needs to be a limit as to how far one person can invade another person’s space. We have harassment laws, stalking laws, traffic laws, pollution laws, disruption laws and privacy laws, to name a few, and we will now have smoking laws.

Smoking is indeed an invasion of personal space. In establishments that still allow smoking indoors, the smoke from a single cigarette will find its way into the area of other patrons, whether they like it or not. Smoking and non-smoking sections make no difference, especially in the eyes of a restaurant worker or bar tender who doesn’t have the convenient choice to distance him or herself from the intrusion.

There is absolutely no reason why the public should accommodate a habit that not only harms the person involved, but also has the potential to harm innocent people unfortunate enough to breathe the same smoky air. The side effects of first and second-hand smoking, which include cancer and emphysema, are extremely dangerous, and it is in the public’s best interest that these diseases and their sources are kept under control.

Statistically, smokers make up a minority in this country. According to the American Heart Association, only 23 per cent of men and 19 per cent of women smoke, and the numbers are continuing to fall. We would never argue that the rights of a minority group don’t matter, but we would not step down on the fact that the rights of the majority are especially important. Even more important than group rights is public health.

Smoking is a personal decision, and any adult is free to acknowledge and accept the addiction and dangers of the habit. However, no one is free to push those same dangers onto unwilling citizens. We should be able to believe we are safe when in public, and although it’s a difficult standard to reach, small steps like the smoking ban will bring us closer to attaining that goal.