Anthony DelBrocco 10/25/2010 ENC1101 Ms.

Bledsoe

Delbrocco1

Tobacco Smoking Argument Essay

Thesis: What is primarily important on this issue is the right to smoke if you want to.

Audience: Anyone arguing either side of the smoking ban issue.

Purpose: To refute conflicting arguments and present a solution to the smoking ban.

potential publication: Eagle newspaper, argumentative internet articles.

Delbrocco2 June, 1999, an emaciated man, balded from chemotherapy lay in his deathbed. Cancer has plagued his lungs from decades of smoking cigarettes. His final wish was to spread his story of suffering, to tell the people, the kids what smoking does to a body. His wish was denied as his ability to speak was lost just an hour before an interview. His name was Bryan Curtis, a family man with a wife and son. He died at the age of 34. When these tragedies occur we are reminded that our freedoms in this country allow people to kill themselves. If we still live in the Land of the free, then these freedoms must still exist. Whether or not this habit results in cancer or any variety of other diseases is irrelevant. What is primarily important on this issue is the right to smoke if you want to. Smoking has been part of our nation's history since the very birth of the USA. In fact, delicate rising economies that determined the growth of our country depended deeply on precious agriculture such as tobacco plants. Without tobacco, early American colonists wouldn't have had such a large source of income that was used to fight the English in the revolutionary war. To try to take tobacco out of the equation that is America is not only a selfish rejection of a past blessing, but also a contradiction of our claims of freedom. The health affects of smoking to not only smokers but to the people around them are undeniably negative, causing cancer and bronchitis. It is also a fact that everyone who smokes gets a fair warning from the surgeon general before lighting up, (that is, if they don't already know from widespread advertisements from anti-smoking organizations or from common sense). If people are still smoking even after knowing the affects, they are slowly, knowingly committing suicide. It's the person's choice so it must be honored, like his memory. Voluntary, legal ways to see the mortality rate challenge the exceedingly high birth and life expectancy rates are very rare and needed to regulate the population. In a world where people want to live forever, this demographic whistles happily to the grave, some earlier than most, we must be grateful for these volunteers on the population control committee. Thinking

DelBrocco3 about it, smoking is really a counteractive statement: Living beings knowingly ending their existence. Perhaps people do it to find solace in the fact that they know how their going to die. It has also been said that eliminating smoking will, in turn, save the states money. When medical expenses and lost productivity are introduced to the equation, each pack of cigarettes cost each state as much as $16. Ironically, putting a stop to smoking would deny the states the income of tobacco taxes. Surely, the tax revenue, reaching as high as $1.4 million, would make for a fine reimbursement for any amount of money lost. If a ban on smoking were to be instated, the decision would be incredibly hypocritical for not outlawing other considerably dangerous things. Logically, Alcohol, fast food and caffeine would all need to be banned for tobacco to be as well. The solution for such a problem is quiet simply really: common sense. If people smoke responsibly by being polite and mindful of others and don't litter, there really are no possible arguments against smoking. If people only smoked away from others, outside, then nobody would be a victim of second hand smoke. If nobody littered with the cigarette butts, then nobody could argue that it is a threat to the environment. These are the only two issues that were possible to oppose besides previously mentioned issues that I have already refuted. The government shouldn't interfere with this particular case. It doesn't make sense to put an end to a tradition that has roots in ours, shutdown whole industries, and leave countless looking for work in response to people with suicidal tenancies. Because this nation has definitely seen better days, and things that don't make any sense occur everyday, let me make it perfectly clear that moving for the government to restrict tobacco use will cause an indeterminable amount of problems. Remember, It's a domino effect, if smoking is banned, alcohol and fast food are next.

Delbrocco4 Works Cited Sue Landry, He wanted you to know. Whyquit com. 15 Jul. 1999. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.

Marjorie Jacobs, History and economics of tobacco Heathliteracy.worlded.org. 1997. Web. 26 Oct. 2010 Aurelio Locsin, Pros and cons of banning smoking ehow.com. 11 Sep. 2009. Web. 26 Oct. 2010.