Should Cigarette Smoking be banned?
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper presents the argument that although smoking is hazardous to the smoker as well as those around them, it should not be banned at a federal level. The paper explains that a federal ban would cause a large loss of state and federal money, and tobacco companies have too much power because of money they supply. The paper also argues that an unregulated black market for cigarettes would be created, each individual person has the right to smoke privately, there would be a negative economic impact and a loss of jobs and there will also be political implications to supporting a cigarette ban. The paper then provides objections to the above thesis that include the fact that legally a federal ban is constitutional, other harmful substances are already banned federally, and cigarettes have a negative impact on health and other health consequences. The paper concludes that though the idea of banning cigarette smoking sounds like a good idea, in practice it would be too destructive. The paper includes an outline.
From the Paper:"The most overwhelming reason why a federal cigarette ban would not be possible is because of money. Money is a major roadblock to the idea of a complete ban on cigarette smoking in a couple different ways. First, government would lose money from the ban and would have to find alternative ways to come up with the difference once the ban was in place. Currently the government takes in almost $7 billion in cigarette taxes alone; that is a very large gap to try to make up. Secondly, the large tobacco companies have so much money, that they have control. Companies like Philip Morris and Loews Corporation give money to the government, politicians, and various organizations, all of whom would lose these contributions if a ban was put into place.
"Moreover, if a ban on cigarettes was put into place, people would still find ways to continue to smoke. As we see with other illegal substances, such as marijuana, it is still produced in mass quantities and used. If banned an unregulated black market would most likely be created (Corbett). The creation of this black market for cigarettes would create issues with prices; people would be able to charge more for the illegal items. Additionally it would create extra expense in trying to police the illegal producing and selling of cigarettes. The government would no longer profit from the selling of cigarettes, but people would still find ways to obtain them."
Sample of Sources Used:
- Corbett, Jennifer. "Tobacco Firms Argue Against Possible Menthol Cigarette Ban" The Wall Street Journal. 10 January 2011. The Wall Street Journal Digital Network. Web. 13 April 2011. <http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110110-714969.html>
- Martin, Terry. "What's in a Cigarette?" Smoking Cessation. 15 November 2010. About.com Web. 13 April 2011. <http://quitsmoking.about.com/cs/nicotineinhaler/a/cigingredients.htm>
- Pringle, Laurence. "Smoking: A Risky Business". Morrow, NY: 1996.
- "U.S. Constitution". Art. I, Sec. 8.
Cite this Argumentative Essay:
Should Cigarette Smoking be banned? (2013, May 29) Retrieved August 20, 2019, from https://www.academon.com/argumentative-essay/should-cigarette-smoking-be-banned-153409/
"Should Cigarette Smoking be banned?" 29 May 2013. Web. 20 August. 2019. <https://www.academon.com/argumentative-essay/should-cigarette-smoking-be-banned-153409/>