2008 Woodie Awards
Campus smoking ban unenforceable
Larry Burge
Issue date: 10/5/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
To smoke or not to smoke, this is the question. UA policy-makers had to answer this question and some students gave protest to the policy-makers' no-tobacco use on the UA campus answer. This "no-tobacco on campus" policy gave rise to other difficult questions.
First, why do people continue to smoke and use tobacco products given that habitual use of such agents causes the body so much damage and second, how are UA authorities planning to enforce a campus-wide no-tobacco policy?
Why do people smoke? Rational people who habitually smoke cigarettes or use smokeless tobacco products have said the pleasure they get from smoking, the high or their nicotine addiction is their right to choose voluntary pollution of their lungs. However, these reasons are not all-inclusively rational, but every person who lights up chooses to smoke because they desire it. And that desire, if truly followed, will not be detoured by UA's new policy alone.
To get the almost 20,000 people on campus daily to adhere to a no-tobacco use policy - from the visitor, to the worker, to the students, faculty or staff - it takes 100 percent cooperation, which, most likely, will not happen soon.
The certainty is that those who desire to smoke tobacco and use tobacco products directly butt heads with the UA policy-makers' ban on tobacco use, which is the disagreement. The solution surely will bring about a future compromise, for intelligent people first negotiate cooperation and then work out differences from that point. The outcome remains a mystery, but the smoking ban weighs heavily toward UA policy makers' way.
Philosophically though, the no-tobacco use policy, although it might be justifiable, hinges on whether it's right to restrict another person's desire when it does little harm to others? However, the majority of the state's legislators voted to ban smoking on state and public property which, by law, is now illegal. And other major universities, major health-care facilities across Arkansas and the U.S. have joined ranks with the legislators. Therefore, UA policy makers seem to have good reason for the ban, mostly because they care about others' health.
A bet on the wording of the permanent UA tobacco use policy would most likely be foolish and prediction nearly impossible. Reason would have it that considerate tobacco users will adhere to the policy either out of duty for the regulation or not wanting to inconvenience others for his or her convenience. Which leaves those tobacco users who feel less considerate and some who feel it is their right to smoke on campus and to spit black slime into open bottles in front of others despite such a ban, with less of a voice.
Thus, the controversy between policy and tobacco users awaits an ultimate answer. But the tobacco ban on UA property, without question, will go into effect July 8, 2008 with or without tobacco users' approval.
Larry Burge is a staff writer for The Arkansas Traveler. His column appears every other Friday.
First, why do people continue to smoke and use tobacco products given that habitual use of such agents causes the body so much damage and second, how are UA authorities planning to enforce a campus-wide no-tobacco policy?
Why do people smoke? Rational people who habitually smoke cigarettes or use smokeless tobacco products have said the pleasure they get from smoking, the high or their nicotine addiction is their right to choose voluntary pollution of their lungs. However, these reasons are not all-inclusively rational, but every person who lights up chooses to smoke because they desire it. And that desire, if truly followed, will not be detoured by UA's new policy alone.
To get the almost 20,000 people on campus daily to adhere to a no-tobacco use policy - from the visitor, to the worker, to the students, faculty or staff - it takes 100 percent cooperation, which, most likely, will not happen soon.
The certainty is that those who desire to smoke tobacco and use tobacco products directly butt heads with the UA policy-makers' ban on tobacco use, which is the disagreement. The solution surely will bring about a future compromise, for intelligent people first negotiate cooperation and then work out differences from that point. The outcome remains a mystery, but the smoking ban weighs heavily toward UA policy makers' way.
Philosophically though, the no-tobacco use policy, although it might be justifiable, hinges on whether it's right to restrict another person's desire when it does little harm to others? However, the majority of the state's legislators voted to ban smoking on state and public property which, by law, is now illegal. And other major universities, major health-care facilities across Arkansas and the U.S. have joined ranks with the legislators. Therefore, UA policy makers seem to have good reason for the ban, mostly because they care about others' health.
A bet on the wording of the permanent UA tobacco use policy would most likely be foolish and prediction nearly impossible. Reason would have it that considerate tobacco users will adhere to the policy either out of duty for the regulation or not wanting to inconvenience others for his or her convenience. Which leaves those tobacco users who feel less considerate and some who feel it is their right to smoke on campus and to spit black slime into open bottles in front of others despite such a ban, with less of a voice.
Thus, the controversy between policy and tobacco users awaits an ultimate answer. But the tobacco ban on UA property, without question, will go into effect July 8, 2008 with or without tobacco users' approval.
Larry Burge is a staff writer for The Arkansas Traveler. His column appears every other Friday.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Nan
posted 10/05/07 @ 9:01 AM CST
Several years ago, Washington Regional Health Systems enacted a ban on tobacco use at all their facilities. Had they followed up with a comprehensive and (dare I say it) compulsory smoking cessation program for all employees, they may have managed to save, not just lost man hours, but lives. (Continued…)
Post a Comment