In Daniel B. Wood's article " Should People Be Allowed to Smoke at Home? " states two different views on smoking. The first view is how people should not be able to smoke at home, and the second view is if people are not allowed to smoke at home, where are they allowed to smoke?
I think the author's main point of this article is basically how places are trying to limit the amount of smokers and up hold smoke free policies because some citizens do not smoke. On the other hand, if the smoke free policies are finialized, where would all the smokers be allowed to smoke? Personally, I'm not a big fan of smoking, but if other people choose to smoke it is their choice. I think in this article, U.S citizens who smoke are victims of dicrimination because they are being limited from spaces that they would be able to smoke non the less their own home . " If smokers are banned from apartments and condos, parks, and other public spaces, the only space left for them to smoke will be single-family homes, a place where children reside." Everyone states that the worst thing to do is to smoke in front of a child so why would they limit it to just this? In my opinion, they should make seperate bulidings for people who do smoke and don't, and restricted areas that are only for smoking. This way non- smokers will be no where in contact with the smoke and smokers will be able to still have their freedom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i dont think smokers should be only allowed 2 live in a place where all smokers live like i smoke where ever but obviously not in front of ppl or blow it in thier face i try my hardet not to get it on them
ReplyDeleteI agree with Randa. It is unfair to invade a person's personal living space with rules. The point is, where do all the rules stop in our lives??Making a place where smokers only can live, is a form of discrimination.
ReplyDeletei agree with randa too..i hate it when people smoke in front of poeple..
ReplyDeleteI'm not against smokers, but that is how i felt when i read the article. It is a form of discrimination and I do agree that people should be allowed to smoke where ever they would please to. But should have the curtiosy and respect that someone might not want the smoke in the face. the only reason why i said that they should make an envoirment for smokers is because i felt as though as they are taking all living options from them that they should have a choice where they want to live. I guess i have to make my self more clear.
ReplyDeletehey Nancy i think its a pretty good idea that smokers and non smokers should just try to separate themselves so that no party is bothered by the other. This way, no one will have complaints about breathing problems or smell issues, etc. It is bad to smoke, but hey, its the persons right to do it, not ours.
ReplyDeletei agree with randa. i don't t that smoker's should be separated from non smoker's
ReplyDeletei agree with you smokers shouldn't be limited from their space
ReplyDeletei get what nancy is sayin and i get wat randa is saying..they way how the book explained it was like where are smokers goin to smoke is everything is limited...so build complexes so they can feel comfortable to smoke a cigg when they want to..but ur also right randa smokers shouldnt be moved somewhere else juss cuz of smoke..ppl r goin to try their best not to get smoke in pplz faces and its not intentionally....
ReplyDelete