Smoking Should be Banned in Public Places.

Thanks you accepting! I hope we can have a good debate togeather. Pardon my spelling and the like, as I am doing this on a mobile phone. But on to my argument. We all know smoking is awful. It causes a ton of diseases, takes years off your life, and kills other people as well. Scientests have studied the affects of second-hand smoke, and found that it is even more dangerous then first-hand smoke [1]. This is because the dangerous chemicals are released in a higher concentration and they linger in the air for several hours. Some health problems include cancer, heart disease, breathing problems, SIDS, and many more harmful diseases. With that being said, why should we allow smoking in public areas? A response might be, "Well, you might only be breathing it in for a few seconds when a smoker walks by." However, as wrote before, the smoke lingers for several hours, and tons of people smoke on sidewalks and in public areas. So that means is that if you walk outside for 2 hours, depending on where you are, you basically smoked 1-3 cigarettes. So it can be very dangerous just to be outside near smokers. So why shouldn't we ban smoking in public areas? It not only is killing you, but the innocent people around you. Another benefit will be that all the cigarette butts will not be thrown all over the ground, reducing litter, and will remove the danger of little kids eating cigarette butts while in the public. Plus, some of the common arguments against a smoking ban won't work. There also is a monetary reward to this. The "Prohibition doesn't work" argument won't work because people can still smoke, the "We will use billions of dollars argument won't work" because 156 billion dollars are lost because of second-hand smoke, and the "People will still smoke" argument won't work because this wouldn't ban smoking, it would only ban it in public, where it is easily enforced. Rebuttals: First off, yes, America did need tobacco to become sucessful early, but this is hardly an argument for this topic. "Given the freedoms granted to us by our founding fathers we have a choice as to whether or not we want to be around smokers. There is no evidence that smoking in open places can have adverse or lasting effects on second hand smokers." I disagree. Second hand smoke has many effects on people, killing 500,000 + people per year. And we often do not have the choice to move away from smokers. And why should we have to move away, when it is easier for smokers just to smoke in their homes. "There is no law, or power given to the government that allows them to take away the privilege of U.S. citizens to smoke, therefore under Article 10 of the Bill of rights grants any privilege not granted to the government to the people." First off, I never specified that my idea had to be in America. And next, if this was to be implemented in America, it doesn't need to be done by the Feds; it could be state or locally done. "but it is pointless and impossible to force the most liberated peoples of this earth (that also are the most Highly armed in the world), to give up Millions of dollars, give up their right to smoke Tobacco, and to enlarge an already too-powerful government." As shown before, this will have many benefits. To conclude, my argument boils to 3 points. First, this will save the US at least 100,000,000,000 dollars per year, will save thousands of innocent lives, and will reduce litter. Good luck! Sources: http://www.cdc.gov... http://my.clevelandclinic.org... http://www.cdc.gov...