No one in my family, immediate or extended, smokes. When I turned 18, I was way more excited about the prospect of being able to vote than the ability to buy a pack of cigarettes.
On first arriving to campus last year, I didn’t notice an extraordinary amount of smokers. Perhaps the main thing I noticed was the amount of cigarette butts lying around the Undergraduate Library.
Thus, I honestly don’t think that I will notice or be affected by the new smoking ban that will be enacted in November 2013.
While the University states eliminating secondhand smoke as the main reason the campus will go smoke-free, those who will be affected most by the ban are smokers themselves.
Now, everyone knows that smoking is bad for your health. Yet the addictive nature of cigarettes makes that fact all the less influential for smokers. After all, about 20 percent of the country smokes.
What this smoking ban will do is essentially force smokers either to decrease their consumption of cigarettes or to encourage them to quit. Those who live off-campus may be less inclined to quit because they can smoke at home. But those who live in the residence halls will more likely be moved toward quitting because they can no longer smoke outside of the residence halls.
I see both of these effects as nothing but good things. In addition to decreasing the use of cigarettes by smokers, the ban will probably discourage students from choosing to take up smoking. This equates to more money in smokers’ pockets and a longer life ahead of them. Doesn’t sound like a huge affront to me.
But I do understand the controversy surrounding the issue. Basically the entire campus is of the legal age to smoke. We all have the right. We all have the freedom to do so. And we all will still have the freedom to do so, just not on campus. The University does have the ability to make certain rules that benefit the health of its students. And the University decided that the negative effects of secondhand smoke were enough to impose a smoking ban. As much as I say that I don’t think I will notice the effect of the ban, I know that I have inhaled my fair share of secondhand smoke while on campus. To know that I will no longer have to subconsciously hold my breath as I walk into the UGL is comforting.
Most importantly, the University needs to hold true to its claim that it will provide many outlets for smokers to try to quit smoking. For immediate help, the Wellness Center website offers information and resources on how to quit. In addition to this, the University is currently figuring out how to develop a program to help students, faculty and staff quit smoking. If a successful program is not developed within a year, then many smokers will be left hanging and will have cause to be angry, creating a situation where the University should decide if it should go through with the ban. With the amount of controversy already surrounding this decision, it is essential that the University make these programs a focal point.
The University needs to make clear what area the term “campus” applies to. Several specifics are up in the air right now, but committees will be working on how to best let smokers know where they can and cannot smoke. Once this information is available, it needs to be easily accessible and highly publicized, for that is only fair and is essential for the ban to be successful.
Smokers should look at this ban as a way to improve their health. Sure, it may be an inconvenience. It may be difficult. But in the long run, I think you’ll thank the University for it.