Issue 12, Semester 1, 2019 GRIMALDUS The University of Melbourne prides itself on being a safe, and inclusive, space for all those who find themselves within its grand old grounds. As part of its commitment to healthy spaces, the University banned all smoking (and vaping, chewing, etc.) on any campus. The powers-that-be recognised that not only can second-hand smoke be injurious in the long term, but it also presents an immediate danger to asthmatics (such as myself), and others who are differently-abled. This is to say nothing of the sheer unpleasantness inherent to walking through a cloud of someone else’s already-circulated, foul-smelling air, multiple times a day. This regulation was by no means popular. People resent being told how to live their lives, and especially so when they perceive they are being preached to. The result is that many people simply choose to ignore the ban (or are unaware of it). At the law school, this is evident from the pack of nicotine junkies taking a hit right outside the front doors, nearly constantly throughout the day. To be clear, I bear no actual ill-will towards my friends who duck outside for a cigarette, but it’s incumbent upon all of us to consider the ways in which our actions affect those around us, and change our behaviour accordingly. Thus, this critique is more than a fist-shaking rant about a minor inconvenience. The health and accessibility issues this topic raises are serious, and should be taken seriously.
No smoker is unaware of the harmful effects of their smoking to themselves, no doubt having had it pointed out to them on a regular basis. However, they may be less aware of the impact their smoking has on those around them. Statistics on second-hand smoke morbidity are difficult to come by in Australia, however, according to The Cancer Council (Vic), for every ten smokers that die in comparable societies, such as the US and UK, one person dies of second-hand smoke exposure. Why should the health of those around you be imperilled, for any reason? Why, for that matter, should non-smokers be left short of breath? Why should asthmatics risk attacks, passing through the miasma of airborne ash that hangs in front of the law school doors on a still day? Blanket smoking bans, such as the one imposed by UniMelb, raise delicate questions around personal liberty. Such concerns should be heard out. Banning the sale or use of tobacco products in a private setting is a clear overreaction. However, tobacco is like many other drugs, in that externalities creep beyond voluntary users. As a matter of personal opinion, I agree that individuals should be free to do with their bodies as they wish. However, smoking in public places is not a responsible way of exercising that right. It may seem innocuous to many of us, who have grown up with smoking still prevalent amongst large tracts of the population. However, on its harms and merits, smoking in public just doesn’t stack up. There is no other way in which endangering the health of others, to such a degree, would be viewed with such forbearance. This is not the kind of issue one should have to grin and bear. To the University, I say: please take enforcement of our smoking rules seriously. To those who smoke: please recognise the discomfort you cause, and make moves to mitigate it. I freely acknowledge that I’m a wet blanket — I certainly do hope to succeed in extinguishing something. Grimaldus is a First Year JD Student.
Smelly Smoker
28/5/2019 04:46:36 pm
Thanks for your thoughtful, respectful article.
Smoker who wants to co-operate
28/5/2019 05:12:25 pm
Hi, same as above, seeking clarification from the author.
Just want fresh air when outside
29/5/2019 09:13:51 am
But hold on, 'Smelly Smoker' you're saying the exclusion zone likely ends at the front doors (with some metres either side) then it's most unuseful. When non-smokers and asthmatics enter and leave the building they will have to inhale a great deal of smoke. Doesnt matter if smokers have 'ducked' around the side, people are exposed. Also hint, if you're standing near porta via ---you're either in the exclusion zone, or, making the exclusion zone nearby, compltely redundant.
Smelly Smoker
29/5/2019 11:19:51 am
Hey "Just want fresh air when outside", thanks for your reply :)
A pack a day keeps the anxiety away
28/5/2019 04:58:58 pm
I crave a dart after reading this
just hook the nicotine to my veins
28/5/2019 05:03:38 pm
cigarettes are for scum
Moderately ambivalent citizen
28/5/2019 06:05:01 pm
What if we need to smoke to rid our unhealthy mouths of the processed dirt taste of Porta Via 'coffee'?
Carl Fardmann
28/5/2019 07:24:19 pm
I agree, the Porta Via coffee isn't good. I get terrible diarrhoea from it!
Keith
28/5/2019 06:10:50 pm
Sorry, I appreciate your concern. However, suggesting that people who enjoy the sweet sweet pleasure of tobacco and tobacco based smoky tubes (or even bongs) will change their ways out of concern for their fellow man is wishful thinking.
Keith Squared
28/5/2019 06:22:10 pm
Hey Keith, does your comment’s central thesis also apply to... your own comment?
Keith
28/5/2019 06:29:50 pm
Hello Keith Squared,
Anon
28/5/2019 09:21:13 pm
This comment seems to suggest/dog whistle that people who are suffering at the hands of others should give up talking up about how bad the others are, or why they ought to stop causing that suffering, or perhaps how much that suffering sucks.
Keith
28/5/2019 10:59:41 pm
Dear 'Anon',
Keith Squared
29/5/2019 11:35:17 am
Keith, you're right about incentives being the most effective means of regulating behaviour. Cool. Freakonomics FTW (is that the correct use of FTW? What does FTW mean?)
Keith Squared
29/5/2019 11:39:42 am
Actually, the author did say, "To those who smoke: please recognise the discomfort you cause, and make moves to mitigate it.". So, they were kinda saying "won't somebody please think of the asthmatics".
r/trees
29/5/2019 11:09:53 am
So glad that we now have a forest of trees opposite the law building to turn all that stinky secondhand smoke from these derelict law students and dropkick skaters into fresh oxygen. Photosynthesis <3 <3
Poignant passerby
29/5/2019 06:21:28 pm
It appears the author hasn’t directly answered what exactly they’re after. Honestly though if smokers are acknowledging, and people generally, that it’s bad to smoke in the smoke free zone, then, any other issue you have isn’t directed at smokers. Don’t hate the player hate the game - if you want reform do something about it and don’t try and imbue some sort of unwarranted social policy through the guilt trip approach. Nice article though. Comments are closed.
|
Archives
December 2021
|