UW-Stout Considering Smoking Ban On Campus
The University of Wisconsin – Stout is currently in talks about instituting a smoking ban on University grounds. No person, whether student or faculty, could smoke on campus. This poses some major questions.
How will the University enforce it? Smoking is so prevalent on our campuses nationwide, it would lead to many citations being issued. One might argue that an officer could just spend his entire shift handing out smoking citations.
“If people choose to smoke, I think they should be able to do it outside. I don’t feel they should have to walk off campus to carry on their addictions. I also feel that nobody would be able to enforce it.” said Stacey Kanarski, a non-smoking UW-Stout student.
One college has recognized this fact. Fuellerton College does not issue citations, rather they ask the student or faculty members to put it out. Fullerton College reports this has been successful thus far and have not had to issue citations or remove students from campus.
Where will the students go? Our campus is surrounded by businesses and residences leaving minimal places for students and faculty to light up. Some students have proposed that UW-Stout make ’smoking shelters’, especially in the cold winter months. When it is -35 degrees, are you going to want students to walk across the street to smoke and risk frostbite or car accidents?
Is the ban a violation of your fundamental rights? Smoking is legal, however, it does affect those people who are in the same environment and chose not to smoke. There are two ways to look at the issue. Do citizens have the ‘right’ to breath clean air? Or do citizens have the right to light up anywhere they choose, especially outdoors since it is legal? You be the judge.
“I don’t smoke, but I don’t think it would beneficial if we made the entire campus smoke free. We then would be regulating every little thing the student chooses to do. It may also be a freedom the student never had at home, and college is about finding out who you are. I don’t like smoking, but I don’t believe we can say no to their (smokers) lifestyle choices.” says Clay Lanners, UW-Stout student.
StoutMedia took to South Campus to talk with students about the issue. Their concerns can be seen here:
What do you think? Voice your student opinion by commenting on this story below. It is 100% anonymous, your UW-Stout email will not be displayed and you can input any name you’d like as your moniker. We’d encourage you to use your name, however you can insert ‘anonymous’ if you so chose.
Tags: cigarettes, menomonie, smoke free, smoking ban, stout, stout smoking ban, stoutmedia, uw-stout, uw-stout smoking, wisconsin smoking
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
September 26, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I personally don’t like the smokers on campus. The “20 foot rule” is not enforced at all and I hate having smoke in my room and right when I go out the door. But I don’t think we have the right to take away their rights to smoke. I think a thing that could be enforced is maybe have specific shelters where people can only smoke and maybe not have smoking while you’re walking because that all just blows into people’s faces and I’m really sick of that too.
September 26, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I do not smoke cigarettes, and feel minorly inconvenienced when having to walk through a cloud of smoke. BUT IT IS LEGAL AND OUTSIDE! Get over it people! I think the smoking shelter idea is bogus and would never happen, so that is irrelevant.
September 27, 2008 at 11:26 am
The percentage of smokers has dropped to 20%. In January a Statewide ban will be introduced and likely passed as it has in Iowa, Minnesota and Illinois. There are 24 States that have passed legislation that covers bars and restaurants. In all of these the smoking rates have decreased. Smoking related disease and deaths from second hand smoke are a huge burden on our society. Study after study show that the vast majority of smokers want to quit, (normally around 80%).
With this in mind, I say pass a campus wide ban, but set the implementation date out something like two years. That gives students, faculty and staff two years to prepare. In two years the general smoking population will be about 15% with the passage of a State wide ban and the percentage on Universities will be in the 5-10% range.
A campus wide smoking ban will be in the best interest of the 80% of smokers that want to quit along with the vast majority of the campus that are non-smokers. Yes, there will be about 5% of the campus population that smokes and wants to smoke. They have two years to either graduate, move on or learn to deal with it.
Incoming students and their parents will be choosing a college based on many merits. A university that takes this serious health issue seriously will be attractive to the vast majority of incoming freshman two years from now. About 10% will stay away because it is smoke free and about 90% will find it more attractive because it is smoke free. It is not only good business sense, it is also good health sense.
September 27, 2008 at 11:38 am
if it’s really such a problem that nonsokers have to walk through a ‘CLOUD OF SECOND HAND SMOKE’ when they leave buildings, then enforce the 25 foot rule harder. the idea that smoking anywhere on campus immediately causes health concerns to others absolute horse shit.
September 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm
While MOST of the health concerns are certainly not immediate, talk to someone with severe asthma about it sometime. Just this year a waitress in Michigan forgot her inhaler and died while at work from second hand smoke.
You can kill the innocent bystanders slow or fast, either way, it is just plain wrong and not anybodies “right”.
September 27, 2008 at 4:31 pm
What is next? City wide smoking bans?? Seriously, we are outside smoking our cigarettes, who are we harming other than ourselves?? Get over it, we follow enough petty laws and expectations, quit wasting your time and money trying to control something that is not harming other people- SMOKING OUTSIDE!!!! I understand confined areas are an issue with secondhand smoke, but we smoke outside. Last time I checked, I paid money to go to school, and I believe that I should have the same rights as everyone else, and that is to abide by the smoking 20 foot buffer zone. What else do you want?? Going off campus is ludacris and stupid-we smoke-get over it, and we throw our butts away, so kiss mine!
September 27, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I think the smoking ban is a great idea. I’m sick of walking behind smokers on campus who are blowing smoking back into my face while walking to Harvey. Put it out you idiots! And all the smokers who are complaining about this, I’m sure you ALLL follow the 20 foot rule, yea right! How about Art students by A.A. ? Sureeeeeeeeeee Art students by Applied Arts are the worst violators of the 20 foot rule.
BAN THE DEATH STICKS!
September 27, 2008 at 6:02 pm
I agree with most of the ban. i understand that the idea may be a crazy shock to many people who smoke, but if given a fair warning people can have no real gripe about the ban. i like the idea of a smoking area/hut. it would keep the smoke confined to be with other smokers and keep everyone else safe and healthy. i agree with josh about the App. Arts “Cloud” it is by far the worst. i also agree witht the possibility of enforcing the 20 foot rule more harshly. Overall, the ban makes sense, there are more nonsmokers that smokers and many states and cities are moving towards a “Smoke free zone”
September 27, 2008 at 9:15 pm
a smoking hut would be a great idea, and would definitely be put to good use during the winter, but i doubt that will happen. walking past someone smoking every once in a while isn’t going to give you cancer any more than walking past a line of idling cars will. enforcing the 20 foot rule certainly makes sense and would solve the problem completely. to take away my right to smoke anywhere on campus, even where there’s nobody else around, is ludicrous. it’s going far past looking after the health concerns of non-smokers and is infringing on the rights of smokers. i can only imagine the mentality of someone lobbying for an idea like this. when i light a cigarette on campus, away from any buildings or crowds, i’m not damaging anybody’s quality of life except my own.
September 27, 2008 at 9:34 pm
i would encourage non-smokers who see this as an opportunity to discard a habit which they don’t partake in (which is minimal compared to car exhaust, factory fumes, and countless other far dangerous pollutants) to take an objective look at it and try to understand that, regardless of what the ban is over, it is still a clear violation of *your* rights, everyones rights, even non-smokers.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out
September 27, 2008 at 10:21 pm
That is kind of ironic. The Nazis killed the Jews with a poisonous gas and smokers are killing non-smokers with a poisonous gas. Thanks for putting it in perspective!
September 27, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Lung cancer has been thrust into the spotlight again after the death of legendary actor and philanthropist Paul Newman at the age of 83.
During Newman’s rise to fame in the 1950s, cigarette smoking was used in the movies and on television to convey masculinity, sophistication and sex appeal.
Late in his career, Newman — who at one time was considered a heavy smoker — famously quipped, “It’s absolutely amazing that I survived all the booze and smoking and the cars and the career.”
It’s been reported that he quit smoking some 30 years ago.
But although stopping does help curb damage to your lungs as the years pass, the chance of getting lung cancer is never completely gone.
“The risk continues for at least 10 more years even after you’ve quit,” Dr. Len Horovitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, told FOXNews.com.
“Once lungs are damaged they don’t grow back,” he said. “It’s like brain tissue — once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”
In fact, smoking is behind nearly 90 percent of lung cancer cases and is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S. among both men and women.
“It’s a horrible way to go,” said Dr. Evan Sorett, a pulmonologist and director of critical care at St. Vincent’s Hospital in New York City. “People have to be put on morphine, they are gasping to breathe. It’s a terrible death.”
Recent statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that lung cancer accounted for more deaths than breast cancer, prostate cancer and colon cancer combined.
But it isn’t always cigarettes that lead to the disease.
“Eighteen percent of people who come down with lung cancer have never smoked,” Horovitz said. “And we do know that out of 18 percent, 80 percent of those people are women, so experts believe there may be some hormonal elements that may play a role in lung cancer as well.”
The National Cancer Institute defines lung cancer as cancer that forms in tissues of the lung, usually in the cells lining the air passages. The two main types are small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer.
Non-small cell lung cancer, the less aggressive of the two, is the most common type and accounts for 90 percent of lung cancer cases.
Small cell lung cancer (sometimes known as oat cell cancer), accounts for about 20 percent of cases, according to the American Lung Association.
Rick factors include:
— Smoking cigarettes or cigars, now or in the past
— Second-hand smoke
— Exposure to heavy metals and other industrial solvents
— Air pollution
September 28, 2008 at 12:37 am
Why dictate what other can and cannot do? If its so bad why dont we start banning cars from being driven in certain parts of our city because of the “pollution” they put out. If thats the case, we need to stop boats from being out on our lakes, atv’s from driving in our woods, snowmobiles from traveling, jets from flying, and ships from carrying their loads. All these are throwing out more toxins than smokers are. I personally dont smoke, never have, never will. But why must we force things upon our society when we are “free” I have asthma also, if i have an asthma attack while im standing on the street corner im not gonna go blame it on the nearest thing possible, like your SUV, or your sports car, which are putting out the same amount of toxins, if not more. im sure all of you know at least 10 people who smoke and some of them are probably your best friends. so you are telling your friends what they can and cannot do? what would they think of that. you want to control their life. thats being a nice friend. you want to control them to be the friend you want them to be, well maybe you shouldnt be friends with them. quit complaining about it!
September 28, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Why dictate others? Because I don’t want to die a slow death to the toxins nor smell like crap all day.
September 28, 2008 at 1:04 pm
My friends say that smoking is a powerful addiction and anything that can be done to increase their odds of quitting should be done. Bring on every ban and every tax. Above all allow the FDA to regulate cigarettes so they can reduce the addictive drugs blended into cigarettes by Big Tobacco to make them powerful.
September 28, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Smoking IS a powerful addiction, which is why smokers tend to be put off by arguments like, “Just get over it and quit.” If that were that easy, most of us would have done it long ago.
More to the point, there are tons of behaviors that endanger both the people who do them and people who come into contact with them. Somebody earlier in this thread made the point about cars. They pollute much more than cigarettes do, and many people could get along just fine with them, and nobody ever got run over by a cigarette–so where’s all the self-righteous preachy harangue about banning them?
As a vegetarian, I find meat pretty gross. There’s a laundry list of negative environmental impacts from the meat industry, which means it hurts all of us, even those us who choose not to eat meat. So where’s all the self-righteous preachiness about that?
Get the point? It’s easy to demonize smokers, but we’re not nearly as dangerous to others as people say we are. I’m actually in favor of a campus smoking ban on the campus where I teach, but not without at least an attempt to accommodate people who choose to keep doing it.
September 29, 2008 at 12:19 am
My window is on first floor right near the exit. If people ever followed the 25 foot rule (WHICH THEY DON’T, Especially in the winter when they are too sissy to stand in the cold) then it wouldn’t be such a big deal but since so many people cannot follow the law, why not inconvinience them. I think I should get the right to breath over your right to choke others with your smoke.
September 29, 2008 at 3:39 pm
more importantly, i think we need to consider a campus-wide banning of self-righteous twats that talk about smokers as if they were subhuman.
October 2, 2008 at 1:13 pm
What “right” do you think you have as a smoker? You have the right to smoke? Is that in the constitution? Or because you choose to smoke you have the right to do whatever you want? Where does it say that you have the right to pollute my air that I breathe? We have noise laws, why not clean air laws?
Maybe because you walk to class you should have the right to jaywalk anywhere you want as well, because you’re only endangering yourself that way. Or maybe you think you have the right to be belligerently drunk at work, while you drive a forklift, because you choose to drink…
If the government didn’t have the RIGHT to change laws and regulations, women wouldn’t be voting, and we’d all have the Right to treat another human being as property. I, for one, am extremely thankful that many of these rights get updated from time to time.
If you really care for Rights, as opposed to just yourself, try fighting against putting chemicals in the public water supply….
October 2, 2008 at 3:08 pm
“Get the point? It’s easy to demonize smokers, but we’re not nearly as dangerous to others as people say we are. I’m actually in favor of a campus smoking ban on the campus where I teach, but not without at least an attempt to accommodate people who choose to keep doing it.”
So smoking should be treated like a disability now? We need to make accommodations to smokers? That’s nonsense. I want accommodations made because I bike to work. I want bike lanes so I’m safe. Because I want them I should get them, right, It’s my right to be safe biking. A statement like that is very selfish and I can’t really expect someone to change something in accordance with what I want…. It’s silly. I deal with what happens, and that’s all.
October 2, 2008 at 7:20 pm
“I want accommodations made because I bike to work. I want bike lanes so I’m safe. Because I want them I should get them, right, It’s my right to be safe biking. A statement like that is very selfish and I can’t really expect someone to change something in accordance with what I want…. It’s silly. I deal with what happens, and that’s all.”
how is that any different than people who want smoking banned?
it’s not like being in a closet with a handful of smokers, its outdoors, for christs sake. when i smoke a cigarette on campus, with nobody else around me, it’s not carried a mile away and brought down into the face of some poor sap who’s out for a breath fresh air, as much as you’d like to argue it. on the same note, i would bet all these nonsmokers who are suddenly so concerned about clean air don’t think twice about driving their car or buying factory-made products or having a bonfire. you want to talk about selfish?
If, once in a while, you have to walk past someone who’s smoking, big deal. It’s an inconvenience, it’s not going to kill you. I can’t stand when people sit next to me when they have B.O., but I’m not clamoring for mandatory bi-daily showers on campus. In fact, you know what i do? I fucking move away like anybody with common sense would do. Try that the next time you find yourself next to somebody smoking. There’s plenty of ground for everybody.
I honestly can’t understand how anyone could want a campus-wide smoking ban and then have the nerve to talk about being selfish. If I step away from other people and buildings to smoke, does it tarnish the quality of air for everybody on campus? Yet I read these bozos above me say things like ‘You think you have the right to choke others with your smoke?” No, actually I don’t think I have that right, and I’m not doing it, either. I’m not breathing smoke down your throat, stop fucking overreacting.