Let’s face it: Our entire campus becoming tobacco free on Nov. 19, 2009 is unrealistic.
The university administration should be applauded for the attempt at making our campus healthier, but it’s fair to say most people will not comply with this ban. Especially since it currently relies on nothing more than an honor system.
According to a Tuesday Kernel article, a campuswide e-mail sent by President Lee Todd on Monday announced that UK will be executing the tobacco-free policy in the near future. The Tobacco-Free Campus Initiative will not only ban cigarettes, but all tobacco products from being used on any part of UK’s campus.
Todd said in a statement that the ban would “greatly improve the atmosphere for all members of our community.†Since the ban has apparently been successful at the UK Medical Center, the initiative committee believed it would carry over to the university’s campus.
A tobacco ban at a medical facility is one thing, but having that same ban at a public university is just not practical. Since the ban depends solely on an honor system, believing people will stop smoking on campus is a bit naïve on the administration’s part. What’s the worst that could happen? Someone kindly reminding you that this is a smoke-free campus and asking nicely to put out your cigarette? That would certainly work.
Something that is bound to happen though, when the cigarette disposal containers are removed, is that the campus will be littered with unsightly cigarette butts, which equals more work for the grounds crew.
Cigarette butts aren’t biodegradable — in fact, they can sit on the ground for 12 to 15 years because of the ingredient synthetic polymer cellulose acetate. So those that aren’t picked up or are missed will be hanging out on campus longer than the sixth-year senior in COM 101.
Penn State, a UK benchmark, is considering a smoking ban, but after seeing that one has not been successful at Indiana University, it will likely not be passed, according to The Daily Collegian, Penn State’s student newspaper. The ban could possibly be effective at smaller, private universities, but it will not have the same outcome at large state schools. Especially in Kentucky, which relies on tobacco products and has the highest tobacco-use rate in the country.
Since secondhand smoke can be a serious danger, this campuswide tobacco ban is a nice idea on the administration’s part. It’s just not a realistic one. Instead of creating this ban, let’s educate our students on the dangers of tobacco products and give help to those that would like to quit.
Check ur facts — 225 public and private universities and colleges have bans in place. Even if the ban is followed by a few, at least the amount of second-hand smoke on campus will decrease. This editorial board would once again rather see something FAIL than to actually have to CHANGE behavior.
More education? Seriously? Smoking kills — I’m sure everyone KNOWS that by now. “Give help to those that would like to quit” — yeah, I’d like the jagoffs in front of the classroom building to stop blowing smoke around the entrances. Help me help them quit.
This should not even be a health issue. To smoke is your own liberty and this is taking the rights of smokers away. It is a legal activity for them to smoke and as a non-smoker it does not infringe on myself if they want to take a smoke outside. if it is about smoking then why take chewing tobacco out? This is an outrage for the university to take rights and liberty from the smokers who, when they buy a pack put money in tax’s so the university can receive money from the state.
I think smokers at UK should stand up for this and protest before other liberties start getting taken away from us Students.
UK is private property and if the owner of said property says no smoking, DEAL with it.
UK is only private property because of the vast amount of students that pay tuition to keep it that way. If there was no money coming in to support the university, there would be no private ownership because there would be one that could afford to run this already outrageously expensive venture on their own. So i say, and i am a non smoker, if you dont want to smell the smoke, walk away…you’re already asking the other half of the argument to walk away so who is really being the bigger person here…the person that says theyll comply with your choice to ban smoking just because you cant stand it?…or the person that says they wont comply with your choice to smoke because they cant stand it? If you ask me, the smokers are the ones that are having to put up with the bullshit…I guess we should ban talking on cell phones on campus too since i dont enjoy listening to other peoples conversations as they walk by even though i could choose not to…make sense? I didnt think so either? Everyone has choices…let them make them, and you make your own.