OPINION: Butting in on Potential Smoking Ban for ICC

As stated in “No Smoking on Campus, Period,” both the Illinois Senate and House of Representatives passed the Illinois General Assembly’s Smoke-Free Campus Act, which will make it illegal to smoke tobacco or any other carcinogenic products in any place on the Illinois Central College campus, and every other state-funded college or university campus. The law will eliminate the designated smoking areas around the outside of our campus and ban smoking in vehicles parked on college property, allowing “no opportunities for individuals to smoke at any time in any location.”

My name is Richard. I smoke cigarettes. My current go-to pack is Camel Turkish Royals. I, like many, enjoy my smoke breaks in between campus responsibilities. You guys probably assume I’m pretty riled up about this bill. I’m not.

I’m into civil disobedience. I believe Dr. King and Co. set a good example, disobeying laws they believed to be unjust and willing to accept the consequences for their actions. No matter how tyrannical, immoral or laughable you perceive a law to be, you are forced to play the game of adhering to that rule of law, to society’s standards.

It doesn’t bother me to break the No Smoking rule every once in a while, to be civilly disobedient, but I don’t suppose everybody operates that way. So for the sake of those who don’t, I’ll choose a side and make a brief attempt at making its case.

This Smoke-Free Campus Act thing is bullshit.

I won’t try to tackle all the civil liberty infringements on smokers in the United States. The focus shall be on Illinois Central College and its smoking population.

Let’s look at secondhand smoke, that creeping, ubiquitous killer of innocent souls. The Smoke-Free Campus Act asserts that “separating smokers from nonsmokers, cleaning the air and ventilating buildings cannot eliminate secondhand smoke exposure.” Sure.

Plus, there is “conclusive evidence” that secondhand smoke kills around 42,000 nonsmoking adults a year. Okay.

I have no philosophical counterpoint, and I imagine at least some of the evidence is sufficient. Is it not pretty clear, though, that without venturing into a designated smoking area, nonsmokers aren’t going to inhale a life threatening amount of smoke? Why, if smokers are expected to migrate to one of the few areas where our campus says we can smoke, can a nonsmoker not simply move out of the way of nearby smoke, or make the decision to not walk where he knows smoking is prevalent? This could be a team effort, guys. We just sort of have to avoid each other.

Let’s not forget we’re dealing with humans, either. When have total-bans on anything worked?

Alcohol during Prohibition? Guns in Chicago? Cell phones on the road?

For the issue at hand, we can look at University of Minnesota Duluth, who banned smoking altogether in 2008, and has not only had a 200% increase in tickets issued for smoking, but had to hire “at least a third” more of what was their custodial staff to pick up “cigarette butts in select areas, including University bathrooms and closets” (umdstatesman.edu). I feel that’s where ICC would be heading with the bill in place – more tickets and more secret smoking locations to clean, creating unnecessary stress for the smokers and staff alike.

I believe the Smoke-Free Campus Act isn’t only undemocratic and uncool, but almost sure to be ineffective. To go on smoking in a smoke-free campus may seem immature and spiteful, but I submit it is the post-conventional, morally sound route to take.

Are we not tuition paying, law-abiding cool people just wanting an education like everybody else? Do we not deserve the privilege to do what we want if we follow the rules?

I don’t like to toss around “freedom” and “rights” very often, but damn it, that’s what they’re taking, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to try and take those things back.