Editorial: To smoke or not to smoke?
Issue date: 2/8/10 Section: Opinion
The issue: Smoke-free campus ban seems nonexistent
Our position: The administration needs to make up its mind
To smoke on campus or not to smoke on campus, this is the dilemma.
Technically, this dilemma should not exist at a university which boasts a newly acquired title of "Smoke Free Campus."
PUC has had this so-called "ban" in effect for nearly six months, but is obviously having trouble getting everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Perhaps the problem lies within the fact that this particular ban is self-enforced.
Assistant Vice Chancellor for Advancement Wes Lukoshus has said that the university is maintaining patience with those who still choose to smoke on campus - hoping that they will eventually comply with the new smoke-free campus policy in place.
According to SGA President Jessie Martin, self-enforcement is the key to keeping smoking off of campus, which can start as the personal decision of the smoker, or as a decision from a passerby who wishes to play hero and stand up for the big, bad smoking ban.
This self-enforced policy seems like an attempt for university administration to have their cake and eat it too. This allows for the appeasement the non-smokers who wish to be void of smoky areas and smelly people in front of them in class, but also allows for the smokers on campus to go about their business - as long as they keep it away from the prying eyes of those who choose to enforce others' self-enforcement. This flip-flop between enforcing or not to enforcing smoking on campus seems like an attempt to side step blame for the issue by refusing to own up to either choice.
The university administration needs to make up its mind. Its job exists in order to make decisions based on what they feel is right for the campus, and if that decision is not what the students of this campus really want, it is up to the SGA to speak up on behalf of the student body. Yes, these decisions are certain to not be favorable for one specific party, and yes, many people will not be very happy in regards to the outcome.
However, at least the student body will be able to respect an administration that actually stands up for what it believes to be right.
Our position: The administration needs to make up its mind
To smoke on campus or not to smoke on campus, this is the dilemma.
Technically, this dilemma should not exist at a university which boasts a newly acquired title of "Smoke Free Campus."
PUC has had this so-called "ban" in effect for nearly six months, but is obviously having trouble getting everyone to jump on the bandwagon. Perhaps the problem lies within the fact that this particular ban is self-enforced.
Assistant Vice Chancellor for Advancement Wes Lukoshus has said that the university is maintaining patience with those who still choose to smoke on campus - hoping that they will eventually comply with the new smoke-free campus policy in place.
According to SGA President Jessie Martin, self-enforcement is the key to keeping smoking off of campus, which can start as the personal decision of the smoker, or as a decision from a passerby who wishes to play hero and stand up for the big, bad smoking ban.
This self-enforced policy seems like an attempt for university administration to have their cake and eat it too. This allows for the appeasement the non-smokers who wish to be void of smoky areas and smelly people in front of them in class, but also allows for the smokers on campus to go about their business - as long as they keep it away from the prying eyes of those who choose to enforce others' self-enforcement. This flip-flop between enforcing or not to enforcing smoking on campus seems like an attempt to side step blame for the issue by refusing to own up to either choice.
The university administration needs to make up its mind. Its job exists in order to make decisions based on what they feel is right for the campus, and if that decision is not what the students of this campus really want, it is up to the SGA to speak up on behalf of the student body. Yes, these decisions are certain to not be favorable for one specific party, and yes, many people will not be very happy in regards to the outcome.
However, at least the student body will be able to respect an administration that actually stands up for what it believes to be right.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 5
john f
posted 2/08/10 @ 9:15 AM CST
I can understand the frustrations of persons who do not want the ban to be enforced. The problem is these people dont realize that smoking on someone else's property is a privledge and is allowed by their graces. (Continued…)
KidKaimera
KidKaimera
posted 2/11/10 @ 1:11 PM CST
Oh lol quit your whining, our tuition and tax dollars pay the maintenance people to pick up said butts! Littering has very little to do with the ban. The ban started when some stupid nursing student whined at the Chancellor, that non-smokers were offended by the sudden barrage of cigarette smoke in their faces when they left the major buildings. (Continued…)
al
posted 2/13/10 @ 9:23 AM CST
what i believe needs to happen is to implement smoking sections where everyone is able to clearly know where smoking is allowed...obviously not by the door. (Continued…)
Bill Smits
posted 2/13/10 @ 9:10 PM CST
The smoking ban is stupid.
I have a ban proposal of my own.
PUC should ban cell phones from campus.
This student has found it almost impossible to find a quiet space anywhere on campus(including the library)
Not that this noise I complain of, is students talking to one another in person, but rather its people yapping on there cell phones, and everyone within a certain radius is forced to hear there stupid conversation. (Continued…)
Post a Comment