Mississippi State University recently took action to eliminate smoking on campus by issuing a campus wide smoking ban effective August 1. For the past two years, members of the Student Association, Faculty Senate and Staff Council have been working to see this policy implemented. Now that it is approved by the executive council, not all students are as accepting of the new restrictions. 

Although many argue that the ban places an unwanted burden on students and faculty who smoke, I believe that the benefits of a campus-wide smoking ban greatly outweigh the costs.

According to the Journal of American College Health, cigarette smoking remains a concern among college students. Although smoking has declined in the overall population, smoking remains prevalent among college students. 

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention states that the life expectancy of a smoker is at least 10 years shorter than that of nonsmokers. More than 480,000 people die each year due to cigarette-related health issues and 7,333 of those deaths are due to secondhand smoke. 

This makes sense if you keep in mind that much of the tobacco industry’s advertising is focused on reaching young adults. Based on this skewed advertising, it should come as no surprise to see that individuals between the ages of 18 and 25 are most likely to smoke cigarettes.

In response to alarming studies about the dangers of smoking, the American College Health Association formulated a strong stance against tobacco use at universities. They advocate for smoke-free campuses as a way to prevent health risks among college students as they age. 

The smoking restriction at MSU follows the lead of many other major universities. According to the Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, MSU’s campus is joining over 1,483 colleges and universities across the country who have implemented 100 percent tobacco-free policies. 

There is no question that smoking bans on college campuses are the new norm, but many individuals still question whether smoking bans infringe on individual rights.

The ultimate question that must be answered is whether a public university has the right, or even responsibility, to regulate students’ personal health choices. 

Similar to debate around the smoking ban is discussion over the government regulation of unhealthy food and drinks. Some argue that the government is justified to act based on the fact that obesity is a public health issue, while others say unhealthy food-intake is fully a personal issue. 

In this situation, I agree with the latter argument. If individuals choose not to eat healthily that is their prerogative—they should be free to make decisions that only affect themselves.

However, smoking presents a different challenge. The effects of cigarette smoke are not limited only to those who do the smoking. The decision of one individual to smoke inevitably means that those around them are forced to inhale smoke as well. I firmly believe this is wrong, and that one’s right to freedom only extends as far as another person’s starts. Smoking impedes the rights of other non-smoking individuals. 

The MSU smoking ban should be thought of as a protection for the non-smoking majority’s right to breathe clean air, rather than a restriction on smokers’ freedom.

The smoking ban is not just in the best interests of student health and personal freedom—it is also in the best interest of our university as a whole. The allowance of tobacco on campus negatively affects opinions of prospective students and faculty.  

I have given multiple tours to prospective students visiting MSU who questioned the allowance of smoking. On several of these occasions, parents followed up with reminders that at other universities smoking was no longer an issue.

Thus, Mississippi State has a vested interest in restricting smoke on the campus if it is to remain competitive with peer institutions that enforce smoking bans. The ban is necessary to ensure all students the right to breathe air free of smoke.