My opinion on the new smoking advertisement law is that it shouldn't be. There is no more Joe Camel and Marlboro Man on billboard advertisements, television, etc.

I think that is wrong because the First Amendment states that we have freedom of the press as well as freedom of speech. The whole point of an advertisement is to lure people into buying their product. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, an advertisement is a poster, bill-board, etc., that promotes a product. It seems to me as if a smoking ad is promoting that product. Why is it wrong to promote their product?If cigarette companies can't advertise, why are the Budweiser frogs still around? They promote a harmful substance to the body. There are warnings about that, but the focus is all on cigarette companies. All they did was invent a product that sells well.

If there is a law at all that should be made about these advertisements that are harmful to the body, the law should be that they should inform the user better. It is the users' fault that they get lung cancer when they are 13 because health classes and drug-free week are supposed to educate them on this.

Aleah Wetherell

Kearns