Banning of Public Smoking

Banning of public smoking has become a controversial topic, with the supporters of both the groups putting forward their own arguments for and against banning public smoking. It is well known fact that passive smoking has contributed to the death of large numbers of people, thereby showing the negative consequences of smoking. Based on health reasons, one can suggest that smoking should be banned in the public areas.

It has been argued by some scholars and people that smoking is the right of the individuals who should not be forced to quit smoking in the public areas although it is desirable to stop smoking in the places such as public vehicles so as not to affect the co-passengers. The supporters of smoking argue that by banning smoking in public places, the smoker’s right to relax in the places like pubs is taken away, thereby reducing customers to pubs and other places. This has negatively affected business of the pubs.

Already, smoking has been banned in the places where there is intimate contact between different individuals. These people also suggest that smokers are addicted to smoking, which gives them relaxation. It is not desirable to compel the smokers to give up their privilege of smoking without any legal problems. It is also suggested that ban on public smoking creates barriers between smokers and non smokers. (Atwell) Many other scholars have opposed the above argument put forward to support smoking in public places.
It is found that passive smoking is the third major reason for the death of large numbers of people. It is unfortunate that so many people have to suffer because of the smoking behavior of the people who use different forms of tobacco. Cigarettes and other tobacco products can be dangerous not only to the smoker, but also to the non smokes who are around the smoker. Smoke contains more than 4000 chemicals, which can negatively affect the health of the individuals.
Non smokers, due to public smoking, may suffer from health problems leading to lung, breast, cervical, nasal sinus cancers, strokes, and miscarriages. While many smokers argue that they have the right to enjoy their life by smoking, anti-smokers in the public places argue that they have the right to live without suffering from diseases due to second hand smoking. Therefore, it is argued that through public smoking banning, it is possible to improve the health of second hand smokers.
In the absence of public smoke ban, the smokers will be encouraged to continue their habit of smoking in the public, thereby affecting the health of general public. The argument that this ban on public smoking will reduce the number of people visiting pubs and restaurants is also not accepted because studies have indicated that ban on public smoking does not lead to reduced number of customers to the pubs. This is due to the fact that majority of pub customers are non smokers. Ban on public smoking may encourage more number of people to go to bars because they can enjoy their drink in non-smoking environment.
By banning public smoking, even the smokers are given an opportunity to leave smoking, thereby assisting them to improve their health. Ban on public smoking can improve the quality of life of individuals in the modern society. Supporters of public smoking contend that ban on public smoking negatively affects the right of the individuals to enjoy their smoke. They suggest that since already there is partial ban on smoking, there is no need to completely ban public smoking as this would decrease the number of people visiting pubs and other public places.
However, anti-smokers suggest that many non smokers have suffered due to the consumption of nicotine. Since, large numbers of people are affected by smoking in the public places, this should be banned. Works Cited Atwell, Kate. “Should smoking be banned in public places? The no argument”. Online Science. 15 November, 2003. August 22, 2006. Available at <http://www. wessexscene. co. uk/> Bethany, S. , and Minneapolis, M. N. “Ban Smoking in Public Areas”. Teen Ink. 2006. August 22, 2006. Available at <http://teenink. com/>