Ban on smoking in public places

Since the beginning of civilization, man has always persuaded his interests for recreation by using tobacco as a frontline substance for his leisure. As time passed by, more production of tobacco started till it reached a stage where today there are numerous cigarette companies selling their cancer sticks at the most reasonable rates. The desire to light a cigarette has always been one of the top most priorities of people who indulge in smoking and in their pretext of soothing their desire for a smoke; they more often than not forget the amount of hazard and trouble caused by the smoke emitting from their cigarettes.

Cigarette smoking is one of the worst ways of self destruction and even after knowing its negative impact on the body, a smoker always tends to overlook the danger associated with it and continues to smoke irrespective of the location in which he is standing. The issue of raising a ban on smoking in public has always been a controversial one and has always been taking the side of a non-smoker than people who are indulgent in public smoking. Non- smokers always tend to move away from a location where a smoker is footing and always have a feeling of their sentiments being abused or overlooked by a person who is smoking near them.

The history of the smoking ban can be dated to the sixteenth century when the Pope Urban VII made it mandatory law of smokers not being welcomed near the premises of the church and also issues a penalty for people who violated this law. This law however did not catch as much attention as the issue is catching on the twenty-first century. Today because of the advancements of medical science and research on the adverse effects of smoking, we have been able to pin point the negative impacts of smoking on a smoker and the passive smoker near by to him.
The following will shed some light on the physical negative impacts of smoking on a smoker: ‘Smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, complicated pregnancy. Smoking by pregnant women result in fetal injury, premature birth, and low birth weight. Smoking is associated with a reduced bone mass and an increased risk of osteoporosis’ (Courtesy: Cheap Cigarettes, “Effects of Cigarette Smoking”. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www. cheap-cigarettes. com/Effects_of_Cigarette_Smoking. asp)
There are evidences too on the fact of smoking affecting post operational procedures, especially related with ones in which transfusion of blood is on a higher side because of the attempt to join bones or tissues which due to accidents and other trauma are disarrayed from each other. Apart from knowing these entire statistics a persistent smoker would continue to smoke and silently destroy his body, but for that soothing experience the smoker might make some innocent bystander a partner of his misery, by making him a passive smoker.
The second hand smoke inhaled by a passive smoker is considered to very dangerous and it causes a lot more harm and eventuality than what it looks at the moment. The worst effect however of passive smoking is on children, and the following evidence will vindicate the point of having smoking bans in public places due to its adverse effects on children: ‘Exposure to tobacco smoke doubles the chances of your child for illnesses like bronchitis, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia. They are also more likely to suffer from ear infections (glue ear), tonsillitis, and asthma. It may damage a child’s olfactory function’ (Courtesy: “Passive smoking”.
Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www. stopsmokingtoday. com/dync/13/Passive_Smoking. html) Legislators and law makers understood the total provocation being inhaled by passive smoking and brought the necessary amendments to the laws of the state by banning smoking in public places. The need for the law to amend was felt by lot of people who were unnecessarily being forced to hazardous health conditions for no fault of their own. Smoking which were rampant in leisure places like pubs and restaurants were the most harmful, as a majority of people have a habit of smoking along with taking intakes of alcohol.
This nature of these smokers brought the non smoking populace visiting such leisure outlets in very uncomfortable positions and in one way brought an infringement of the constitution to these victims of passive smoking. There was a nationwide applause for the banning of smoking in public places and a majority of the nation was giving it thumbs up and also considered it an important decision which was taken to curb smokers from spreading any amount chances of passive smoking to non smokers. The following evidence will shed light on the nation’s opinion of having a smoking ban in public places:
‘Gallup’s 2004 consumption habits survey reveals that the American public is fairly accepting of such ban. A majority of 58%Americans currently say they favor a ban in their state that would make it illegal to smoke in workplaces, restaurants and bars’. (Courtesy: Alec M. Gallup, Frank Newport , “The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 2004” .Page 306. Retrieved on December 2, 2008. Gallup Organization. Published by Rowman & Littlefield, 2006) There are a lot of advantages that can be grouped with the banning of smoking in public places.
Firstly a commuter or a non smoker can have fresh whiffs of air without the mixture of tobacco endorsed smoke hovering around. Secondly the ban itself makes the smoker smoke less which in turn is helping him from reducing the health hazards which he would eventually inflict on himself over the period of time. The ban on smoking in one way slows down the process of self damage that smokers tend to endure with their constant puffing. It has estimated that around thousands of Americans die every year due to active and passive smoking, and the ban would definitely help the figure of passive smoking by a great extent.
The ban comes with a whooping of $50 for the first violation and $75 for repetitive violations. This becomes more deterrent for an active smoker and eventually brings him on the brink of leaving the habit or the least bringing down his no. of cigarettes by a good amount. Another big advantage related with the ban, is that the risk of fire catching up in factories or other places to due to a burning cigarette is greatly reduced and it brings the work place into a much safer and a cleaner zone. Also it helps saves the energy consumed by ventilators that are required to recycle the air in such places.
However there are certain sets of disadvantages of such a ban too and the most primary one is they way smokers get into more hazardous situations in smoking zones. Here due to a large amount of smoke gathering the ventilation is slower which results in itchiness of the eyes and other lung problems because of the amount of passive smoking inhaled by active smokers. This somehow gives smokers a second class treatment as it becomes acceptable for the government for non smokers not to undergo minimal passive smoking but to allow massive passive smoking for active smokers in such zones.
A lot of restaurants and bars feel the crunch as their smoking customers refrain from coming to them and thus it bring a drop to their turnovers. In today’s high stress working atmospheres, employees are feeling more frustrated as somehow the tension which they could feel being released by their smoking has been feverously curbed. Smoking ban is one of the most righteous decisions of the government helping non smokers from the unwanted dangers of nicotine filled smokes.
However when the law was being implemented not much attention has been given to smokers rights and at times it is becoming a little hypocritical situation. Nevertheless the main objective of such a ban bring back a life to their citizens which could be void of at least one addiction and would be more fruitful to them in terms of having a hale and hearty standard of living. Reference: 1) Cheap Cigarettes, “Effects of Cigarette Smoking”. http://www. cheap-cigarettes. com/Effects_of_Cigarette_Smoking. asp 2) Passive smoking”. http://www. stopsmokingtoday. com/dync/13/Passive_Smoking.
html 3) Alec M. Gallup, Frank Newport , “The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 2004”. Gallup Organization. Published by Rowman & Littlefield, 2006 4) http://www. notosmoke. com/herbal-smoking-articles/pros-and%20cons-of-smoking-ban. htm 5) BRADLEY S. KLAPPER, “WHO Urges Smoking Ban in Public Places”. May 29, 2007. http://rds. yahoo. com/_ylt=A0geu.. NnTVJvk8BvQdXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyamNvY2Y3BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA0Y4NjJfOTM-/SIG=13u9q6ff9/EXP=1228336909/**http%3a//www. sfgate. com/cgi-bin/article. cgi%3ff=/n/a/2007/05/29/international/i122741D62. DTL%26type=politics