What's all the fuss about? (Should smoking be banned in public places?)

Member Name: nicola21

Product:	Should smoking be banned in public places?
Date:	23/03/01 (23 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Freedom in democratic society

Disadvantages: There are worse killers out there

People have been smoking in public now for well over a hundred years. My father started smoking when he was 12 years old. That was back in the 50's. No one knew of the medical implications then. Cigarettes were sometimes prescribed by doctors as stress relief decades ago.

As individuals we all have the choice to decide whether or not to smoke. But since the medical forum of society has pushed the dangers of smoking to the front of the health debate, all the non-smokers out there seemed to have jumped on the band-wagon and joined forces in making smokers' lives hell.

Yes, we know it's bad, but the only reason we personally poison ourselves with toxic smoke, is because, what the hell, we enjoy it. How many non-smokers go out on regular drinking binges which is equally damaging to their livers? Restaurants and pubs have done their best to provide adequate non-smoking areas for their customers. But you cannot ask society to suddenly change the habits it's had for over a century. Public houses, offer alcoholic beverages and most sell cigarettes. The two go together, and they have done for a very long time. As you drink alcohol, the blood vessels in your body contract. As you smoke, the blood vessels in your body relax. The more you do of each, the more it encourages the other, it is a physical state. That is why most smokers who plan to give up, always think, "How will I cope when I go down the pub?"

I understand that smoke drifts and occasionally wafts up non-smokers noses, which according to national medical statistics leads to a very small percentage of the population apparently becoming ill from smoke inhalation. But why ban it? Polluting the atmosphere? How many non-smokers drive cars? That polllutes the atmosphere. Aerosol sprays? How many people recycle? Rubbish is burned causing pollution. There are so many diverse pollutants in our atmosphere these days, who knows what we are all breathing in.

It
is sad that people close to us have died from smoking-related illnesses, many of those people were actual smokers for a long time. We all know someone who died from cancer or heart didease. My father died at a young age from heart disease, probably as a result of smoking for 30 years, but non-smokers cannot blame their poor health if they have poor health on the drifting smoke pollution from smokers in public arenas such as pubs.

So, in my opinion, no; smoking should not be banned in public places. There are already adequate measures taken where smoking is banned in certain places so as not to offend non-smokers. I smoke. I know I will give up when I am pregnant for the first time one day. I do not smoke in the vicinity of children; and in pubs, I keep my ashes to myself.

The idea that smokers take more paid breaks than non-smokers at work is ridiculous. I smoke in my designated breaks and if the job entails no breaks, I do not smoke until lunch, or until my shift has finished. I do not take more time off than regular non-smokers.

There are so many factors out there that are possible killers. Passive smoke inhalation in pubs is the least of our worries. I know that many people will be offended by my thoughts, but non-smokers, I put it to you: Think about the fumes from your cars, the amount of rubbish an average family generates in a week. Where does that go? How many people burn coal on open fires? It's all pollutant to the environment. And probably one of the biggest hypocritical aspects of non-smokers in their self-righteous plight to ban smoking everywhere, is the fact that you reckon smokers are putting others' health at risk, how many of you get in your cars and speed through residential areas? Surely that's a more formidable killer and bigger threat than drifting smoke?

Summary: