Should everyone be given facemasks? (Should smoking be banned in public places?)

Member Name: chrispitts

Product:	Should smoking be banned in public places?
Date:	02/07/03 (403 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Ban - fresh air

Disadvantages: Don't ban - choice

I feel well-qualified to write about this subject. I'm a doctor (a GP). I'm also a smoker. Yes, I know. I've heard it all before. "You should know better..." "Don't you know it'll kill you..."

But I have one question to the never-smoked non-smokers, who claim the habit is disgusting... If it's really as bad as you think, WHY DO SO MANY PEOPLE SMOKE?!!!

Aha, of course. The natural come-back to that question is "well, it's addictive, innit."

And it is. It's very addictive. But that bypasses the fact that, to smokers, cigarette (or pipe, or cigar...) smoke smells, and tastes, quite nice.

Yes, believe it or not, that horrible stench, that vile, dry, burning-leaf smell is actually something many smokers relish. There is an argument that this is the addiction fooling you - that actually no-one could possibly find the smell of burning tobacco attractive, and that the body just craves nicotine so much that it fools you into thinking it smells nice.

But whatever the mechanism, many people continue to smoke not because they are addicted... but because they LIKE SMOKING. (Please excuse the occasional capital letters - I know it looks a bit Sunday Sportish, but some points deserve attention, in my view.)

And that's not counting the psychological benefits - all of which, I admit, are percieved rather than real, but by quenching the craving for nicotine, there is a very palpable sense of "de-stressing" (the fact that smokers are generally more stressed anyway is beside the point...)

Talking of points, let's shift track a bit here, and talk about the subject in hand - should smoking be banned in public places? In fact, as I drove to work this morning, there was a news article about this very thing...

Well, despite (once again) being a smoker, I had a brief lull earlier this year, and gave up for 4 months. And I was shocked. Rat

her than craving a fag every time I passed someone smoking, I nearly gagged. Rather than asking for a puff on my wife's fag when she lit up, I almost chucked her out of the car, because I could hardly breathe.

And this wasn't an act - I wasn't going down the "preaching ex-smoker" route - I just physically couldn't stand the smell.

And it gave me an insight to what we smokers put non-smokers through day-in, day-out.

As a dad, with a 2 year old, I do wonder what damage we're doing to her when we take her into a pub - even the non-smoking section, by and large, stinks of smoke. (OK, OK, we're probably doing more damage by being smoking parents, but we never, ever, smoke indoors).

And even as a smoker, I get a bit annoyed by people lighting up while I'm eating.

So, I concede, it IS a disgusting habit. It's filthy, smelly, and expensive. But as I've said above, lots of people still do it, so is a ban the right thing to do?

Tricky. Our town shopping centre has recently become "non-smoking". Except, of course, the cafe in the middle, where people can smoke freely. Where's the logic in that?!! The cafe's not even closed off. So everyone has to pass by, through a haze of smoke. Why make the rest of it smoke-free?!

And that's really my point with pub "Non-smoking sections". Unless the non-smokers are in a different room altogether, how will they benefit?

So it's all or nothing. And, because I've had a taste (being the operative word) of being a non-smoker, I'd be inclined to say "ban it". Obviously, as a doctor, I'd also be inclined to say "ban it".

But I'm not going to. Why?

Well, there's this thing called human rights. It's legal to smoke. Fags are easily available. So to say someone can't smoke in public is not, in my opinion, a good thing to do. O
K, yo
u could argue people aren't allowed to have sex in public, but I don't think the two really compare.

And whenever I go out, I feel uneasy surrounded by loads of loud, inebriated people. So I think we should ban drinking in public places. Think of the problems that would cause.
Actually, come to think of it, I don't like swearing much either, so let's ban that as well...

And what happens if someone breaks the rules? Prison? A fine? Hey, that's going to be a great moneyspinner for the Government isn't it? Because, quite frankly, people will carry on smoking in public. And so the already-stretched police department will need to have 24 hour patrols in town-centres, purely to catch those naughty smokers. Wow. There's a useful way to waste time and money. Maybe the Government will set up a "Smoking Unit" - specialist police trained in cigarette-extinguishing, packet-confiscating, and how to cuff a smoker without getting ash on your uniform.

I think the whole concept is ridiculous. But I can see why people want to do it. Smoking kills. Passive smoking kills. Smokers have a choice (ish...). Passive smokers do not.

I don't think the solution lies in banning smoking in public places, or raising the cost of fags to £45/pack (believe me, people will still buy...)

No, the solution lies at source. As long as the fag manufacturers are making billions, as long as the Government get loads of nice tax, cigarettes will still be made, and people will still buy them.

Cigarettes are part of life now, and people will still want to smoke them, whether we want them to stop or not. Even a total ban means some clever backstreet people will find ways of manufactuing them on the black market. They aren't going to go away...

So what do I propose?

A half-way house. Ban fags in many places, by all means. Ban them in some pubs, clubs and restaurants. But give the s
mokers SOM
EWHERE to go. (There are those capitals again...) Set up "smoking houses" - pubs where you can smoke. Everyone needs a choice, and some people choose to smoke. To deny them the opportunity when they are out enjoying themselves is just plain wrong.

And that's me done. Got to go - doing my prescriptions for nicotine patches...

Summary: