Smoking should not be allowed at public places - Essay Example

Smoking is a habit that people get involved in by choice or influence. It has detrimental universally proclaimed health effects that far out way any self acclaimed social or psychological benefits. The most common known health effects include respiratory tract, heart and lung diseases whereas pleasure is most associated psychological effect. This has prompted many governments to find mechanisms of reducing access to cigarettes by running adverts and antismoking campaigns, and forcing cigarette manufacturers to place warning signs on cigarette packets.

This paper addresses the importance of banning smoking in public places According to the 2003 poll conducted by MORI in London, 40% of the interviewees concurred that smoking should not be allowed in a restaurant, a public place; 54% wanted separation of smoking and non-smoking zones. The most striking fact was that only 4% were indifferent to the location or exposure to smoking. In another separate research on Edinburgh residents, 58% were in favor of banning smoking in public places while only 28% opposed the move (City of Edinburgh Council, 1).

Smoking pollutes the environment by releasing toxic components to the atmosphere. Even though it is the right of smoker to have cigarettes, a clean environment on the other hand is a necessity for humanity. A ban on public smoking- no matter how- may seem unfair to smokers, it will ensure that people live in a clean environment by reducing pollution, and nonsmokers’ rights are taken into consideration. Over the weekends and in vacations, most parents do prefer to spend their time with their children in public places.

What happens in a case whereby people smoke in such recreational or public places? The answer is almost obvious; Children learn by imitation, and would actually try to act out what they see or observed happening in their surroundings. Therefore, the presence of smokers in such localities is bad influence to children and may introduce them to smoking at early ages. As precautious measure, the state government should ban smoking in public places.Most chain smokers spend most of their money and time in cigarettes.

Therefore, banning smoking in public places would result in limiting the frequency at which such people smoke. This will not only result in saving money and time that can be invested elsewhere in a more profitable manner but also help the state to reduce the average health problems arising directly from smoking.It is very hard for non-smokers to entertain the disgustful scent that arises as a consequent of cigarette smoking. They are likely to get annoyed and develop belligerent attitudes towards those who smoke, and may choose to isolate themselves from smokers.

This form of isolation is not helpful in social integration. Moreover, secondhand or passive smoking also leads to the same consequences as the firsthand smoking. Thus, those who hang around smokers inhale the same toxic elements such as arsenic ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, formaldehyde, benzene and vinyl chloride, even though they are not smoking, and thus they are equally at risk of suffering from the same side effects. Therefore, to protect innocent secondhand smokers in public places, the government should ban smoking in public places.

In conclusion, smoking is not a basic need in life but a bad habit adopted by individual as result of poor or misguided choices. Moreover, it results in negative health outcomes, bad influence on children, wastes the smoker’s money and denies nonsmoker the right of clean air. Those with misguided conceptions about smoking should get the facts rights, otherwise they may be in a dilemma of finding out if life after death exists. Therefore, I, fully support the notion of banning public smokingWorks CitedCity of Edinburgh Council.

Support for Smoking. Feb11 2005 from http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/629/Support-For-Smoking-Ban.aspx Accessed on Nov 2, 2011