A Key Issue for the Human Well-Being
It is essential to understand that what I am going to argue is not out of any sort of misplaced sense of self-righteousness, or in order to simply tell anybody what to do. It is out of a genuine and deep concern that I would like to see as few people become less addicted to a deadly substance and eventually die as a result of it. Smoking in public spaces should either be banned or not is the big debate. Many people are for and against the argument that smoking should be banned from public areas which I’m focused on: restaurants and bars. The “pro-smoking” stand against that argument because they claim that it is a violation of their freedom of smoking anywhere. The “pro-ban” believe that smoking in public spaces lead to unwanted health issues.
The adversarial audience (pro-smoking) could say passive smokers (second-hand smokers) can choose to breathe in another people’s smoke. And if they don’t want to second-hand smoke, they shouldn’t attend places where smoking is allowed. Many restaurants implement a certain time and space for smokers. Now let’s say a family with a child who is prone to get an asthma attack due to smoke and wants to eat out in this restaurant, and the only day and time they have are the same as the smoker. It would be reasonable that the smoker should step outside and smoke instead of inside even though, there is ventilation. And usually, the ventilation isn’t enough to clear out the smoke. The reason is that even though restaurants and bars have designated areas to smoke, the smoke clusters and spreads out (airborne nicotine). Another thing they can point out is that it is legal to smoke tobacco, so governments have no right to ban it.
My point is that I don’t want to ban it because people like to smoke, but I think it should be ban in restaurants and bars, where people would like to go without thinking about the smoke they will inhale and later get sick. Many say that a ban on smoking in public places would drive many bars and restaurants out of business since smokers wouldn’t attend to these places anymore. They are afraid revenues will drop, however, some studies show that smoking bans have no significant effect on overall profits. Another claim is that by implementing this ban it makes it feel like it is a demand that people should quit smoking altogether. They claim the ban is a violation of their freedom of smoking anywhere. The point across here is that smokers should smoke in places where it is designated for them like specific shops. No one is forcing smokers to stop but simply help them stop or lessen their use since they have the right to smoke. Lastly, many times smokers who are long-time users become dependent on the use of nicotine (smoking) and therefore, can’t stop if there were to be a ban. Like I said earlier, no one is forcing smokers to stop but simply help lessen their addiction.
It's no news that cigarettes are bad and can lead to a deathbed. Cigarettes cause various types of cancer and can complicate the well-being to both parties (smokers and non-smokers). Despite decades of falsified tobacco industry funded-studies, to the contrary, this has become common knowledge to a lot of people, so they continue to smoke. Nicotine is a highly addictive substance according to the Medicine Net, “people smoke many more cigarettes than they do marijuana”. It is the only major drug/substance studied in the world that has been proven as deadly and as addictive, and yet it is still legal. Not only is smoking bad for someone’s health but the fact there are countless cigarette butts that cause litter. Not one person in the world can say they have not seen a cigarette butt because, when you walk down an ally or the beach, or outside a restaurant or bar or even driving on the streets, basically wherever you go you will always find a cigarette butt/bud. Many of the times, smokers just toss the cigarette butt and by not looking back those still-lit¬-butts can cause a fire. The health of an individual is the essential of life. Lessing the consumption of smoking in public will have health benefits for the user and lessen the risk of cigarette smoke health issues for the public. Therefore, creating a healthier populous.
A big step in public places especially (focusing) in restaurants and bars is to model exactly how it would go about banning smoking. Not just prohibiting or creating a policy as to what time or day people can smoke (like it is now implemented) but actually banning it completely. The model is that if security stops you for smoking, your first offense will be a warning, your second offense will be a fine, and then your third offense would be handled with an officer. I believe this is a very clear model that everybody can understand, and everybody can follow making it more effective than a first-police-encounter. Also, smokers should smoke outside of restaurants and bars. Smoking in public spaces (restaurants and bars) should be banned because it may lead to health risks to non-smokers.
Adopting this policy can reduce the health risks (second-hand smoke-a.k.a. passive smoke) of others. In addition to the model, business (bars and restaurants) will bring people’s attention into some information on existing programs of smoking such as flyers or other forms, because even though there are many ads and commercial about helping smokers to quit or lessen their intake, “too much is never enough” information/help. This is so that people have a chance to avail themselves of these programs and get on the road to quitting or lessen their use/addiction even though, it is extremely difficult for people to quit even if they wanted to. It is a key issue for the health of the individual in both parties.