One of the most popular argument against the ban on smoking in public places is that it is a clear cut encroachment on the personal life of the individual. Secondly, smoking ban in public places gives it unnecessary attention, and it is a normal human tendency to try something that is regarded as a taboo in the society. When forced to stop smoking at the workplace, an individual is likely to experience withdrawal symptoms, which can in turn hamper his performance. Making a law is one thing, and implementing it is a totally different ball game.
If a statute pertaining to smoking ban is passed, but not implemented properly, the failure will result in youngsters taking to smoking in closed environment without proper guidance, which will be even more hazardous. On the commercial front, such a ban is bound to affect the business of cafes and pubs. Lastly, this ban is also against the interest of the government, as a significant share of the state treasury comes from the taxes on the cigarettes.
Each of these pros and cons need to be taken into consideration before coming up with some statute about banning smoking in public. More importantly, just coming up with the statute is not important, the administration has to make sure that it is properly. We have seen the futile exercise of making laws, and forgetting them, being repeated quite a few times in the last decade or so. At the end of the day, making a law, but not implementing it, is like not making a law in the very first place. By Abhijit Naik
Since my childhood I have heard that "Smoking is Injurious to Health". I know it's true and so do the millions and millions of smokers all around the world. So why smoking in public remains a grave issue? Do smokers don't realize the negative impact their smoking is having on the environment and on the people inhaling the smoke? There can be various aspects to this topic. While smoking can be a very serious thing for non smokers like you or me it's a routine thing for people who smoke. Smokers don't believe they are harming anyone and hence their smoking shouldn't be such an issue of major concern. Looking at so many interesting aspects about smoking, I have decided to debate on smoking in public places.
Banning Smoking in Public Places
In today's debate on smoking in public places, I am going to list out points supporting both smokers and non smokers. I know most non smokers would think that the arguments of the smokers section are bound to be baseless but I would urge all my readers to read the arguments of both the sides without being biased. The two points put forward mentions the view of a non-smoker vs. a smoker, i.e., against and for the motion of the debate. You can be the judge of should smoking be banned in public places or not.
It's a proven fact that smoking is very dangerous for the human body. Smoking cigarettes can cause cancer, respiratory disorders and a range of cardiovascular diseases. People who smoke are not only killing themselves, they are also killing people who are near them. Active smoking can be a choice but passive smoking can't. People who don't understand the negative effects of tobacco smoke should not be exposed to smoke. This is the main reason that every country should adopt a smoking ban in public places. In most cases it has been noticed that people who smoke know all the repercussions of smoking. It's true that smokers harm themselves but unless and until they don't harm someone else, they shouldn't be stopped from smoking. If someone does not wish to follow passive smoking he/she can avoid going to places where smoking is allowed. Hence a ban on public smoking is completely baseless.
Freedom to Smoke
Non smokers don't choose to be passive smokers, they are forced to be one. Yes there are very less non smoking bars and hotels in the country because not many people visit such places. Non smokers who work in...