Prompt three: Against the Smoking Ban in Public Areas

Across the country, public places such as libraries and museums are now smoke-free environments, and restaurants are required to have separate smoking and non-smoking sections. Some smoke-free advocates are now campaigning to ban smoking in all restaurants and bars. Do you think this is a good idea? Why or Why not?

           

It is not the end of the world when a by passer gulps in a portion of chemical residue from a cigarette. Indubitably, the pernicious gas of a cigarette can evoke respiratory illnesses, such as asthma and bronchial infections. Hence, the rise of anti-smokers who use second-hand smoke as a reason to ban smoking in public areas. Regardless, I feel that the smoking ban in public areas should not be set in place solely off of risk. Law-makers should not ban smoking in restaurants, bars or other public places because there are alternatives for not having to be around second-hand smoke. 

            Typically,  anti-smokers base their arguments on health risks without looking at the issue from another perspective. They assume that banning smoking in public areas will reduce the health risk and possibly get smokers to quit. That is highly improbable . One, smokers do not go cold-turkey after all those years of smoking. They will, most likely, find a way to smoke if all places are off limits to smokers. Two, the health risk  does not mainly settle on second hand smoke, there are other causes involved, such as emissions from exhaust pipes, obesity, sexually transmitted diseases, etc.   Surely, their motives are high in the clouds and have given little thought to reality, which makes their argument plausible but not practical. To them it is more an issue of "ban smoking, then everything will get better." That is single-mind thinking.

            Moreover, the negative appearance they associate with smokers, which merely seems like another stereotype, is unfair because not all smokers are indifferent toward other people's health. Many smokers go off towards isolated areas to smoke instead of deliberately going around other non-smokers. Banning smoking in public restaurants and bars is like banning late-night driving because people are far more likely to fall asleep at the wheel. Late night drivers will not automatically stop driving;  in fact,  they would fight against such a bill if set in place, deeming it inconceivable, and impossible to stop because of their jobs or other time consuming destinations.

            The prohibition in the 1920's did not work. Reasons for banning alcohol then were to lower crime, reduce social problems, cut taxes needed to support prisons and poorhouses, and ameliorate health and hygiene in America. On the contrary, it did the opposite of what it was set out to do.  "Even though the sale of alcohol was illegal, alcoholic drinks were still widely available at "speakeasies" and other underground drinking establishments. Many people also kept private bars to serve their guests. Large quantities of alcohol were smuggled in from Canada, overland and via the Great Lakes... Alcohol became more dangerous to consume; organized crime blossomed; courts and prisons systems became overloaded; and endemic corruption of police and public officials occurred. (1920's Prohibition)."  So what does that say about banning smoking in general and in public places?

            Since anti-smokers are intensely affected by second hand smoke's on non-smokers, they should continue on with designated areas for smokers and non-smokers. Worried about the drifting tobacco smoke? Make the designated areas more efficient so that not even a bit of smoke will work its way into a non-smokers section. Worried about outdoor second hand smoke on infants', toddlers' and/or adolescents'? Fine the smoker for inducing a potential health hazard— they will know better next time. The development of e-cigarettes is a much smarter way to smoke, too, rather than have tobacco gases filling the air.

            Ultimately, smoking should not be banned in public areas. Agreed, it will prose as a health risk, however. There are alternatives and much more effective ways to avoid second-hand smoke, since that is the main reason people are fuming about public smoking. Quite frankly, smoking will always be around just like it had been hundreds of years. Banning it now could make things worse.