This blog will discuss the proposition to ban smoking outright in any public place.

Smoking is the number one cause of preventable death, and it is clear, that second hand smoke causes a lot of problems for people who are constantly around smokers. This being said, the smokers themselves generally regret being addicted to smoking, and they often take the view that "I do it but you shouldn't." As this blog states (one of the 10 I've tagged with delicious,) my class blog; they argue that marijuana is illegal, but many people still smoke that, and if smoking became banned in public places, it wouldn't stop the smokers. They will still smoke, because they are addicted, and it would just mean that they get fined when they get caught. Which would certainly help the matter and reduce smoking outdoors, but not altogether stop it. They argue that if smoking becomes banned in public places then cars would also have to be banned because of the air pollution that causes and major factories would have to be shut down. They claim that it is ridiculous to attempt to ban smoking in public places because simply too many people would be opposed to it, and wouldn't be able to satisfy their need for nicotine when they aren't at home, and would have to indulge in a cigarette, therefore meaning that the ban simply wouldn't work.

In syria however, they have taken many precautions and ways to enforce their ban of smoking in most (but not all) public places. There are large fines to pay if people smoke where they are not allowed to, and offenders can even face 3 to 12 months jail time. These punishments are designed to scare the smokers into submission, and not want to risk smoking where they are not allowed to.


The problem is, smokers have a physical addiction that they need to satisfy every few hours, or they get serious cravings that will severely affect their mood and actions, and if the ban is passed, and they are not allowed to smoke anywhere except in their own home, they will be driven to break it. That being said, it is their own fault that they smoke, they have made their bed, and they have to sleep in it. Their bad habits affect the health of others, and it is unacceptable that they can use the excuse that they won’t be able to resist smoking, after the ban is passed, when because of them, people around them have to suffer. In an article about how New Zealand is dealing with the matter, John Key does not favour the ban. He believes that smoking in places near children is dangerous, but argues that smoking in a wide open space is less harmful, and he doesn't want New Zealand to become a 'nanny state'. He can see the harm that is being done, but he knows that a large amount of West Aucklanders smoke, and Key dosn't want to lose their votes in the upcoming election (or so many think) and that is the real reason he doesn't favour the ban.

In this article (Smoking banned in the UAE) there has been a federal law in the United Arab Emirates to ban smoking in their city. They are extremly serious about this, and people who violate this law are punished severely. The fact that the punishment is so terrible, has seen a significant decrease of smokers in the city. They have been rather successful  in this campaign. This is impressive and many other cities could follow by the example set by these valiant people, and ban smoking in their cities aswell. This article lists the advantages of banning smoking in public places; it is amazing at what could be gained. The air would be cleaner, there would be less smoking related deaths, and the government would make a lot of money for progression by fining those that choose to smoke.

In the next piece of information reviewed, there is a shocking story of how the cousin of the writer died from second hand smoke. This explains how their cousin was constantly around smokers, and she got lung cancer, and later died - in a very painful way. This is a serious problem for people who have to be around smokers for many hours a day. For example if they work/study with smokers, and the smokers have full reign to smoke whenever they want, then the non-smokers who have to be around this, will suffer becasue of it. There won't be instant signs of this, but after a period of time it will certainly have had some kind of effect on them.

In the city of Washington, there has been a lot of controversy about whether smoking should be banned or not. Many non-smokers argue that simply separating smokers and non-smokers in restaurants and other public places simply doesn't cut it. They are still exposed to their smoke. California health officials estimated that secondhand smoke kills about 3,400 nonsmoking Americans annually from lung cancer, 46,000 from heart disease, and 430 from SIDS (sudden infant death Syndrome). These are serious numbers of innocent people dying from second hand smoke. There are other frightening facts in this article, and they really do show the damage that smoking is causing society. The health problems caused by smoking is immense, and the second hand smoke is no exception. Children and people with asthma are especially endangered by second hand smoke, and it is worrying for anyone with asthma to be around it. The smoke can cause them to have an asthma attack, which could be potentially fatal.

In this next piece of information studied, there are many different views and opinions of what people think about the ban in all public places. What has been detected from reading this is that most people agree that smoking should be banned, and the people that don't agree with this are either smokers themselves, or dullards who don't understand what the second hand smoke is doing to them. There was a posting from a 15 year old girl whose mother smokes, and she said it was harmless, and to leave smokers alone. This is a very sad statement because she doesn't even realise the damage that is being done to her health, or the risks that her mother has put upon her.

Another website has a similar structure to it, showing the views of some people in Japan/USA/Britan on whether smoking should be banned or not. It is interesting because most of the posts are from smokers, agreeing with the ban. They can see how bad it is, and they support the fact that it shouldn't be allowed in public places even though they themselves partake in smoking. This shows that most people do know it is wrong, and harmful to their health to smoke, and they would love to quit, but are sadly hooked in very strongly.

Over all 10 of the sources that have been reviewed, most of them look down on smoking and really disagree with it being in today's society. It may have been acceptable in the olden days when people were not so aware of just how harmful smoking can be, but now everybody knows the dangers. A lot of these sources favour banning smoking in all public places, but it is just such a large undertaking for a city/country to undertake, many steps would have to be taken, and it would be a long and gruelling process. But it is a step worth taking, to protect the innocents from second hand smoke, and protect the smokers from themselves. If they are unable to smoke in any public place, they will inevitably smoke less, which is more healthy for them. Smoking should be banned in any public place, the positive effects of this would be extreme.