Smoking threatens the air that we non-smokers breathe, making us get sick. Smoking in public obviously causes harm to others, it's been known a long time before this research. But where exactly does that line of thinking end? In addition, they believe a ban would possibly drive many bars and pubs out of business as smokers would not go there anymore. According to Utilitarianism, when making a decision you should choose the one that results in the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Cigarette butts are non-biodegradable and can clog water systems if thrown recklessly. People against smoking bans are concerned on the effect on government revenues if the push for smoke-free states will be implemented.
Vehicles are however a necessary tool for people to use, not always, but most of the time to enable them to carry out their jobs take patients to hospital, enable disabled people to have the same freedoms as others etc. It is already the norm to ban smoking in restaurants and cafes in Australia. Peters Smokers should have the right to smoke, but it's not reasonable if that right is harmful to others. With all the overwhelming information on the effects of passive smoking I think that smoking in a workplace should be deemed an occupational health hazard. These bans were sparked by contemporary research that, for the first time, proved the harmful, carcinogenic effects of secondhand smoke. Maybe we should put £1. This obviously flared up its fair share of supporters and non supporters.
These sorts of people wind smokers up with their tutting etc. Who are you to ban smoking anywhere other then your own home. Addictions or ailments, whether it is smoking cigarettes or over eating, can feel a lot like being a prisoner or a slave to your addiction. At first I think that smoking in public places causes a considerable amount of harm to people those who are non-smokers. What about in outdoor areas? Passive smoking kills so many people it's not fair on others. Frankly, we believe smoking to be a complete waste of the time spent smoking and the money.
If some people want to kill themselves and make themselves stink at the same time then fine, but why should I have to be at the same risks and smell as bad as they do, just because they don't care about anyone else? I once went on Eurostar with my smoking-seat reservation. All public places should have smoking and non-smoking sections. David Butler, Australia Parents of young children are kidding themselves if they believe they are giving their children a good start in life by having the latest accessories and ensuring a place in the best schools. Smoking is bad it can cause heart problems, its un healthy, it portrays a bad example, and it can kill people since it is known to be one of the number one cause of death that can be preventable in America. A non-smoker arrived in the carriage, sat down and proceeded to criticise and insult smokers for the rest of the journey. Secondly, smoking should be banned in public places, but specifically in and around schools, parks and other public areas where children are likely to be.
In the same way, when I go to a friend who is non-smoker, I wouldn't even dream to ask them whether I can smoke or not. For example, my cousin died three years ago from second hand smoking. Whatever the reason is, it is a hard habit to break once one starts. Where would it all stop? I think the 10% of all people with asthma and other respiratory ailments deserve the same accessibility accommodations as those in wheelchairs. A puff of cigarette can harm a smokers health. Perhaps it would be better to concentrate on enforcing some of the bans already in place.
Please stop talking and re-educate yourselves. Besides that, we undertake to meet your deadlines, and to write papers that are properly referenced and well structured, and are of a high academic standard. Millions of people working in these industries will be thrown out of jobs. And thus at least do justice to others if not to they! I am glad I have quit but I am certainly not going to join the sickening throng of health and culture fascists who have found in smokers a new pariah class to beat up. Also cigarette smoke can make non-smokers agitated by the smell of cigarette smoke, which is not very pleasant. If the public really want smoke free areas then we will get them by voting with our feet, we shouldn't need laws.
In your office the smoke you puff may be a reason of shouldering displeasure among your colleagues that may turn into a conflagration. Private businesses are not supposed to be required to cater to the whim or concern of every single person. A puff of cigarette can harm a smokers health. It is simply not fair to impose this upon another person. Addictions or ailments, whether it is smoking cigarettes or over eating, can feel a lot like being a prisoner or a slave to your addiction. According to the pro-smoking group Air Initiative 7 in 10 of you do. Sometimes, public places are the only places these people can smoke, so back off.
A chain-smoker is the worst sufferer. What about the rights of non-smokers to breathe fresh air? Breathing in the smoke indirectly has the same effect as smoking the cigarette. You can also talk to the administrative staff from the same page this communication will not be shown to the writer. In addition, discarded cigarette butts can be a big problem. Even thought the same as the concession is able to be taking place on this topic… 474 Words 2 Pages Smoking in Public Places Should Be Banned I feel very strongly that smoking in public places should be banned. This includes cellophane wrappers of fag packets, plus the packets themselves, as well as dog-ends. Do you really want people to smoke in public places instead of using these new products? This announcement gave me deeply impression that cigarette was harmful our health absolutely.
Smoking Should be Banned in Public Places Smoking in public places causes a considerable number of sicks to people and the government should be doing more to protect its citizens. Get on with life and stop whingeing! As you can see, non-smokers cannot just ignore the smokers. They lessen the chance of influencing others to take on the habit. I have shifted tables and sometime left before finishing meals because someone has lit up and it has just been too unpleasant. A tobacco-free society by 2035.
Business owners who are not in favor of smoking bans as well as smokers who are used to smoking in public places such as restaurants and coffee shops argue that restricting smoking in these places can drive customers away and this can be harmful to businesses. So why ban smoking, why not all the things that are harmful to people. We can solve this problem and we won't even need to ban smoking in public places by creating more special rooms like that on many other places so it won't harm the non-smokers. Fine, but shouldn't this include all health-related bad habits, such as drinking alcohol? In conclusion, I want to say that there are no reasons left to permit smoking in public places, and I also think that maybe this is the time for people to quit smoking. I think that's what's called respect. A counter argument to that is that by smoking in public places, smokers are putting the lives of those around them including other smokers at risk, which is against the Canadian Charter of Rights.