Home | Health | No Smoking
One of the most heated debates the past years has been on the issue of whether or not to ban smoking in public places. Several countries like Australia, Norway, and Canada have taken the huge step, and other countries, they say, are in serious discussion. What prompted these countries to ban one of the biggest and most profitable businesses in the world? Why aren’t all countries following suit? What are the pros and cons of banning smoking in public places? Is the question really on its effectiveness or on the freedom of choice?Should the government be in or out?Almost everyone would agree that tobacco smoking is a harmful and addictive habit, not to mention costly, especially in countries where the ban has been implemented. Only the question of how harmful is yet to be established, as smoking advocates believe that scientific procedure and results have been distorted to generate favorable results. Setting this issue aside, there have been alarming reports from the American Cancer Society and World Health Organization. Research done by the American Cancer Society suggests that active smoking causes up to 400,000 deaths each year – more than the combined number of deaths rising from AIDS, alcohol and drug abuse, car accidents, murders, suicides and fires. Worldwide, the number is even more alarming – one every ten seconds – or three million people each year, and the figure is estimated to rise to ten million people by 2020. According to a press release by the WHO on March 9, 1998, the increased risk of lung cancer among non-smoking spouses of smokers was estimated at sixteen percent and in the workplace, an estimated increased risk of seventeen percent. It is only normal for the government to act on such alarming figures, as it is their duty to ensure the safety of their population. If they can declare taking hard drugs and drunk driving as illegal as these activities would almost soon after hurt innocent people, then banning smoking in public places is only logical. It harms innocent people the moment a cigarette is lit as we cannot choose the air we breathe.It is the government’s role to protect the health and safety of its citizens against acts, deliberate or unwillful, that harm them or innocent people. But the government also has other roles to play – like guarding the freedom of choice, or personal freedom. Tobacco smoking does not directly kill a person, unlike drunk driving, or as fast as an overdose of prohibited drugs. It has the potential to be harmful, depending on the length of exposure and present health conditions. In many ways, its potential harm is comparable to that of eating fatty foods or drinking alcohol. Both can increase the risk of heart disease and are activities enjoyed by majority of the population, yet they are not banned but are left to the person to decide. Banning smoking is a biased action on the part of the government in terms of safeguarding the citizens’ wellbeing, and is an intrusion to their freedom of choice.
Article Source: http://www.content.onlypunjab.com
Visit us or share your opinions at the worlds best homepage or free content resource.
Do you want to quit smoking? Visit Smokefree England for further information.
Please Rate this Article
5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5
Not yet Rated
