SMOKING BAN

A smoking ban is a public policy that includes criminal
laws and health regulations that prohibit smoking in
certain public places and workspaces. There are varying
definitions of smoking employed in this legislation. The
strictest definitions define smoking as being the
inhalation of any tobacco substance while the loosest
define smoking as possessing any lit tobacco product.
There are many reasons why smoking bans originated,
but most of these have medical origins. Research has
shown secondhand smoke is almost as harmful as
smoking in and of itself. The effects of secondhand
smoke are relatively the same as smoking. Lung
disease, heart disease, bronchitis and asthma are
common. Those who live in homes with smokers have a
20-30 percent higher risk of developing lung cancer than
those who do not live with a smoker. Many see it as
unfair that others have to suffer the effects of
secondhand smoke when they are not able to make the
decision for exposur to it. Non-smokers who worked
with smokers experienced a 16-19 percent increase in
lung cancer rates. In this case, the worker had no
choice but to face exposure to the smoke. Smoking
bans remove these risks for many people. The National
Cancer Institute, Surgeon General of the United States
and National Institutes of Health all support smoking
bans because of the statistics of second-hand smoke.
Smoking bans are also imposed because they improve
air quality in restaurants and other establishments. In
New York, it is now illegal to smoke in all hospitality
venues. Studies by the Center for Disease Control have
shown the air quality in New York establishments to be
nine times higher than those in New Jersey where
smoking remains legal. Studies have also shown
employees are exposed to far fewer toxins in areas
where smoking is banned in the workplace. In Norway,
tests showed a decrease in the nicotine levels of both
smokers and nonsmokers when smoking bans were
enacted in the workplace.
Critics of Smoking Bans
Despite the positive effects on health and air quality,
many people are still opposed to smoking bans in the
United States. Critics in the smoking ban debate include
the well-known musician Joe Jackson as well as
Christopher Hitchens, a political critic. Usually, people
who oppose smoking bans see these laws as an
example of the government interfering in people's lives.
They look at the effects on smokers, not those on non-
smokers who are subjected to second-hand smoke.
Other critics emphasize the rights of the property owner
and draw distinctions between public places, such as
government buildings, and privately owned businesses,
such as stores and restaurants.
Some critics of smoking bans believe that outlawing
smoking in the workplace may cause smokers to simply
move their smoking elsewhere. Instead of smoking
indoors, workers may begin smoking in public parks and
exposing a new set of people to their secondhand
smoke. Some have even argued that local bans on
smoking will increase DUI fatalities. Those who wish to
smoke will be forced to drive further away to do so,
althoughno evidence has been found to support this
theory.
Smoking bans in public places are becoming more and
more common in the United States. Whether the rights
of the non-smoker to breathe in fresh air outweigh
those of the smoker to smoke freely is a matter of
opinion, manifesting itself in a heated smoking ban
debate.