Smoking or Non-Smoking Should There Be A Choice?

Imagine sitting in a restaurant unable to enjoy a meal due to the cloud of

smoke coming from a neighbors table. The fact that there was not a designated area
for smokers has put the smoker and the non-smoker in an uncomfortable situation.
Smoking should be banned in public places because non-smokers have a right to
clean air, and because second hand smoke is more dangerous than actually
smoking a cigarette. However, smoking should not be banned in public places
because it is the smokers choice to smoke just as it is the non-smokers choice not to
smoke.

President Clinton is quoted saying that we have got to do more to protect

people in public places and clean up the air that all of us share. For non-smokers,
inhaling someone elses cigarette smoke can be very aggravating. It is bad enough
that automobiles, processing plants, and other types of industries pollute our
environment, but for a smoker to choose to smoke around a non-smoker is a
violation of their right to clean air. Stanton A. Glantz, who wrote Smoke Free
Ordinances, states, By March 1997, more than 150 communities in the United States
had eliminated smoking in public places and work places. California law now
requires that all restaurants be smoke-free and that all bars become smoke-free on
January 1, 1998 . So, an effort has already become in some places to purify the air
for those who do not smoke. If the nation would ban together as a whole, society
could eliminate public smoking completely. By stopping public smoking, society rids
the environment of a hazardous pollutant, and it prevents the danger and unhealthy
affects of second hand smoke on non-smokers.

Second hand smoke increases the risk of heart disease and heart attacks by
increasing a person s risk of developing blood clots. Second hand smoke, the smoke
inhaled from other people s cigarettes, pipes, and cigars, causes 53, 000 deaths a
year, and is the third largest preventable cause of death in the united states, behind
regular smoking and alcohol abuse. Jinsup Kim, M.D., reports that, exposure to
environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) raises a non-smoker s risk of developing lung
cancer by at least 50 percent (Health Article Magazine 65). The only effective way to
avoid the negative effects of second hand smoke is to insist on a smoke-free
environment whenever possible. Non-smokers can encourage smokers to walk
outside to smoke and open windows to keep the room ventilated to minimize the
consumption of second hand smoke.

As citizens of a freedom-based nation, the constitution encourages the right to

freedom of press, freedom of religion, and, most importantly, freedom of speech. If
Americans are free to make the choice to do anything, what makes the choice to
smoke in public places different from any other decision? If a smoker makes the
choice to smoke, then that person is aware of the consequence that goes along with
that decision. American females have the choice to end a baby s life by receiving an
abortion, therefore, smokers should not be inhibited from making a choice to smoke
where they choose to do so.

In response to it being a smokers choice to smoke, and the non-smokers

choice not to smoke shows that everyone is affected by smoking being banned in
public places. Non-smokers choose not to smoke and are left alone, while people
who choose to smoke are told when and where they can smoke. If America is a
nation of freedom, then why is where and when someone smokes such a
controversial issue? Smoking should not be banned in public places because it is the
smokers choice to smoke.

During the course of the meal a cloud of smoke is now no longer a bother.
Because there are now designated areas for smokers and non-smokers someone
could enjoy a meal without being uncomfortable. At the same time, a smoker is
made uncomfortable because the restaurant is a non-smoking facility. Only the non-
smoker can be completely satisfied. Is that fair in a free nation? If public places
would compromise and designate certain areas for smoking and non-smoking then
maybe everyone could be in a public area and be comfortable or satisfied.