1 of 363

No

Write now Article Tools

"They've taken away our freedom," was the first complaint that I heard as a result of England's public smoking ban. And so the situation escalated; "next they will ban smoking altogether, and then alcohol too!". But the point that many have failed to recognise this ban represents a freedom gained by the general public.

Now that smoking is banned in all of England's public places, the public have gained the freedom to enter whatever shopping centre or club they desire without having their lungs attacked by smoke. Second-hand smoking' or passive-smoking' are a term used to describe how people who inhale smoke, which is exhaled from a smoker, are affected. Passive smoking can cause just as much damage as regular smoking, with scientific evidence linking deaths, diseases and disabilities to second-hand smoking.

So when taking this into account, it would seem that the public smoking ban is long overdue. The selfish habits of others have been polluting the lungs of the innocent for too long and in England on July 1st 2007 this has been stopped. In October of this year, the age at which it is legal to purchase cigarettes will rise from 16 to 18 in England and Wales. After years of research proving how lethal smoking is, action is finally being taken against it.

If you have had the experience of being in a smoke free public place after a ban, you will know what a strange sensation it is. Just last night (Wednesday 4th July), my band played at the usually smoky Dry Bar in Manchester. But this night was different: from the stage, the back of the venue was actually visible! It was a welcome change, which meant that the next morning my clothes and hair didn't absolutely stink (although I have to admit that the stale cigarette smell was replaced by body odour).

Looking back to my introductory paragraph, I think the debate of freedom' is in need of further inspection. A lot of smokers, as well as some non-smokers, are outraged by England's new ban. They say that this ban represents another step towards a nanny state.' Obviously this side of the argument should not be overlooked, but the only freedom' lost by smokers has been their freedom to poison not only themselves, but anyone who comes into contact with them.

What will be the consequences of the absence of public smoking in England? Well firstly, the hygiene of all public places will increase. But another side affect may be that some smokers will give up smoking altogether, and that is reason enough to have a public smoking ban. The general health of the nation will rise, which may lead the government to think that they have shot themselves in the foot. Better national health means a greater life expectancy for the average man or woman, which will mean more money will be spent on care for the elderly. Also, if cigarette sales fall, the government will miss out on the billions of pounds generated by tax on cigarettes.

Admittedly, there are negatives to the banning of public smoking, but in my opinion they barely make a mark against the positives. The positives span right down to every individual: the chances of contracting a passive smoking related cancer will drop. Some smokers will kick their habit and stop wasting their money. Younger people will not be as exposed to cigarettes as they were, and there is hope that this could prevent some youths from starting to smoke.

To finalise, the banning of smoking in public places can only do good. Over 30 countries worldwide have implemented some form of smoking ban, and it would seem that this is a spreading trend. In England, I've already seen smoking shelters being raised and wet, shivering smokers are making more and more appearances on the streets, but I can only smile.

Learn more about this author, Jeremy Fisher.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should smoking be allowed in public places??
We want to hear your view. Write now!