Effectiveness of Smoking Bans in Public Spaces

Tobacco  possesses  severe  effects  on  the  lives  of  people  in  society.  People smoke  tobacco  for  various  reasons. More  so as a way of relieving stress. It makes them free from unpleasant feelings. Nevertheless, it is a risk to the health of a person. Are the cigarette packets even labeled with warning signs? People still smoke with the knowledge of the status quo (Huesch).

Previously governments had introduced policies to have open spaces for persons who were smoking. This served as a way of protecting the citizens who do not smoke from inhaling the fumes from all avenues.

For the same reason, it would be good to ban the smoking acts from public spaces (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green).

Historically prohibitions centered on not smoking in places that had been sealed off spaces. This was due to the effect that the non-smokers had (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green). For instance in the aviation industry, the year 1973 saw the airline civil aeronautics board made provisions for people to smoke as well as non-smoking areas about domestic flights. After some years buses followed suit by having areas where one would smoke (Huesch). Also, restaurants had areas for non-smokers and smoking. Also, the waiters and managers of hotels still are exposed owing to the hours they spend in the facilities of which would lead them to develop health complications.

The aspect of having smokers have an area to smoke was done without consideration of second-hand smoke. Non-smokers were not protected from the smoke that was released (Huesch). It possesses a threat to the health of the people of which could have been backed by scientific data. More of the studies had centered on where the smoke was spiteful and irritating.

From scientific research, the smoking of a cigarette has a more significant health impact on a person that is inhaling the smoke (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green). A person considered as a non-smoker. They become susceptible to health conditions such as lung cancer, heart illness, and severe experiences of asthma. The epidemiologic studies show that people have illnesses owing to Class A carcinogen in 1993. This is according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

At times children pick smoking habits from seeing how adults smoke. The youth have gotten into the interest of smoking (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green). They see it as a way of entertainment and passing off time. It looks cool, and they slowly teach each other. Many of the youth are school attending children, and it is distressing. How do they think of smoking and billowing smoke from their nostrils?

Public smoking areas were identified to protect various categories of people in society. This is because of the secondary smoke that the people who are not smoking inhale. From research, it is more dangerous than the person who is smoking since they have a filter.  The law on public smoking has had an impact (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green). This has assisted in decreasing rates of heart attack and expectant woman difficulties when giving birth. Do they inhale this smoke? Children with cases of asthma have also reduced significantly. Other areas that should be off limits are smoking, including schools, stadiums, convention centers, and private workplaces.

To this extent, it would be an excellent avenue to ban the places that people smoke in public areas (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green). It would significantly reduce how people smoke and also the air pollution that is present. What actually would help is to have hefty fines on people who are found contravening the law. This is by smoking in public. We have rights, but we must protect human rights as well. Thinking of your neighbors or relatives health is the starting point.

In previous research on Cochrane systematic review the study found out that there is no correlation between smoking in public spaces and health factors (NEJM). Therefore, the conclusion was that people still inhale the smoke when they pass nearby the public smoking places. This is because these spots are located on the streets. They also went on to give an account of adolescents aged 13 and 15 years being involved in smoking. Nevertheless, women are seen to still smoke though in insignificant numbers (Anyanwu, Craig, Katikireddi, and Green).

The federal government through the composition of the states can pass legislation (Huesch). For instance, the city council voted for the ban during their last sitting thirty-six to twelve. They rejected a proposal to have public spaces as areas of smoking still. The smoking fraternity wanted to have their joints in place yet. This led to the public also sitting on the gallery. They wanted to see that they have support from the legislators. The public health commissioner should have been responsible for the cases of smoking in public parks. This is because also these areas need a sound environment.

Therefore, it is prudent to prevent people from smoking in public spaces. This is something that was practiced forty years ago when people lazily sat and smoked in parks, sea lines and at the porch of their doors (Huesch). Trying this nowadays should attract a fine immediately. The removal of the smoking areas and prohibition from smoking in public places would draw hue and cry. The people would be at conflict with the city council, but it is for the best of the society. Would one have the desire good health or ill health for the longest time? Smoking a cigarette would last a minute, but the effects are enormous.

In advocating for prohibiting smoking in public spaces, it should be a gradual process. This is through the use of friendly posters and ambassadors. Media and social media advertisements would also be a good avenue. This is because many people would be aware and not be caught off guard when they are smoking (Huesch).

According to air monitoring researches, health risks have been seen to reduce significantly. This is due to the effects of the smoke being some distance away. The measurements that the study used were two meters by two away (Huesch). This study was critiqued by the journal Tobacco Control. Their findings show that second-hand smoke has serious effects since it diffuses. Smoking citizens view smoking in public spaces as a not being irritable. Their way of approach is interesting since they do not see the after effects.

Court hearings have been scheduled to have the ban enacted (Huesch). There was a civic hearing on the New York Metropolis injunction last fall. From statistical evidence that was presented fifty-seven percent of the city dwellers were found to have elements of cotinine in their body. This was a result of exposure of tobacco from the public spaces. In the city about sixteen percent of the dwellers smoked. This was an account by Health commissioner. He went on to report that smokers also litter the beach areas as well as the parks. They leave the cigarette butts aimlessly. This finding was made possible by counting the butts in some areas that had been sampled. He claimed that he looked at the items that were disposed and found that cigarette butts were very many in the area. A beach is a family place, and the county council would lose revenue if families decide not to visit the polluted public spaces.

The prohibition of smoking in public spaces is the first approach to bring up anti-tobacco fights and match towards freedom (NEJM). It is also a means of dispiriting people who smoke and at the end quit smoking in the best way possible. Smoking being a desired act it can abstain with time. This is through undergoing a rehabilitation program, taking medication as well as visiting a counselor. This requires a sound campaign from the citizens. For example, they can have the R sign in various points with a cigarette encircled with a red stripe. It is a much to stop people from smoking by a great extent (Huesch). Also, the leaders that are elected to office must share the same interests whereby their manifestos support the ban on smoking. This is possible since they would assist in lobbying for the right policies such as this one.

Tobacco is seen in contemporary times to be the leading cause of most deaths. This leads the people also to be significantly affected by diseases. For instance, in the USA smoking has remained stationary. The legislative process has made it possible for this to happen. To illustrate these politicians have had a chance of enacting tax provisions of cessation services and civic education crusades (NEJM). This has created a significant impact on the way people are responding to the effects. It is not feasible to stop the sale of tobacco, but policy formulation has been seen to work in the USA. This is because it could lead to people sourcing for the products illegally hence, an increase in crime rates and inferior goods being used of which pose risks.

Therefore the soft power that is being used remains to be effective. This is because of the people that it affects. For instance, the removal of public smoking spaces is a good sign of prohibiting smoking. For instance, some states have implemented bans of which have been met with an equal backlash from the private sector. Some companies have been closed. They claim that their business is being made redundant. In some companies, employees are not allowed to smoke same to academic institutions. Smokers are being banned in all places. This will lead them to have no space eventually. Would they hide now to smoke or light a cigarette to have a happy feeling? Alluding to Allan Brandt statement on where they would hide (NEJM).

In summary, smoking should be banned from all public spaces. It is a safety measure to mitigate the effects of smoking in the country. Tobacco possesses severe effects on the lives of people in society. The government had introduced policies to have open spaces for persons who were smoking. The aspect of having smokers have an area to smoke was done without consideration of second-hand smoke. From scientific research, the smoking of a cigarette has a more significant health impact on a person that is inhaling the smoke. To this extent, it would be an excellent avenue to ban the places that people smoke in public areas. The federal government through the composition of the states can pass legislation. For instance, the city council voted for the ban during their last sitting thirty-six to twelve. Therefore, it is prudent to prevent people from smoking in public spaces. Advocating for prohibiting smoking in open areas should be a gradual process. The prohibition of smoking in public spaces is the first approach to bring up anti-tobacco fights and match towards freedom. Tobacco is seen in contemporary times to be the leading cause of most deaths. Therefore the soft power that is being used remains to be effective. Everyone deserves a healthy life and environment; therefore, smoking fraternity should not be allowed to smoke in public places.

Works Cited

1. Huesch, M. Causal Effect of Public Space Smoking Bans? JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173(9):836-837. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.84
2. Nowhere Left to Hide? The Banishment of Smoking from Public Spaces. (2013). (10.1056/NEJMp1104637) NEJM.
3. Anyanwu, P., Craig, P., Katikireddi, S., and Green M. Smoking and tobacco. Protocol Impacts of smoke-free public places legislation on inequalities in youth smoking uptake: study protocol for a secondary analysis of UK survey data. (2018). Volume 8, Issue 3. BMJ journals

Did you like this example?

1109

46