Skip to content

Community: Real Life

Smoking bans


James

A 16-year-old enjoying his new-found freedom after finishing GCSEs, James is scrimping and saving for a car for when he turns 17 but so far a second-hand rusty scooter looks more likely than the pristine turquoise new Mini he fantasises about when picking lottery numbers.

James doesn't want to light up in his local, but he's still fighting the smokers' corner.

I don't smoke, well OK I used to, but I've been free of the habit for ages. But even as a non-smoker I sympathise with nicotine addicts and feel a sense of solidarity with smokers in opposing the 4,500 doctors who have recently called for a public smoking ban in the UK.

New York and Dublin recently introduced such bans. We all know smoking is bad; whether it's the anti-smoking adverts on TV or a relative who's died from smoking everyone should be aware of the misery smoking can cause.

But is it right to ban smoking in certain places? I can see why it has been banned on planes and in cinemas, theatres and shops, it just seems a tad extreme to ban smoking in pubs and bars. People have always smoked in such establishments and it's fair to say that a good chunk of the clientele will be smokers.

Seeing as nobody HAS to go to the pub and people have always smoked there I don't think the anti-smokers have got any ground to impose an outright ban. What makes Britain great is that we have a tolerant society, why do the anti-smokers wish to destroy this by persecuting 27% of the population into being forced out of pubs and clubs? I fail to see what is wrong with choice; why can't we cater for smokers and non-smokers rather than having to take sides?

"What makes Britain great is that we have a tolerant society"

With the help of technology, such as improved ventilation it is quite easy to designate separate areas for smokers and non-smokers making prohibition unnecessary.

Anti-smokers consistently whine on about wanting to breathe clean air. Do they plan to ban cars and lorries then, too? I wonder how many of these people demanding 'clean air' drive cars? Given that most of us live and work in urban environments with car fumes and god knows what else it seems a little extreme to make so much fuss over a little tobacco smoke. I'm no scientist but I'm pretty sure that a lorry belching out diesel fumes poses a greater danger to my health than an old lady having a quick ciggie.

The research into the harms of passive smoking has been very contradictory. Some scientists have claimed that the dangers of passive smoking are largely exaggerated whilst others have said that they are understated. Although even if passive smoking isn't harmful (and I don't think anybody knows how harmful it is for sure) if somebody is smoking nearby it can be unpleasant and irritating. But then drunk people are unpleasant and irritating too. Are we going to 'ban' them? Some smashed fool urinating and throwing up on the street is far more antisocial and annoying than a little nicotine-laced exhalation. Are the do-gooders trying to ban drunks? Or is that their plan after succeeding in banishing smokers from public places?

For as long as smokers remain a sizeable minority, which will be the case for the foreseeable future we need to cater for smokers and non-smokers and not give in to those that wish to crush our personal freedoms, civil liberties and independence.

Angry? Submit a rant


Bookmark with:What are these?

Also on TheSite.org