Even then researchers had concerns about the hazards of smoking as they pertained to second hand smoke and people who inhaled it(Comfort pp 14). Commonly referred to as passive smoke, those who were around smoke without actually smoking themselves soon proved to have several definitive health risks associated with being near the smoke and inhaling it through passive (second hand methods).
"Medical concerns about the dangers of passive smoking--inhaling other people's tobacco smoke--can be traced back to the 1920s, and there is also now a widespread consensus that such passive smoking can cause disease. Other people's tobacco smoke, either from the burning tip of a cigarette or the smoke that is exhaled by the smoker, is classed as a known human carcinogen by the US Environmental Protection Agency(Comfort pp 14). "
For the most part public place for the purpose of legislative ban incorporated any "enclosed or semi-enclosed area that members of the public have access to which provides a business or a service including workplaces, buildings and public transport(Comfort pp 14). "
"Direct benefits revolve mainly about respiratory health, and regular exposure to smoke may trigger asthma in infants and young children. The indirect benefits to young people's health associated with smoke-free policies is seen to relate to the general reinforcement of the messages that non-smoking is now increasingly the norm within the community and would thus help to promote non-smoking lifestyles in future adult generations(Comfort pp 14)."
While the ban is primarily directed at health issues there are non-health issues that are also derived from a non-smoking policy. They include the smell of nicotine not getting into clothes and hair simply being in a public location, and the absence of littering with butts, ashes and cigarette packages.
While many states have entertained the idea of banning smoking in public places few have actually moved forward and taken the step. New York State however recently became the third state in the country to introduce and implement smoking ban to test drive its effectiveness(Comfort pp 14).
When the ban on smoking in public was first suggested for the state of New York business owners united to argue against such a policy(Spitzer, 24). Citing economic hardship, enforcement problems and smokers' rights as three reasons that a ban should not be implemented they lobbied in conjunction with the nation's largest tobacco companies to block the attempt to pass the ban.
"There is little reliable data on the economic consequences of the state ban. Opponents claim it has resulted in the loss of 2,000 jobs and $28.5 million in wages. In New York City, where a public smoking ban predates the statewide law, restaurant and bar patronage reported an 11 percent increase after the law's enactment. In truth, most reporting of adverse economic effects has been anecdotes from resentful business owners and smokers whose comments suffer in reliability and objectivity(Spitzer, 24)."
While the beginning implementation was confusing to all who were