The smoke-free laws are based on the rationale that it is fundamental to protect people from the effects of second-hand smoke and such people run the risk of diseases such as heart disease, cancer, emphysema etc. The strong evidences of the link between passive smoking and lung cancer remind everyone about the importance of controls over smoking in public places. According to Michael Calnan, “Control over smoking in public places has become of increasing importance as a measure which governments might adopt, mainly because of the attention given to the increasingly strong evidence of a link between passive smoking and lung cancer than CHD. Certainly, it is a measure that might be favored by those who place great emphasis on the freedom of the individual and who are antagonistic towards more direct government intervention through fiscal policy or controls on tobacco promotion.” (Calnan, 56) Therefore, I strongly believe that smoking in public places must be checked by stronger governmental intervention considering the facts that it is highly harmful for non-smokers, it causes pollution of the public places, and it is a strong case of violation against individual liberty.
Smoking in public places should be prohibited, because such practices illustrate strong cases of violation against individual liberty, and the public smokers not only challenges the health issues of the people around, but also the basic freedom of human beings to live a healthy life. Whereas there are already strong oppositions against such practices, I feel there should be stronger activities to counter these practices of apparent violation of basic human rights. The regulatory activities to limit smoking in public places have been on a tide over the past few decades which include a variety of both public and private sector initiatives. “More recently, antismoking efforts have been fueled by growing evidence of adverse