Smoke from cigarettes is affecting the environment as a whole and is also affecting the individuals who smoke. This is the very reason that smoking is being banned in public places so it cannot harm other individuals. This argumentative essay would further expand the points of smoking ban on public places and would provide with a definitive conclusion as to which side is more convincing (Vallero 2008, Goudie 2000 & Cooper 2001).
The proponents of the ban on smoking in public places present with researches carried out on the topic which clearly shows that smoking in these public places is harmful to the health of many individuals who are exposed to the smoke involuntarily (Carb 2003). They argue that the smoke in these public places can cause non smokers to passively smoke and some asthmatic patients can have a triggered asthmatic attack because of it. (National Health Survey 1994). Similarly patients who are already suffering from fatal diseases would be triggered by this tobacco smoke if they are exposed to it highly as reported by the CDC (Washington Post 2004). They bring forward laws which provide every human life in this world with the right that they should not be exposed to carcinogens which would affect their health and if this ban on smoking does not take place then these individuals would be exposed to the carcinogens of cigarette (U.S Department of Health and Human Services). They also bring forward other harms which may be caused by cigarette smoke to the society. The cigarette butts that are left behind by the smoker can be a cause of fire at many places and by imposing ban on smoking the government can ensure that these incidents are avoided (Daily Courier 2004). Similarly it is found that these butts of cigarettes also constitute a great part of the litter found on the beaches and if bans are strictly imposed on these recreational places the cost of cleaning the places would be much low. (Chicago Sun Times 2003). It is seen that many of the