Consider the possible arguments on both sides of this debate, and reach your own conclusion on which side you favor.

Most people agree that smoking should be prohibited by law. Even though smoke-free law has a lot of benefits in all sectors of life, we should consider this argument on both sides. On the on hand, scientific evidence proves that anti-smoking legislation decreases all kinds of death related to smoke and lead to better national health. According to World Health Organization, the number of deaths in smoke-banned countries such as Australia and Austria has dramatically decreased, and its population is increasing year by year thanks to legislation. Furthermore, implementing these bans all around the world assists not only smokers but also protects everyone from second- hand smoke. Every year one out of ten non-smokers die from second-hand smoke. However, opponents of the law against smoking contribute the idea that the law is conflicted to democratic countries where human rights cared the most. They believe that it' s their choice whether they smoke tobacco or not in public places. Moreover, critics of the law stress that how can authorities control human smoking habits even smokers could not control themselves? Smoking or not is just up to them, and it is about ethics. In conclusion, I am with those who oppose the law against smoking. Instead of controversial restrictions and any laws, they should provide enough private rooms or any extra space in any public place.