On the one hand, those who support smoking restriction in social places cite health issues
because smoke contains hazardous substances that cause cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. It
has vital importance, especially for those who do not smoke, because secondhand smoke has
more adverse health effects than firsthand smoke. Evidence from many studies shows that most
victims of tobacco-related diseases are a nonsmoker. These people are range from children to
pregnant women and elders. Moreover, many people disgust cigarettes in the public community.
It means smokers should respect the interest of others. Also, youths and children tend to try or
addict to smoking unconsciously by seeing public places smoking.
On the other hand, opponents of such law cite some benefits that this can bring to a person and
state. To some countries, the state budget mainly consisted of smoke production. An example
can be seen in Chinese provinces that are solely dependent on smoke production. Forbidding
smoke leads to economic difficulties in such regions. Furthermore, it is argued that consuming
things that give pleasure is a matter of freedom.
Overall, I would tend to side with the supporters of enacting laws on smoking. It seems to be a
valuable decision for health. Even if some countries make profits from smoke import, in the
future, maybe it would equate with expenditures for the healthcare service.
On the one hand, those who support smoking restriction in social places cite health issues
because
smoke
contains hazardous substances that cause cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. It
has vital importance,
especially
for those who do not
smoke
,
because
secondhand
smoke
has
more
adverse health effects than firsthand
smoke
. Evidence from
many
studies
shows
that
most
victims
of tobacco-related diseases are a nonsmoker. These
people
are range from children
to
pregnant
women and elders.
Moreover
,
many
people
disgust cigarettes in the public community.
It means smokers should respect the interest of others.
Also
, youths and children tend to try or
addict
to smoking
unconsciously
by seeing public places smoking.
On the other hand
, opponents of such law cite
some
benefits that this can bring to a person and
state
. To
some
countries, the state budget
mainly
consisted of
smoke
production. An
example
can
be
seen
in Chinese provinces that are
solely
dependent on
smoke
production. Forbidding
smoke
leads to economic difficulties in such regions.
Furthermore
, it
is argued
that consuming
things
that give pleasure is a matter of freedom.
Overall
, I would tend to side with the supporters of enacting laws on smoking. It seems to be
a
valuable
decision for health. Even if
some
countries
make
profits from
smoke
import, in
the
future
, maybe it would equate with expenditures for the healthcare service.