On February 14th, the British Parliament voted to instate a plan to ban smoking in public places. This ban, which won a 384 to 184 vote, followed similar bans in Ireland, Scotland, and many U.S. States. While it has been criticized as government encroachment on personal lives, the 384 to 184 win shows the overwhelming support for public smoking bans. The effects of these bans are mainly positive, even for bars and other such business, and health officials worldwide have praised them. However, the increase in smoking bans during the last five years shows an outright ban on smoking all-together. This might counter the positive effects of the current smoking bans. While smoking bans have existed since the 1500’s, most bans by modern nations have been enacted since 2000. Before then, some U.S. states tried smoking bans. However, there was not enough public support to keep them going for a long time. These bans mainly affected the Prohibition generation, which led many people to oppose smoking bans on purely political grounds. Before the great build up of anti-smoking campaigns and the laws passed since 2000, many people opposed the bans on smoking for the same reasons they oppose them today: government interference in citizens’ personal lives. So what changed? It is a medically proven fact that smoking causes cancer. Those who oppose smoking bans for this reason believe it is an individual’s choice to endanger their life, and the government should not stop them. The major change in the anti-smoking campaign was the discovery of the health risks of second-hand smoke. Popular ads on TV in the 90’s showed children suffering from second-hand smoke from their smoking parents. With images like this, it is easy to understand the enormous increase in anti-smoking sentiment. Smoking is dangerous to the smoker and to those around them. Particular complaints about second-hand smoke arose from the service industry, which has workers who are commonly exposed to second-hand smoke in restaurants and bars. This increase in knowledge about smoking led to the bans on smoking in government property, private businesses, and even outdoor areas. The question is then: where will the current anti-smoking campaign lead us? The campaign shows no signs of slowing down, and people have already expressed the desire to ban smoking all together. U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona stated in 2003 that smoking should be banned throughout the U.S. Other health watch groups have called for this ban, noting that bans in certain areas do not do enough because smoke particles linger and drift, harming those who choose not to smoke or sit near smokers. While a world without smoking would seem heavenly to many people, a nationwide ban brings up the obvious fear of a reaction like that to the prohibition in the 20’s. Trafficking of cigarettes could become a successful criminal industry. People would then associate such a ban with crime, rather than the positive benefits of the current smoking bans, possibly leading to a revocation of all anti-smoking laws. To prevent this situation, the governments of countries worldwide should continue to restrict smoking in public places while the people support it and medical studies show its success. The current bans have led to more people quitting and fewer people buying cigarettes. It has also drastically cut down on the harmful chemical content of air in urban cities. However, the governments proposing these bans need to be aware of the negative impact of a totalitarian ban on smoking, and thus, they should not ban smoking entirely.
