Thursday, July 17, 2008

Smoking Bans

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/smoking/smokingbans.html
For some time now, smoking has been banned in many places, including offices and enclosed areas including bars and restaurants. In addition, separate smoking rooms have been closed down as well, which was something that I was unaware of.

I think that anti-smoking legislation is great. The government took a while to implement this law, which is one of the negative aspects I see with this whole issue. You think they would have acted sooner eh? I mean, especially with the effects of second-hand smoke.

I think that getting rid of separate smoking rooms all together is pretty bad. Why? I am not a smoker, and I am not trying to justify that it is a good habit to take on, but some people need to smoke. They are just so addicted to it and taking a few puffs relaxes them and puts them at ease…so why get rid of those separate rooms? It’s not like non-smokers will be subjected to the smoke since the room is an enclosed area. Anyone who goes into a smoking room will have to deal with the consequences on their own, whether or not the are a smoker.

On another note, I strongly believe that smokers who get sick, (because of smoking), need to pay some sort of fee for health care. I know that health care is free in Canada, and that is great. However, those who smoke are just asking to get sick…their sickness is more or less avoidable and they should not be given free health care when there are other sick individuals who get sick because of some unavoidable factor. It isn’t your fault that someone smokes and it certainly is not my fault that someone smokes…it is THEIR fault and they should pay the consequences for this if they end up in the hospital room because of smoking.

I do realize that a law like this would be VERY hard to implement, but I want to know what you think about this. Firstly, what do you think about the issue of separate smoking rooms, and secondly, what do you think about the idea of having smokers pay for health care if they get sick because of their bad habit?

SS
Posted by at

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

You're right, this is a hard situation to make a call on. We have to keep in mind that the smoking ban exists not only to protect others from second hand smoke, but to deter smokers from smoking i.e. if they dont have a place to smoke, they wont. I think that is why the smoking rooms have been closed. As for what I think about them, as a non-smoker, I don't have a strong opinion.

The law that you suggest would be very hard to implement like you said. Personally, I agree with you. If you pick up a pack for the first time, especially knowing all the effects smoking has on your body, you should definitely pay something to the government if you get sick. However, people might say that this is bordering on discrimination and whatnot. Or that smoking is an addiction which needs help to be cured, not borderline criminalization, you know? Also, people who smoke are generally poorer people (I heard this in one of my classes) so I don't know if they would be able to afford to pay were they to fall sick. It might just make their situation worse.

What do you think about the new issue of not having cigarettes in plain view in gas stations and such in an effort to prevent youths from being tempted to try it?

July 17, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Saw Tun said...

This is a very interesting topic and one that is relevant to just about everyone. As a non-smoker, I am in strong support of smoking bans. Our society is made healthier as a direct result of these restrictions. The negative effects of smoking have been widely accepted for a very long time and it only makes sense that our government has finally made a strong move. With regards to the smoking rooms, I would have to disagree with you. Removing these was a good decision because it both reduces smoking and it deters others from smoking.

You also mentioned that smokers who end up in the hospital as a result of their smoking habits should pay a fee for hospital services. I can see where you’re coming from; however, this issue must be looked at with greater depth. For instance, should obese people who end up in the hospital also pay a fee because they got sick from obesity? Just like smoking, eating is also a choice. It’s not your choice and it’s not my choice. It was their choice.

July 18, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Matthew Wong said...

I totally disagree, my comment was so long that i decided to turn it into a blog of it's own, come check it out, you wont regret it.

July 18, 2008 at 11:22 PM
Christina said...

I agree with you - the anti-smoking legislation was a good idea, and I actually believe the provincial government did all of us non-smokers a favour by banning smoking in many public places. I would have to say I disagree, however, with your opinion of the ridding of separate smoking rooms. I actually think it was an excellent step - taking into consideration employed individuals that are required to be in the 'smoking room' - security in a bar, perhaps?
But I really liked your idea of smokers, who get sick, paying a fee for their health care. It seems fair... If an individual makes the choice to smoke, being aware of the possible health risks, it seems just that they should pay for the medical treatment they require for the health conditions that could have been avoidable.

July 21, 2008 at 10:29 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)