Public smoking is a contentious topic. While it can play the role of a cultural symbol or serve as stress relief, its detrimental effect on health and noxious odor put smokers and non-smokers at odds. This has led to a number of regulations on tobacco consumption in some places, while others disregard the issue. In this essay we will consider both sides.
On the one hand, opponents of cigarette consumption cite evidence of the risks of secondhand exposure to nicotine, such as an increased likelihood of peridontitis, coronary heart disease, lung and throat cancer, and many other issues. Furthermore, cigarette butts or electronic vapes can pose a fire hazard indoors. Smoke can also settle onto walls and furniture, damaging property. In certain countries like Russia, it is prohibited to smoke outdoors at all, with smokers facing minor fines if spotted at bus stops, for example.
On the other hand, many places take a less restrictive approach to the topic. For instance, many Serbian restaurants come equipped with ashtrays and designated tables for those who choose to smoke, and no restrictions are applied in stores and grocery shops. There, cigarette use is treated like part of culture, with no need for punishment or regulation, save for locations such as hospitals, which may house people with respiratory vulnerabilities.
Overall, I side with opponents of public smoking. While it is within one’s right to choose to smoke, the health risks to those who do not are too great to be ignored. Enforcing better separation between smokers and non-smokers, as well as popularizing more targeted delivery methods, like patches or chewing tobacco, will benefit both sides.