Home > Ciao Café > Current Debate > Should smoking be banned in all public places? > Reviews

babajane3... 1


Add to my Circle of Trust

Subscribe to reviews

About me:

Member since:01.01.1970



Smoking...who's right.


Definately healthier

Some won't agree

Recommendable No:

31 Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful See ratings
very helpful by (98%):
  1. dbirse
  2. fuzzibear
  3. vikstar
and 51 other members
helpful by (2%):
  1. HeyWhat

View all ratings

The overall rating of a review is different from a simple average of all individual ratings.

Share this review on


Chosing this catagory to put my op,was quite difficult.Whilst the debate of whether to permit smoking in public places or not is something I feel strongly about I want to go a little further into the subject of smoking,so I hope everyone will indulge me a little and read on a bit further.
Both myself and my husban are smokers,and have been for many years (more than 15 years).We have a daughter who is,like myself an asthma sufferer and we have two ther children.We live in a smallish house (3 bed terraced),and despite having air filtration units installed,windows open regularly, and smoking as much as possible outside the house... are still polluting our childrens atmosphere.
We both smoke 20 cigarettes a day and have tried on many occasions to give them up (unsucessfully).
That's our basic background,so now the scene is set..on to the debate.....

Smoking in public places?

I may be considered narrow minded,but in my mind there is only one right side to this,and that is the side that allows choice,and the right to that choice.
Not the choice to have a cigarette and inflict it on those around you, but the choice NOT to inhale anyones fumes,whether it be at home or in a public place.
As a smoker you can choose to have a cigarette,but as a none smoker you often do not have the choice to breath clean and smoke free air,all because another person chooses to pollute their own lungs!!
If it is possible to have an area for those who feel they want to indulge their "habit",yet still ensure areas for those who do not,then fine allow smoking.But if it's not practicle to have both then surely those who want clean lungs should have priority?
When smoke is inhaled the effects are semi-permanent and after prolonged exposure it is permanent.Yet when you are "forced" to breath smoke free air,it is not permanent..you can always nip off somewhere else for a cigarette afterwards.

Smoking...an interesting point.

Now it's time to consider a few other points about smoking....
When a handful of unfortunate(to put it mildly)people contracted CJD suspectedly from beef,the results were instant and profound.Beef was stripped from the shelves at an amazing rate.Bans were put in place on meat in a variety of ways and by many countries.
In view of this I fail to understand how a host of nations allow the sale of cigarettes,which are literally addictive,unhealthy,deadly consumables.
I have read many articles pointing at the expense to the nhs by smoking related desieses,yet none to point out the amount of the goverments revinue from the sale of tobacco.
There is something fundamentally wrong when cash income overrides the welfare of people,and feel had beef been taxed at a similar rate then it would never have been withdrawn from sale in any way.
Not being totally nieve I realise that the withdrawl of tobacco would have great financial implications on our goverment,and effects on existing smokers,but there are ways to adress this too.
Outlaw the sale of tobacco products,let those who are long standing smokers have a perscrition for patches or similar,and whilst they still need them cigarettes..(payable at the same as from the shops now).The goverments have time to adjust to the lost revinue..and indeed revinue from the sales of alcahol and such are likely to increase a little as bootlegging will decrease.
Ok there will be some redundancies in the tobacco trade,but the money people were spending on cigarettes will be spent on other things so other oporunities will open.
If the strain on the nhs is so great from smoking related illness the that too will decrease and money can be saved.
The true affects of the addictiveness of cigarettes is obvious to me...I love my children,understand how bad it is for theirs and my health and hate the smell,yet I still light a cigarette at the first sign of stress..


Yep,I am a raving hypocryte but,both people who don't smoke and our children have the right not to have their lungs poisened by this terrible habit,a habit that makes sensable inteligent people put thier lives and those around them at risk on a daily basis.

  Write your own review

Share this review on

« Previous review   Next review »

Rate this review »

How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines

Rate as exceptional

Rate as somewhat helpful

Rate as very helpful

Rate as not helpful

Rate as helpful

Rate as off topic

Write your own review Report a problem with this review’s content

Comments about this review »

dbirse 04.04.2007 12:50

Very good.

MHam 01.11.2003 09:06

I'd love to see them try and implement that! M xx

mrlovepantsuk 26.06.2003 13:25

nice op with some good points.

Add your comment

max. 2000 characters

  Post comment

More reviews »

Review Ratings »

This review of Should smoking be banned in all public places? has been rated:

"very helpful" by (98%):

  1. dbirse
  2. fuzzibear
  3. vikstar

and 51 other members

"helpful" by (2%):

  1. HeyWhat

The overall rating of a review is different from a simple average of all individual ratings.