Smoking Ban

Further to J.L. Cranfield’s piece on a smoking ban I would like to add my comments.

Firstly I am quite astounded that someone would compare smoking to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases’. They are manifestly different activities. Firstly the act of sex between two consenting adults is just that, a decision by two people to do something together in private (for the most part). Smoking is an activity that requires one person to act, and another only has to be within the immediate vicinity of them, no questions asked, in order to have this activity thrust upon them. There are laws and rules against forcing sex (and subsequently the possible spread of a sexually transmitted disease) on another person. Most of which are laid out in the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Also a comparison is drawn with the image of a drunk driver crashing a car and killing other people. There are also laws prohibiting such behaviour. Over the past years there have also been large, high publicity campaigns to stop people behaving in such ways.

This is behaviour where one person will impose a circumstance on to another, without the other’s consent. Not only is it non-consensual, it is dangerous to the health and well being of those on the receiving end.

Can this be compared to smoking in a public place? Probably. To use the example of the Mungo’s bar in the university campus, people can choose not to go in the smoking area. Fair enough. However do those who work there choose to do so? It can be said that they have chosen their job. However, considering the rising costs of university life, and the difficulties in finding flexible, temporary jobs in this city, acceptance, rather than choice may be more appropriate. Also some do not choose to stay away from the smoking area. There are those who cannot do so purely because of the smoke generated by other peoples’ habits. Asthma is a breathing disorder, which affects many people in this country. Normally it can be easily controlled by suffers. However, the condition can be seriously aggravated by inhaling smoke particles. A very good friend of mine suffers an asthma attack if anyone in the vicinity (such as the small bar or restaurant) begins to smoke a cigarette. She does not produce any poisonous gases to make others ill, yet she is the one discriminated against. When a person sits next to you on a bench with a bottle of whiskey, you do not suddenly become drunk, or are induced to vomit instantly. Any adverse behaviour by a drunk person (such as hitting or verbally abusing you) is prohibited by law. So why should the act of smoking a cigarette be different? The chemical effect of drinking alcohol is only felt by those consuming it. The effect of unprotected sex is also primarily felt by those consensually participating in it.

Smoke from a cigarette diffuses in to the air. By its very nature it spreads as far as it can, possibly into the lungs of peoples nearby.

To clarify, I would not support a ban on smoking in the entire campus, as this would obviously be impractical and unnecessary. However a ban on smoking in enclosed spaces on campus (bars, rooms, cafes etc) would be advantageous I believe. Here are some interesting websites:

http://www.ash.org.uk/html/passive/html/passive.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1454981.stm
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4998

By Mark Silvey