▶ Your Answer :
In the world, more and more countries ban smoking in public places. It is a debatable issue between smokers and non smokers. The rule has its advantages and disadvantages. I firmly believe that this rule is excellent. I will explain this by giving two aspects.
To begin with, smoking damages non-smoker’s health, so called passive smoking. In fact, the effect of passive smoking is terrible, leading to the increased rate of cancers and respiration diseases. Especially, passive smoking can result in serious damage more seriously to children. In South Korea, it has been a few years for a ban on smoking to take effect. Before, people used to smoke without hesitation in public places. This situation gave non smokers displeasure, and children was not able to enjoy themselves in amusement parks, or theaters. Due to the complaints of people, the government introduced the laws against smoking in public areas. After this, all situation changed dramatically. Non smokers are free to walk on the street, and for children, they can spend their time with their friends without any danger. If there had not been for this law, non-smokers and children are still in danger of smoking, leading a lower quality of life.
On top of that, the rule plays a major role in declining smoking rates. In other words, given the law requiring smokers to smoke by force in designated places, people are not willing to smoke. Compared with past years, as smokers are not allowed to smoke in public places, they have to go to designated smoking zones. It is troublesome work to smokers. One of my friends, named Minsu, is a good example of this. Just a few years ago, he was a heavy smoker to the point of being concerned about his health. However, after the law took effect, he cut down on smoking. The reason for this is that whenever he wants to smoke, he must go out and smoke in appointed places. This made him change his mind because it was bothersome to smoke outside. Before long, finally, he stopped smoking. Not only him, people around me gave up or reduce smoking. This example is indicative of how this rule can encourage no smoking among people.
Of course, some people are against the law, arguing that cigarettes are favorite food. However, indiscriminate smoking harm people who are not interested in smoking. Nobody has the right to destruct other’s health, and everybody has a right to stay outdoors without disareeability. For these reasons, I think that this rule is consequential and essential. |