Banning Smoking in Public Places
Prompt: Smoking not only harms the smoker, but also those who are nearby. Therefore, smoking should be banned in public places.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Answer: Smoking is believed to be detrimental to the smoker and those who are nearby, and thus should to be prohibited in public places. I tend to agree with this argument for two reasons.
The first reason is that those who smoke in public places harm others' health. Public places, such as buses, shopping centers, and hospitals are often crowded, which means a large number of people will suffer from second-hand smoke if one person smokes. This air pollution in public places may cause coughing, high-blood pressure and even lung cancer in those who do not smoke. Second-hand smoke could be particularly harmful to children and the elderly, whose respiratory system are likely to be vulnerable. Banning smoking in public places would protect people's health by creating a secondhand smoke free environment.
Second, for smokers, forbidding smoking in public places would reduce their chance to smoke, which is good for their health. If workplaces ban smoking, for example, workers would have to go elsewhere in order to smoke. This inconvenience could contribute to a decline in their frequency of smoking. Additionally, some may resolve to quit smoking as it becomes more and more difficult to find a place to smoke. In this way, prohibition of smoking in public places would rid those who smoke of the detrimental habit.
In conclusion, banning smoking in public places would benefit non-smokers, by protecting them from second-hand smoke; meanwhile, such prohibition could help smokers reduce their frequency of smoking. That is why I completely agree that smoking should be forbidden in public places.
