The first of those three disadvantages, which is probably the most important one, is the health of non-smokers. According to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Second-hand smoke contains higher amounts of toxic agents than the smoke that passes through the cylinder of the cigarette into the active smoker's lung. It has led into 3,800 lung cancer deaths per year in non-smoking American societies. Some other researches have also proved that second-hand smoking causes several other types of cancer, including nasal sinuses, brain, breast, cervix and thyroid cancers, as well as leukemia and lymphoma. Other than cancer and those other diseases, the toxins from second-hand smoking can also cause death to a fetus if a pregnant mother inhales it continuously. The nicotine in the toxins causes the fetus to grow inconsistently, and often brings death to it. If it is lucky enough, the child will survive, but he or she will be born with a handicap. Another disease that these toxins can cause is asthma. It might not be as deadly as the ones above, but it is bad enough to disable somebody to do something which he or she is capable of doing. For example, a child who is capable to become a good swimmer might not be able to swim because his lungs have been intoxicated by nicotine that he or she gets from passive-smoking. These intoxicated lungs create asthma, and disable the child to breathe properly. If the child can’t even breathe properly, how do you expect him or her to become a good swimmer? In America, the habit of smoking has spread throughout the society. Whose rights are really being violated? When smokers light up among us nonsmokers (including infants and children), we have no choice but to breathe in their toxic residue. Simply having smoking sections in restaurants does not solve the problem. This is the same as requesting to swim in the non-chlorinated end of the swimming pool.
Besides killing, we also find smoking to be irritating for a number of reasons. For instance, the smell of smoke is awful, it clings to your clothing, and it affects the breath of the smoker. Smoke in the air is also irritating to the eyes, causing them to water and itch. In order to reduce the number of annoyance suffered by non-smokers, the United States government passed a law that prohibits smoking in public places. However, is this particular law enough to guarantee non-smokers’ convenience? The answer is no. There are many other places that is not categorized to be public places, but visited regularly by a lot of non-smokers. Take bus stop for example. Since it is not a public place, people usually smoke here without considering the fact that there are many other people, who happen to be non-smokers, waiting for the bus. These people have no choice but to wait there, being bothered by the smoke. As long as there is no law that gives them the authority to ask the smoker to stop smoking, these non-smokers wouldn’t be able to do anything to keep their convenience.
Every person deserves the right to enjoy the luxury of clean air, as well as healthy environment. But when will people be able to enjoy this clean and safe neighborhood? This situation seems impossible to achieve since there are too many pollutants in our society, and smoking is one of them. Over the past few decades, smoking has always been one of the major sources of this hazardous act. Besides causing air pollution, smoking also raises the risk of houses or buildings catching fire. According to American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), almost 10% of burning cases are caused by smoking. Not all smokers are aware of whether their cigarette butt is still on fire or not when they throw it away. It might end up getting blown by the wind to somebody’s back door where he or she stacks used papers, and starts a fire. If cigarette butts can burn a house to the ground, we could then conclude that there are always bigger risks that non-smokers have to face. A single smoker has the capability of causing a fatal damage to our environment, and he or she is not the only one who will suffer from it, all the other people (including non-smokers) will have to suffer from it too.
Many non-smokers have lost their properties, their loved ones because of other people smoking. The law exists today is not enough to guarantee the safety that non-smokers deserve. The fact that there should be a new law giving this group of people authority to protect themselves is obvious. It is time to grant these people the rights to provide safety to their life.
