Ban on public places alone doesn't truly reduce smoking OVERALL.Only on the ban of production of cigarettes and other tobacco products ,this way of addiction of smoking and drugs will come to an end.A smoker can smoke at any place.I personally feel that banning alone in public places wont help in reducing smoking overall.
Being a smoke myself, I can attest that the more bans that are put in place, the more smoking is reduced overall. There are days when I do not have the time to smoke because I am traveling in and out of areas where smoking has been banned. This in turn makes me wait to light up and also reduces my overall cigarette consumption. So, thank you cigarette bans for helping me get that much closer to quitting.
If people weren't allowed to smoke in any public places, including public streets, outside of businesses, in parks, and the like, it's possible that they would stop. The reason being, they would only be able to smoke in the privacy of their own homes. Because people are often out of their homes for hours each day, a ban like this might help them break the habit due to not being able to take breaks to get their nicotine fix.
A smoking ban would make cigarettes unaffordable on the black market. Tobacco growers can switch to other cash crops such as soybeans, corn and the like. Tobacco companies can turn to making other products such as health foods, energy drinks, etc. It's all about devoting profits to research and development. Plus, every company needs to realize that if you don't diversify, eventually the company will wither and die. The same is true with tobacco companies--Marlboro needs to come up with other products or eventually they will go out of business when no one smokes anymore.
Banning smoking in public areas would make smokers feel unwelcome and force them to leave their friends and family when they wanted to smoke. This separation would make people miss out on many things and force them to remember with every step to the smoking area that smoking is not a healthy or socially acceptable activity. This eventually would make smoking an undesirable habit as you can't go out in public and have fun doing it.
A ban on smoking could count for a couple of things. It would reduce the areas that smokers could actually smoke. This in turn would reduce the contamination that occurs in others from second hand smoke. If a smoker wishes to smoke and damage his or her own body, it should be kept in an area that only those that wish to partake can do so.
A smoking ban is a good idea because it would help stop the spread of a smoking culture. Many young people start smoking socially, and this would be greatly reduced if there was a smoking ban in public places. Young people would not pick up the smoking habit in bars or restaurants.
Bans on smoking in public places does more than just reduce second hand smoke for non-smokers. By limiting the available times and places where smokers can smoke, society creates a situation where smokers will consequently be reducing the number of cigarettes they smoke. This reduction may cause smokers to start cutting back on cigarettes at other times as well, potentially leading them to stop smoking all together.
I think in the long run it would. At first, smokers would just find somewhere else to go and smoke. After a while though, I think some smokers would become tired of having to hide, sneak around to find a secluded area, and missing out on things because they have to leave. The social stigmatization may lead some to quit.
How??? Because people that smoke won't be able to smoke and can't put a cigarette to their mouth and start smoking.
The air will be clean for everyone and they won't have to berth in tobacco, pregnant women won't have to worry about going out and getting fresh air and for parents because they don't have to worry about taking their kids to the park
A smoking ban would not reduce smoking overall. The ban would only cause people not to go to those areas anyways and stay at home to smoke. This would not be good for the economy because we need people to be free to spend their money. Everybody would suffer if this was to happen.
Indeed, smoking ban's good, however, for those who are addicted with the tobacco, it takes them a painstakingly effort just to cut down on smoke not mentioning get rid of this die hard habit. As for dealer that lives on tobacco, unless there's a new drug, they won't say no.
I expect that the truley addicted would stay at home and smoke more and feel more isolated by their addiction that they cannot overcome, whilst lighter smokers may reduce their use.
The public enviroment may be safer to a very low degree but the home enviroment would significantly become a more harmful enviroment for both the smoker and there cohabitants.