The Right to Smoke or the Freedom to Choose

As far as I know there isn’t any such right as the Right to Smoke. Perhaps it may be termed as an Individual’s Right. A right is not ‘anything that I can get away with.’ A right is ‘something I can do without being forcibly restrained or penalized.’ So if I am forcibly asked to control my urge to smoke or be punished, then I have no right to smoke. To smoke or not to smoke is one’s prerogative. It is best described as a private right. It should therefore be practiced privately.

But if the exercise of these right, harms, offends or put others in an uncomfortable situation, then the habit of smoking does not remain a right. We should care for public interest and practice good manners. It is a gentleman’s duty and a common courtesy to seek the permission of his host or guest before lighting up a cigarette.

Enough has been said on tobacco related diseases. Cigarette smoking is now connected to the cancer of the lungs, chronic bronchitis and emphysema. The government seems to take a lot of interest in our health, by not concentrating on providing clean drinking water to the citizen as it should do, but by putting a ban of smoking. My take is clear. Why ban smoking? If so much concerned is being displayed by the Govt. for the general good health of the citizen, then why not ban the manufacturing of cigarettes? I don’t need to answer that question.

The ban on smoking in ‘public places’ now has taken off a lot of responsibilities from the individual smoker’s shoulder. He now does not have to find a way to pursue his habits without offending others. He has to pursue his habits in private among consenting adults. Very soon this ‘right to a habit’ may also be taken away from him. (Meantime, I have still not understood what a ‘public place’ is? It definitely would mean Government offices, parks, hospitals, schools museum, railway coaches and areas under the Government control or jurisdiction. But bars and restaurants? Aren’t they private properties? Don’t the private properties holders have a property right? So shouldn’t it be left to them whether they allow smokers in their premises or not?)

Last but not the least: If the Govt. is not that serious and concerned about the citizens’ health, then it should not put a blanket ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. It is best, the decision should be left to the private property owners, who run bars and restaurants to allow smokers, have an exclusively smoking joint, (non-smokers entry not restricted) or ban them. If they allow smokers, then the non smokers should not have a problem. The least the non-smokers can do is leave politely and enter another private property owner’s bar or restaurant where the property holder chooses to ban smoking.

I am not trying to express, support, encourage, sponsor or champion a pro-smoking environment. I am simply infuriated and concerned on the ‘Orwellian attitude’ the authorities have adopted. I am not propagating a Right to Smoke, but a ‘Right to Choose.’ One should have the freedom to choose. Shouldn’t we?

ΨΨΨθΨΨΨΨΨΨθΨΨΨΨΨΨθΨΨΨΨΨΨθΨΨΨΨΨΨθΨΨΨΨΨΨ