America was formed with the ideology of being free. Americans usually do what they like, even if they're hurting themselves, as long as they're not hurting anyone else. The law only steps in if an innocent bystander is being harmed. This leaves the door open for the second hand smoke attack on smokers. Anti-smokers would like to see smoking banned in public places because of the effects of second hand smoke. While on the other hand smokers would like the right to smoke anywhere, including public places. Perhaps there is a middle ground. Instead of banning smoking from public places buildings where smoking is allowed could be forced to have better filtration systems or separate enclosed rooms for smoking.
             Nonsmokers have the right to breathe air that is clean and unpolluted by harmful tobacco smoke. "Over thirty years of research have conclusively established cigarette smoke as a carcinogen", states the Surgeon General. The CalEPA estimates that passive smoking causes 35,000 to 62,000 deaths annually due to heart disease. The second hand, or sidestream, smoke inhaled by passive smokers' causes damage that can lead to disease or death. The Surgeon General also states "The chemical composition of sidestream smoke is qualitatively similar to the mainstream smoke inhaled by the active smoker". This shows that when a person decides to smoke they also make that decision for the people around them, by polluting there air as well. The Surgeon General went on to say, "Nonsmokers are exposed to levels of environmental tobacco smoke that would be expected to generate a lung cancer risk". Inhaling environmental tobacco smoke can be harmful to a passive smoker. That's why many nonsmokers are pushing for a public smoking ban.
             Smokers should also have the right to smoke where they please, including public places. If smoking was banned in public that would be like stating that smokers are se...