One would easily say or mention that themselves smoking does not cause any harm to anyone else around them or poses no risk to anybody else. That smoking is performed independently in an autonomous way as an autonomous action that affects no one even when present. That is true when applied to most cases especially if you consider that smoking has to be proactive to be harmful while passive smoking while not reaching that quantity or the same extent is inequivalent to the same person smoking which becomes the source of danger thus remaining unaffected by what happens on average since the smoke in question has already been through somebody’s lungs to be exteriorly residual but it does not apply to all cases nevertheless and ill people may have certain illnesses that cannot withhold passive smoking not compatible to their condition.
To be more clear those types of illnesses are first all heart conditions and then most of the respiratory conditions. This must establish a measurement of priority for many not to complain about passive smoking without having a reason to.
Treating people irresponsibly as not having the adequate capacity to avoid smoking in the presence of those sensitive or prone to it because of their health is definitely not the right solution to address such a problem although it is what happened. This is what the smoking ban will avoid exposure to in general but not in specific.
So, about smoking bans and where they are originated, did some people as Britons not possess adequate responsibility not to smoke in the presence of those who are immediately affected? This is a question that can be formally set and be asked to the right person in relevance to their decisions while the ways in which it can be answered may vary.
Bring Back Smoking Freedom 