The Rights of Smokers Are As Important As The Rights of Non-smokers

 
    The Ministry of Health and Welfare announced an amendment to the National Health Promotion Act which states smoking be prohibited in all public places such as restaurants, bars, and PC Rooms. It seems that it is good. However, before the smoking prohibition law would go in effect, we should consider about two things: “designating smoking zones” and cost of cigarette price.
    First of all, designating ‘Smoking Zones’ is more effective than providing a list of ‘Smoking-free areas.’ Not only are most of the smokers unable to remember all the clauses in the new act, but it merely confuses them. I would rather see designated ‘Smoking Zones’ in all public buildings. I admit, of course, that smoking on streets or in restaurants must be banned. Yet, the places where smokers often visit like PC Rooms or bars should have areas for smoking. Flexibility and consideration for location is required.
    In addition, high smoking rates in Korea likely stem from the low cost of cigarette price. Korean cigarettes prices are the lowest among OECD countries. Ireland has the lowest rate of smokers and the highest cost of cigarettes at 14,975 a box. We could follow this example. Raising the price of cigarettes should go into effect before any legislation is implemented. The U.S. already increased the cigarette tax to 40%, and Australia banned advertisements for cigarettes. If the government is sincerely interested in the nation’s health, it should consider looking more for the fundamental causes of the current problem.
    Smoking laws have been championed by a number of people for quite a while. However, the government should keep in mind that the rights of smokers are as important as the rights of non-smokers. 

 

By Lee Hyeon-kyoung, Junior
Dept. of English Language Education

 

 

What are The Rights of Smokers?

 
    The 37th article of the Korean Constitution officially states that the freedom and rights of people shouldn't be infringed upon by any reasons not contradictory to the Constitution, itself. I'm not saying that one's freedom should be guaranteed no matter what. But, smoking in the presence of people who are uncomfortable with it-or who suffer from health issues-is not a reason to restrict smoking. Banning smoking, with the exception of very few spaces, is a nonsensical and impractical idea. If smokers can’t light up outside buildings and stairs, where there are no one but smoker, where should they go to relieve their stress?
    Not only that, but there's another thing I'm really worried about: How many PC parlors will go under if the anti-smoking law goes in the effect? Most customers in PC parlors are smokers and if they can't smoke while playing games, none of them will go anymore. It is undeniable that most of parlors will have a snowball’s chance in hell of keeping their businesses open. These new proposals must be struck down immediately.
    As I mentioned previously, restricted smoking areas should remain in existence. However, lawmakers should consider any negative effects the anti-smoking law may cause. They should consider the rights of smokers and non-smokers alike.

 

By Yoon Joo-sung, Junior
Dept. of Business Administration

저작권자 © 충대신문 무단전재 및 재배포 금지