The policy which is put to restrict smoking in public places and society is fair since smoke causes more harm to the non-smokers and employees. Tobacco is regulated at the restaurants, workplaces, and transport facilities. The restriction has ensured the smokers are minimizing the number of cigarettes which they smoke daily thus reducing addictions. Since the smokers are provided with places to smoke, the policy does not infringe on the rights of the smokers. These restrictions have helped in controlling tobacco use in the society leading to minimization of its incidence and prevalence. Therefore, since the bans on smoking on the public places have minimized the rate of heart attacks in the society by almost 26% per annum, I support this restriction due to its health benefits to both smokers and non-smokers.
On the other hand, the ban in smoking has proved to be effective in preventing cases of emphysema and lung cancer which usually develop slowly compared to the heart attacks. With the increased time in the smoking ban, there has been a cardiac benefit which makes me support this policy fully. The second-hand smokers have a thirty percent greater risk of suffering from a heart attack than smokers. Also, due to the increased number of younger individuals in the clubs, they tend to be affected by smoking hence having the likelihood to have a heart attack. Heart attack among these young persons is led by the stickiness of the blood which tends to cause blood clotting. Blood clotting due to exposure to smoking makes the person have bad cholesterol making them be at a higher risk of experiencing the heart rhythms.
Therefore, I support smoking restrictions since it has more benefits to both the smoker and non-smokers. With these restrictions, the mortality rate which is caused by heart failure and other cardiovascular diseases will go down. It is recommendable to the public to join hands and ensure the success of this policy since they are the beneficiaries of the ban.