In his study, he highlighted how some smokers are able to continue their smoking activities secretively even after the imposition of constraint legislation. The observations made during observing the smoking activities in the designated no-smoking zone reflected different categories of smokers. Some of the smokers were not ready for smoking openly in public places because of the fear of facing public criticism. Such smokers have been identified as nomadic smokers by Barnett, Pearce & Thompson who define them as smokers who smoke only in places where their smoking habits are not revealed openly. Such behaviour of the smokers of being afraid to smoke in the public place highlights the fact that how smoking is perceived as bad practice by the general public. This suggests that how smoking has been stigmatized as bad practice because of the ill health effects it causes. Further observations also reflected the contrasting opinion on smoking in public places as only a few people seemed troubled to see smoke coming out of a designated smoking place. A large number of people did not seem to get disturbed and ignored the smoking activities being carried out there.
On observing the smokers and their habits some interesting observations were made. Most of the smokers were observed to blow smoke in upwards direction which reflects an extremely sociable approach where they care about their smoking causing harmful effects to others. Observations reflected that smokers were continuously talking to each other and sharing their cigarettes and lighters without considering the social statuses of other smokers and some studies have termed smoking as a social practice. The above observations are in contrast to much of the literature which does not find any positive impact of smoking in the public. This observation reflects the fact that smoking areas are a social area where smokers express themselves freely without any social barriers. Although the fact that smoke-free legislation has had an impact on smoking activities cannot be denied. Many of the smokers were not ready to smoke in a designated no smoke area because of the constraints imposed upon them by legislation which ban smoking. Callinan, et al., 2010 highlights the fact that introduction of legislative reforms related to banning on smoking has resulted in a decrease in a number of active smokers and also led to a reduction in exposures of passive smoking.
This report found despite an area designated as a no-smoking area a few numbers of smokers were ready to smoke in such area. Although the number of such smokers was very few which reflects the point that smoking in public place in the current time period is an out of place activity. Scientific researches highlighting the detrimental effects of smoking led to negative stigmatization about smoking. Various legislation in jurisdictions around the world has been introduced which impose either a complete ban or limited ban on smoking. Countries like India have imposed a complete ban on smoking in public places. As discussed above contrasting opinions regarding the effectiveness of such bans on reducing the harmful effects of tobacco have been presented by the works of and Callinan. Further research is required for determining the effectiveness of such bans and for determining the fact that whether imposing bans on smoking is the best alternative for regulating the use of tobacco, although this research project concludes by stating that smoking in public space is an out of place activity currently.
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.