Home
Has Indian Govt. gone too far in controlling smoking?
Share
Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Stumble Upon
Technorati
Mixx
Sphinn
Twitter
SphereIt
Propeller
Gmarks
Newsvine
Yahoo! My Web
Live Journal
Blinklist
E-mailMade Popular Oct 1 2008
India :
The Indian Health Ministry will put into effect a countrywide ban on lighting up in public places, including pubs, office premises, open stadiums, restaurants, schools... The smoking ban marks the government’s most ambitious diktat to date.
It is estimated that about 40% of the deaths in India every year are linked directly or indirectly to tobacco use. However, Indian Govt. does not intend to make chewing or sniffing tobacco an offense.
Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
Sorry no picture found for this combination of tags. Try to search minimum number of tags at once
RSS 
Radhika
Oct 2 2008
mumbai,
India
We need the ban in place. Whatever efforts are put forth, they are sure to be circumvented by the avid smokers, however small steps like these will ensure some fall in consumption as kids generally don’t smoke at home, infront of parents etc. Why should passive smokers pay for the effects of smoking?
Comment Link
(Local Perspectives)
This was really necessary. Whether this works or not is a different thing altogether. But we must do everything that needs to be done to discourage people from smoking and make the environment clean for non-smokers.
(Local Perspectives)
Just as the non-smokers have a right not to smoke, the smokers have a right to smoke. Smoking doesn't harm the environment that much. If pollution is a reason then we must check other grave polluters than a burning cigarette.
(Local Perspectives)
I don’t see how this is any different. Many countries in the world already have, or are currently in the process of putting such legislation in action. How is this so controversial for India?
(Global Perspectives)
Not at all! In fact the Indian Government should be thanked for taking such measures. Passive smokers have suffered a lot. Such bans are a boon to these innocent victims who have tolerated this public nuisance for all these years. Moreover, it will definitely put a check on the smokers also.
(Local Perspectives)
i do not think it has gone too far...
but rather it was not on time!
i rejoice at the ban!
YIPPEE.
GOD...
I HATE SMOKERS!
but rather it was not on time!
i rejoice at the ban!
YIPPEE.
GOD...
I HATE SMOKERS!
(Local Perspectives)
I agree, and I AM A SMOKER. I don’t see why smokers should be allowed to pollute others, and, even before the law here in France, I tried to minimise my interior smoking.
On the other hand, the ”I hate smokers” attitude of Sharwar K doesn’t help a smooth transition. Does she not pollute in any way? No car, no electricity, no packaging, no planes, buses or trains? No plastic? Nothing? If so, bravo.
If not, it doesn’t help to have negative feelings. We should all be in this together, because we ALL pollute.
Good day to you all....
On the other hand, the ”I hate smokers” attitude of Sharwar K doesn’t help a smooth transition. Does she not pollute in any way? No car, no electricity, no packaging, no planes, buses or trains? No plastic? Nothing? If so, bravo.
If not, it doesn’t help to have negative feelings. We should all be in this together, because we ALL pollute.
Good day to you all....
(Global Perspectives)
I chose the agree box because i appreciate your initiative in acknowledging that smoking is no great feat!
about my attitude well i would like to stick to that, still!
you see, Michael,”car, no electricity, no packaging, no planes, buses or trains? No plastic?”
I agree that the usage of the above does pollute, but all the above are necessities, while SMOKING IS NOT!
And it would still be a joy if any or all of the above are also banned by legislation, man will any how find his way.
but for now, fellow human, lets start with banning the puff!
we should be glad that we have atleast one thing less to die from!
...
about my attitude well i would like to stick to that, still!
you see, Michael,”car, no electricity, no packaging, no planes, buses or trains? No plastic?”
I agree that the usage of the above does pollute, but all the above are necessities, while SMOKING IS NOT!
And it would still be a joy if any or all of the above are also banned by legislation, man will any how find his way.
but for now, fellow human, lets start with banning the puff!
we should be glad that we have atleast one thing less to die from!
...
(Local Perspectives)
Shahwar, Is driving a necessity?
Well, it gets difficult to define. However, I agree with your right to be what you are :)
As for the Ban, I think it is not bad to have it but it shall also become a means of harassment for POOR smokers ;)
Most importantly, I’d be more glad if our Health Minister focuses on urban as well rural sanitation measures, which can greatly improve environment as well as public health. In cities as urban as Delhi, Mumbai you can find garbage loads lying in the city threatening onslaught of an epidemic any given day and will cause more harm than all smoking in the city. I urge him to take a tour of every city he goes to in an open vehicle so as to realise what pollution actually is.
I find it difficult to agree with the 40% death due to smoking/tobacco as mentioned in article above though. Is it true?
Well, it gets difficult to define. However, I agree with your right to be what you are :)
As for the Ban, I think it is not bad to have it but it shall also become a means of harassment for POOR smokers ;)
Most importantly, I’d be more glad if our Health Minister focuses on urban as well rural sanitation measures, which can greatly improve environment as well as public health. In cities as urban as Delhi, Mumbai you can find garbage loads lying in the city threatening onslaught of an epidemic any given day and will cause more harm than all smoking in the city. I urge him to take a tour of every city he goes to in an open vehicle so as to realise what pollution actually is.
I find it difficult to agree with the 40% death due to smoking/tobacco as mentioned in article above though. Is it true?
(Local Perspectives)
I AGREE WITH YOUR PROPOSITIONS!
hey, but you asking for too much...
lolte...:):>:)>:0
This is India!
Banning the puff is the easiest way by which our ”concerned” authorities can show they care!
Dont you get it, these people have not much going on, no value system whatsoever!
But banning the smoke is atleast a sensible step regardless of its FALLIBLE ORIGINATING SOURCE!
:)
hey, but you asking for too much...
lolte...:):>:)>:0
This is India!
Banning the puff is the easiest way by which our ”concerned” authorities can show they care!
Dont you get it, these people have not much going on, no value system whatsoever!
But banning the smoke is atleast a sensible step regardless of its FALLIBLE ORIGINATING SOURCE!
:)
(Local Perspectives)
Add your Comment
