Out in the cold, a lone member of society stands alienated from the rest of the world. A plume of smoke rises from her mouth; this is what sets her apart from the rest of the population, the fact that she smokes. In the last decade, this has been happening as people become staunchly more politically correct. It has almost become a crime to smoke in this country as the year?s progress. Is this right? Should smokers be treated this way, are they worse than the rest of society just because of their habit?

Smokers have been banned from almost every facility in this nation, save some fast food restaurants and bars. Almost all the nice restaurants have eliminated smoking sections, and for what reason: to quell the cry of all the nonsmokers in this world? If these people had their way all the smokers would be crammed into a rocket and shot off to the farthest reaches of the universe.

Why have smokers been driven out of public places when there are efficient ways of eliminating secondhand smoke? There are machines called smoke eaters that have been scientifically proven to eliminate 98% of the toxins found in secondhand smoke. Why are these overlooked when legislation is passed making it illegal to have smoking sections in public buildings? I do not have the answers to these questions, only the politicians do.

I believe that smokers should have the right to smoke anywhere outdoors and in certain areas indoors where efficient second hand smoke elimination procedures are in place. I need no backing for the outdoors claim because if smokers are not permitted to smoke outdoors than where are they allowed to smoke, only in their houses with the windows closed and the blinds drawn? I hope this never happens because if it does there will be a copious number of extremely aggravated people wandering the streets just trying to get home so that they can have a cigarette. As for the indoor part of the argument well, it is very simple. As stated before, smoke eaters make the environment safe for nonsmokers sitting in their nonsmoking sections. Also, the claim that some unfiltered air can escape from the smoking section and into the nonsmoking section, big deal. So many things now have been found to cause cancer it is almost impossible to get through a day with out taking in some sort of carcinogen. An example of this is found in a recent study of foods that Americans consume. In this study carcinogens were found in food that had been barbecued. Is barbecue going to be eliminated all together or only allowed in certain designated areas?

One more point that I would like to bring up before I end my tirade is tolerance. People are so concerned about teaching tolerance to today?s youth it is ridiculous. Parents are encouraged to instill in their children tolerance for everything but heavy drug addicts, criminals and smokers. Are smokers that bad of a fraction of society that we should be discriminated against by society as a whole? I can see if we were alcoholics getting drunk everyday and causing damage, both emotionally and physically to the people and things around us but we are not. I also see the argument coming up next, physical damage due to second hand smoke and I have answer to it. How much damage do you think is caused by one whiff of smoke entering your lungs as you walk past a smoker, the answer is next to nothing. Humans can not develop cancer by inhaling a little smoke that was already filtered twice, once by the filter on the end of my cigarette and once by my lungs.

I feel that there is one more argument that I should acknowledge. This argument is as follows. Some people are going to say that I am bias because I am a smoker and due to that fact my arguments hold no weight. Well to them I say try and find someone who is not bias in some sort of way on this issue. Nonsmokers are just as bias as smokers are on this subject. Therefore no one can provide a impartial argument for either side.
.
As I try to imagine what the future is going to be like it looks worse and worse. If nonsmokers keep getting their