Everyone has habits — like biting your nails. Some people smoke.

Everyone has pet peeves — like scratching nails on a chalkboard. Mine is smoking.

I’ve never taken a puff of anything and never will. It is something I adamantly refuse to do. I dislike smoking immensely. I think it stinks, it’s a waste of money that could be put to better use, and I would be a wimp and cough because I couldn’t inhale.

Now, before any smokers become upset with me, let me tell you that I am not some sheltered person who refuses to associate with or be in the same environment as people who smoke.

That is not true. I happen to have several friends and family members who smoke. I have been inhaling second-hand smoke from the day my parents took me home from the hospital. I go places where smokers are. I respect smokers’ rights to smoke, but sometimes I wish they would respect me, too.

Like at the bars. I expect that when I get home from going out, my clothes and hair will smell as a result of a smoke-filled bar. That is nothing out of the ordinary.

However, there have been occasions when a smoker or two has impolitely blown smoke in my face or in the direction of my table filled with non-smokers. My skin has also felt the pain of careless smokers whose fire meets my arm or leg.

Not everyone may be careless in such a manner, but smoking is still making a big stink in America. The news is filled with reports about tobacco companies and settlements and all sorts of studies about smoking.

Recently, new revelations have come to light showing that tobacco companies purposely added nicotine to cigarettes to increase addiction and their profits. This news upsets me because not only is it irresponsible, it is greedy.

On the other hand, I don’t think it’s right for everyone and their mother to bring lawsuits against tobacco companies after a multiple-decade smoking stint. If you decide to smoke, you must deal with the consequences.

But must I deal with those consequences, too? I don’t think so.

A study appearing in Wednesday’s issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association shows 30,000 to 60,000 deaths in the United States yearly are the fault of second-hand smoke.

Compared to being in a non-smoking environment, people inhaling others’ smoke are more likely to have hardening of the arteries and are more susceptible to suffering heart attacks. It has also been linked to lung cancer, respiratory problems and other illnesses.

Now, I am not one to be worried about each study linking habits to health. But many studies are resulting in laws making it harder for smokers to light up in public — like in California.

On Jan. 1, a law went into effect to strictly ban smoking throughout California, even in bars. The law has many smokers upset, but there is really no way for the state to enforce it. A smoker can be asked to stop smoking in an establishment but doesn’t have to.

I think it is OK to restrict smoking in some places, like airports, government buildings and the like, but I have a few qualms about the California law. It should be up to the proprietor to make such restrictions. Just like I don’t think it would be right for the university or city to create some sort of anti-alcohol restrictions for the bars during Veishea, smoking shouldn’t be outlawed in bars in California. Besides, what is the use of making a law if you can’t enforce it? It sounds a little ridiculous to me.

But still, the issues of second-hand smoke remain. Some smoking groups claim that restricting where they smoke is unfair, but tobacco’s nicotine is a drug. There must be some ways to curb it. You can’t legally walk or drive through Campustown while drinking a bottle of alcohol; it puts others in danger. There must be some limits.

I am glad there are smoking restrictions, although some may be a little far-fetched. I am happy tobacco companies are losing power. But I feel I am lucky to be in America, where there is more awareness about the dangers of smoking and second-hand smoke.

Now tobacco companies are taking the rest of the world by storm by selling their products around the world, like in Japan and Europe — where smoking is exceedingly more common than the 24.7 percent of American adults who light up.

Fewer laws and worries about smoking worldwide have been to the benefit of the American tobacco giants. But in Europe, where smoking is much more common, restrictions are on their way.

The European Union Parliament agreed in December to ban television and radio spots advertising cigarettes, as well as promotions on billboards and clothing.

They are also banning ads in magazines and newspapers and limiting tobacco sponsorship of athletic and cultural events, according to the New York Times. It may be the toughest blow yet to the tobacco industry.

In short, although each person has the right to choose whether to smoke, it is also fair to consider the rights and health of those who choose not to light up. To smoke or not to smoke … I’d rather not and I’d rather not inhale your smoke, either.

---

Erin Payne is a senior in jounalism and mass communication and potical science from Rock Rapids.