The second hand smoking issue has generated a lot of vitriolic political rhetoric. Almost all that are exposed to the passive smoking might suffer lung cancer, but the big debate is the veracity of any linkage between variety of social ills and toxic rhetoric of politicians. I agree and argue that politicians should continue with their vitriolic political rhetoric and more so, start give solutions to the issues surrounding second hand smoking so that the non-smokers' rights are affected. Second hand smoking, which is also known as involuntary smoking, environmental tobacco smoke, or passive smoking, refers to the up take or inhalation of smoke, from products of tobacco, which are consumed by other people (Skilling). It usually happens when smoke-containing tobacco enters or permeates an individual's environment, to cause its inhalation by persons within that given surroundings. Scientists have shown evidence that exposing someone to second hand or passive tobacco smoking can in the end cause health problems and disease, respiratory disabilities, and even death. The health risks factors of second hand smoking has come to be a matter of both political and scientific consensus, these health risks have turned out to be the main motivations or grounds for many governments to formulate laws on smoking bans. These bans apply to areas and surroundings in workplaces, indoor public places, and on the streets or in any open public space.  Second hand smoking has taken a central role as a key issue in the hearted debate concerning the harmful effects and the need to control the use and manufacture and of tobacco products and associates. Industries and stakeholders in the tobacco's manufacture and its health aspects have had concern about second hand smoking, as a real threat to human lives and the business interests, since early 1970s. The harm it posses to passersby and by standers was seen as a governing factor, for the institution of strict regulations of tobacco manufacture and production. Even though, the tobacco industries are strongly aware of the second hand smoking harm and effect on non smokers, they have gone ahead to organize and coordinate scientific controversies about the issue, with the aim and motive of forestalling the regulation laid on their products. This instigated a vitriolic political rhetoric in America. Sharp division has always taken the center stage when it comes to tobacco's sale and manufacture. To one extend, its sales helps in boosting the economic growth of a country, but to the other extend, health and well-being of the uses along with the non-uses is put not only risk but also eventually leads to expensive medication procedures on the victims. Politicians are to some extend very right in giving their vitriolic rhetoric, on second had smoking, but they should not do this for political gains as others do, but as to help protect the rights of the non-smokers. Scientists have proved that smoking causes diseases, which finally leads to death (Winickoff and Friebely 75). It is disheartening when the stakeholders in the tobacco industry are paying the same scientists so that they may come up with evidences, which prove that second hand smoking does not affect those who do not smoke. The frustrations that they might just, get away with this, makes the politicians to raise their voices, through the vitriolic political rhetoric. It is a misguided perception by some people that second hand smoke is quite harmless. The actual truth is that, it contains a lot chemicals ranging from and hydrogen cyanide, arsenic dioxide to ammonia particles. The toxicity of such chemicals has been proved and might cause cancer if in situations of acute or chronic exposure. It is true that non-smokers exposure to the toxic compounds and chemicals is same as the smoker's exposure when they unwillingly inhale the second hand tobacco smoke. To this age, it has become vivid that tobacco smoking is detrimental to the smoker's health and it causes lung related ailments such as cancer, it causes coronary disease in adult users and in children, the second hand smoke causes, bronchitis, and asthma (Dietrich, Schindler, and Schwartz 835). The tobacco industry is now onto the secondhand smoke. Representation by researchers and scientists of overwhelming evidence and extensive research, which has been done fully indicate that the second hand smoke can also make the non-smokers to suffer from lung cancer just as in the case of the first hand smokers. Studies done on individuals, who have faced long time exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, showed that twenty-six out of thirty-three published study reports indicated a relation between involuntary smoking or second hand smoke and cancer of the lungs. The study's estimate was that, the persons that breathed second hand smoke were eight to one hundred and fifty percent more likely to contract cancer of the lungs. This is one valid reason that makes the Politian's want for the government to deploy more measure, to help protect the non-smokers. I regard as selfish and inconsiderate, the tobacco companies' claims and arguments that are there are only debates on the effect of second hand smoke to non-smokers and that no health hazards are experience by breathing a second hand smoke. Many organizations of or that are for anti-smoking are endeavoring in trying to turn the act of smoking in public to be a private act that will not have to interfere with the non-smokers or make them breath the dangerous second hand smoke. It is the right opinion that politicians continue in the issuing of vitriolic rhetoric statements to facilitate such actions.  It is important to note that under the influence of the the politicians and the human rights organizations many smokers have been convinced to cut down on smoking or have a complete quit. The fact that smoking is a common activity in the society makes second hand smoke a more disturbing problem, of increasing concern among non-smokers. Second hand smoking is currently ranked as the third cause of bronchitis and lung cancer related ailments among non-smokers. The Environmental Protection Agencies estimated that involuntary smoking is accredited for between a one hundred and fifty thousand and three hundred thousand lower repertory ailments in children below 18 months and infants ( 347). This results into between seven thousand five hundred and fifteen thousand hospitalizations of children each year. The children's exposure to second hand smoke may likely result to the children having faulty lung function and related symptoms such as wheezing, and excess phlegm. Children can even face medical surgery for the treatment of ear problems resulting from second hand smoke exposure. The exposure may result in fluids building up in the middle ear of the child. Women living with spouse who smoke have to experience the negative effects of second hand smoke on the off springs even before the children are born. The intoxicating smoke components reach the fetus through air the mother inhales. Other effects of second hand smoke on children born in environments of smoke are that, they will less survival chances of being fully developed or have very less weight. Vitriolic political rhetoric in second hand smoking is also contributed by the involuntary smoking being able to leads to damaging of arterial linings and blood clots, which are the two leading factors in the developing of coronary diseases. Tobacco companies to an extend are scared of the shocking health revelations about the second hand smoke research and how it might affect cigarette manufactures. The fact that the tobacco companies are trying to prove to people that there is no concrete evidence to show that the second hand smoke can lead to development of lung cancer or related diseases that scientists associate it, really builds grounds for political rhetoric statements. They have even gone to the extent of requesting scientists to publish any finds that works for them and against the earlier findings. The debates surrounding the use and manufacture of tobacco products and the effect of second hand smoke have attained boiling peaks. It is high time the government start taking the issue of second hand smoking a more serious attention, being that, irrespective of different methods of study being applied by different scientists, on the second hand smoke, still comes up with the same results. Combination of physical human evidence of the effect of second hand smoking with results of experiments done in the laboratory are prove enough to show that second hand smoking can cause lung cancer. It is paramount that this issue should no longer be ignored. As per the vitriolic political rhetoric by politicians, the non-smokers ought to have the rights and privileges of breathing smoke-free air. The government should champion in restricting smoking activities in public and work areas to keep work place and its surroundings a smoke-free environment. In concluding this argumentative paper, I feel that, although putting a ban on smoking may result in the some effect to the economic conditions of a country, due to reductions in revenue from tobacco taxation. Organizational and health risks of both first hand and passive smoker sum up to be more costly than allowing the act to be carried out anyhow anywhere. In that scene, the vitriolic political rhetoric should always curry the day.