Its baffling how so many "liberals" can be so for this ban. Its like people learned absolutely nothing from the War on Drugs. When it comes to some topics I feel like I'm on an 80s Conservative forum when I read the rhetoric.
In some instances, I think it's trolling, but in most, it's simply well-meaning liberal thinks the most forceful/strictest action possible = getting to the promise land of peace and good health the fastest. What's the quick fix? BAN!
Mixed in with some left-wing authoritarianism, which most of the time is indistinguishable from 70/80/90s Conservative rhetoric. It's a power-grab coming from thinking the world simply revolves around your way or the high way. Often that comes from classism as well, if you see yourself as middle-class and well-educated and
can't even at considering lower-class and poor people exist "under you" and maybe have different lived experiences. Though please do use your argument of being an ally when suitable to tell everyone you are ironically concerned your Government doesn't treat or handle poor/sick and unemployed people well.
Which is made more painful these days when young Conservatives are rebranding themselves as the freedom absolutists. Tactical espionage in itself, and pretty much just an attempt to gain popularity and own the libs. But in saying that somewhere right now a Conservative is reading this topic and going "Holy shit, the left really is what my parents used to be. Authoritarian and old-school Conservative.". It's hogwash, no society can exist under absolute freedom, but we can exist with carefully considered proposals, laws, bans, etc.
Far more steps need to be traversed before as extreme a proposal as what is in the OP. History and attempts at it (strict prohibition) have shown repeatedly it doesn't really work. Tackling social and behavioural problems like this properly is more about mitigation and lower numbers of those involved. Such as my post earlier which stated since WW2 smoking has dropped from like 70% of the UK, to the low 20's. People have worked hard on this and responsible forms of banning have been introduced. Not ridiculous age-gate ban scaling and fantasy land "smoking gone in 5 years".
Maybe in 200 years, smoking won't be the vice many (or anyone) turn to, to deal with life. It'll probably be plugging a VR headset in and never coming back to real life. My point being, times can change, but human behaviour and mental health concerns will be eternal. Smoking can affect others more so than things where you almost strictly hurt yourself, but that is why the compromise had to be banning smoking in many public places. That isn't the same as banning it completely.
In the short-term, vaping is probably going to continue to chip away at smoking numbers, and while it's a side-step, it's one with enough immediate benefits to help continue on the path of reducing people inhaling far worse combinations of poisons.
