Could it? How?
And particularly, how out here in the Real World?
Remember, it failed to do so for centuries. And, since you're not a smoker, let me tell you something you are possibly unaware of: If you are a smoker, you don't need the surgeon general to tell you you are doing yourself no favor. The hacking cough in the morning, the frequent pain in your chest, your lungs feeling like the inside of a coal mine, frequent colds and flu infections and sinus infections, ...
But by the time you find all that out, you're HOOKED.
And thoroughly hooked. Quit smoking was among the most difficult things I ever had to do. But had I not done so, I probably would not be alive now. I had a heart attack 5 years ago. Had I still been smoking then, it very likely would have killed me, and quickly.
And there were strong economic incentives on the part of the tobacco industry to suppress bad news. You may not remember this, but they used to push cigarettes as GOOD FOR YOU. Calmed the nerves. Kept weight down. They included cigarettes as part of the ration packs for soldiers in WW2.
I don't think outlawing tobacco is any solution. Then it just becomes another item in our highly successful, decades-long War On Drugs. But counterating and controlling the propaganda from tobacco's vested interests may not be a bad thing at all.
And can you justify forcibly quarantining people with SARS or measles? Then maybe you have a basis for quarantining second-had smoke. It also causes health problems. Just takes longer, but can kill you just the same.
And, yeah, I know that's a serious deviation from libertarian philosophy and I am definitely fond of that philosophy. But we're talking real world here, with real people dying, not an abstract universe.
BTW, did you know that if you smoke, your greatest mortal risk from it is not lung cancer, but heart disease?
When's earnings? :-) |
