Thinking about my last post during my morning ablutions, a simple question occurred to me (and before lunch simple questions really are all I can manage). I know it’s been asked before but I think it’s worth asking again:
If tobacco and alcohol are so dangerous why aren’t the anti smoking/drinking campaigns asking for them to be banned?
Seriously think about it, none of the pressure groups that claim that smoke and drink are destroying lives, wrecking society and killing thousands of people a year at extreme cost to the NHS are actually asking for them to be banned. If they’re really that dangerous why not? After all we banned the use of asbestos, we’ve reclassified numerous other drugs as illegal why no campaign for an out right ban? Just more and more taxes and greater restrictions.
ASH themselves say:
“ We do not attack smokers or condemn smoking.”
But why not if they want to eliminate the “harm caused by smoking”, how can they not condemn smoking, if it’s as dangerous as they say. Surely that’s a bit like saying:
“We want to eliminate the harm caused by people shooting themselves in the foot, but we’re quite happy for people to shoot themselves in the foot”
I suspect there are three obvious answers:
1) They’re lying but going for an out right ban they know wouldn’t work (pretty much proved by prohibition).
2) They’re self serving control freaks, that know if they ever get us all to stop with our filthy habits they’d have to get real jobs and they’re much rather just meddle in other peoples lives.
3) Both of the above.
If anyone’s got an alternative answer to why none of these health campaigns don’t out right ask for things to be criminalised (as the anti-drugs groups do), I’d love to hear it.