A Nationwide Ban on Smoking?

Conceivably one could have nightmarish visions of a new role for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives--that of enforcing a national smoking ban. After all, tobacco is one item that falls within the broad purview of the bureau.

Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, D-New York, and Mike Huckabee, R-Arkansas, stated Tuesday that they would support a national smoking ban.

Obviously Huckabee's opposition to smoking is based upon religious conviction. Many ministers believe smoking to be sinful. Perhaps they never heard that for over a century countless Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian ministers in North Carolina not only disagreed with that assessment but supported the tobacco industry since it was the state's largest cash crop.

As for Hillary's support for such a ban, it would be hard to imagine the Democratic candidate believing anything at all to be 'sinful' except for what evil capitalists do to the planet and the poor.

Hillary's support for the ban on tobacco arises from the modern liberal mindset, which views government as the ultimate nanny and guardian of our health, our diet, our lifestyle, lest we imbecilic peons make choices that are not for our own good.

After all, only government can know what is for our own good.

The New York Post reported that Hillary is very pleased with local and state laws forbidding smoking in public. She praised New York City in particular for its stringent restrictions on smoking, and further sarcastically quipped that the nay-sayers were predicting hard times for bars and restaurants, when in actuality those businesses continued to flourish after the ban.

It is not at all difficult to determine why restaurants and bars continue to do well in NYC. The desire for food and drink is greater than the desire for tobacco.

When put up against food and booze, tobacco loses every time.

Other cities and towns have not fared so well with smoking bans. Some have even turned down proposals to ban smoking in bars and restaurants.

The thing that is particularly troublesome about the notion of a nationwide ban on public smoking is that once again the long and intrusive arm of government reaches into private lives and attempts to regulate individual choice.

And with the BATFE on the loose, looking for ways to continue to justify its existence, it would not be difficult to imagine the day when the agency would be called upon to enforce anti-tobacco laws.

Want to light one up on the street corner after a meal at a fine restaurant? Better resist that urge, or your butt's going to jail, bud!

Surely government has better things to do than to watch citizens for signs of tobacco use. But then again, since when did government ever resist the temptation to seize more power to rule over the lives of citizens?

This is precisely why the words of the Framers are just as relevant today as they were in the 18th century. They warned about this very thing.

And if we are not careful, their very worst fears will come true. As Jefferson warned, 'From time to time liberty must be preserved by the blood of tyrants and of patriots.'