Live Long And Prosper.

"For decades, we've known of the grim reality that two-thirds of smokers will meet an early demise due to cigarette-triggered illnesses."

Whenever a controversial piece of legislation appears that restricts or impinges on the rights of a few, the freedom argument arises. In the context of Hong Kong, that stance is woven into a misleading narrative suggesting that all our general freedoms are under attack. 

The freedom argument carries the least weight when it defends the rights of smokers, a minority whose habits affect the majority. 

For decades, we've known of the grim reality that two-thirds of smokers will meet an early demise due to cigarette-triggered illnesses. This toll burdens our already stretched public health system and inflicts immeasurable financial and emotional costs on families. Moreover, this is just the tip of the iceberg when we consider the impact of passive smoke.

Thus, this week, as the government moved to curtail the use of vapes and further restrict smoking in public places, the freedom argument gained prominence. The SCMP provides a helpful guide to what is coming. 

For centuries, thinkers have struggled to define the boundary between individual freedoms and restrictions for the betterment of society. Let's keep it simple and summon the famous Vulcan philosopher Mr. Spock, who observed, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one." Thus, I welcome the government's moves that address the needs of the many. 

However, it’s clear that a more straightforward approach, such as a blanket ban on smoking except in strictly designated areas, would be more effective and easier to enforce. 

Instead, we have adopted an increasingly layered approach, prohibiting smoking within certain distances of schools and in queues. From an enforcement perspective, this creates confusion and discourages officers from acting due to fear of disputes. Additionally, the focus on vapes overlooks traditional cigarettes. 

Of course, the tobacco industry will mount a subtle campaign through its proxies to water down any legislation using various arguments. On the vapes front, they've hit upon the idea that banning vapes will discourage tourism. Nonsense. I'd assert it's more likely to encourage tourists, knowing they can bring their kids to venues free of toxic vapes.  

It's disheartening to see the tobacco industry's lack of integrity. Their history of deceit regarding the impact of smoking, their manipulation of scientific data, and their attempts to lure children into smoking places them in the same league as drug cartels. This is why they operate through proxies and shadow organisations, trying to gain a false sense of credibility. 

The work of these lobby groups is already visible in the comments section of newspapers and in the utterances of some politicians. 

In the meantime, the greater good should prevail. Live long and prosper.