Comment on the BBC You-Tube video reporting bad news from New Zealand:
The 2019 recreational cannabis referendum should have won and then drugs would be legally available from the market and there would have been no question to ban tobacco smoking and buy drugs instead.
Smoking is not an anachronism, like the professor likes to put it, it is an invention made by the human brain, and every invention had to be invented, including e-cigarettes and cigarettes themselves. It is good for your mental health to smoke besides, as an escape from reality, unlike what it is to your physical health, and people like that should know that there is such a thing as recreation. And no form of recreation is an anachronism.
What I would call an anachronism is being puritan in the modern era, like anti-smoking Nazis and zealots are.
What they have done with that housewife-like minister according to her accent, is concealing taking advantage of the existence of the law to adapt it to make it say what they want, regardless of the aim that the law has to dictate the abandonment of certain actions.
The minimum age requirement to buy tobacco has been set to 18 or 21 to deter and prevent underage smoking and ensure the mature responsibility of the person wanting to smoke, not to take advantage of its existence by converting it into a variable from a constant value, isn’t it Mrs smart, and raise it incrementally by one year every year?
First thing’s first, nobody is allowed to influence other people’s actions and decisions in such a way and that includes the government and its ministers and members of parliament. If I am not allowed to ban you from smoking and kick you out of your job and work, then neither is the government minister allowed to do the same. The reason they could is because there is no written constitution wherever that happened first, like in England.
The constitution of a country ensures the liberty of its citizens and overlooks politicians to act accordingly, and it is not up to the law that is punishable whether these things will happen or not rather than a constitutional matter that has already been resolved by previous generations, and people like this and many other ministers and labor as well as labour prime ministers deserve to be prosecuted over constitutional matters of restricting the freedom of citizens and limiting what they can and cannot do depending on their autonomous actions whose performance depends only on themselves. Think about it this way.
But if you can consider enough, they said that they are banning such an activity or action or the act of smoking which is not hostile towards anybody else, instead of using terms like prohibit of forbid, because of exactly the same reason. The world is full of smart asses and the Australians and New Zealanders in government are many of those to run an anti-smoking WHO-led and compliant police-state and regime!
Commented under https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYkkiWc9PAI
Bring Back Smoking Freedom 