In a classic sense of tyranny of the majority, voters in Austin have decided that they know what's best for local property and business owners. By a margin of 51 to 48 percent, voters approved a public smoking ban in all local restaurants and work places. What makes these voters think they have the right to tell people what they can do with their publically accessable private property escapes me.

Whereas before there was an unregulated mixture of smoking and non-smoking restaurants available for people to choose from, effective September 1st government authorities will begin to use the threat of lethal force to make sure that there are only non-smoking restaurants available. Free markets be damned.

Similar measures banning the sale and consumption of alcohol (which is just as deadly, and a greater threat to public safety considering nobody causes an accident because they had a few too many cigarettes) failed in the 1920s. Even worse they ushered in an era of organized crime and murder that still plagues us today. What's more, temperance was indirectly responsible for the hideous Gun Control Act of 1934, a reaction to rampant organized crime.

I have long held the opinion that the neo-temperance movement will be both a success and a failure. That is, they will succeed in banning smoking, and they will fail at preventing it.

Already smoking has been banned in Ireland, Norway, and New Zealand. Currently the bans only impact "public places", but they include private property like bars and restaurants. Successive steps will include private homes and cars, especially where children or employees might be present. Do you have a maid? You might soon need to decide between firing her and continuing your habit. Driving your kid to school? Better not be smoking while you do it.

Anti-smokers and pleasure police have been on the march for decades. They have taken the baby steps approach to pass increasingly restrictive bans on tobacco, with the ultimate goal of complete prohibition.

The Neo-temperance movement is bound to get their wish. A complete prohibition of tobacco products seems inevitable. The smokers just don't have the numbers to withstand the tyranny of majority rule. But a ban on tobacco won't mean cessation. Just like the underground establishments of the 1920s, some defiant bar and restaurant owners will refuse to enforce the ban. Indeed in places where there is already a ban in place, some restaurant workers are looking the other way rather than take on the role of the pleasure police.

Cigarettes may not be as popular as alcohol, but they are certainly more popular than illicit drugs. Throw in cigars and smokeless tobacco, and there are plenty of people around to violate what they view as a silly and unjust law. When criminals organize to meet that demand, lets just hope that we don't get caught in the crossfire.

Related articles:
Lincoln tax revenue up in smoke with ban -- 04/19/2005
Houston, we have a problem -- 03/10/2005
Neo-temperance movement going after alcohol again -- 02/16/2005
Neo-temperance is inevitable, and doomed to fail -- 02/07/2005
1984: Fired for being a smoker -- 01/26/2005
Neo-temperance marches on -- 11/16/2004
Yet another smoking ban -- 11/04/2004
Temperance movement costing lives -- 01/26/2004
All your vices are belong to us -- 01/08/2004
The Unprotected Minority -- 08/19/2003
Pleasure Police, literally -- 10/22/2002