"So many holes riddled through the argument presented here you can see the daylight shining through the other side. One is that a single large seizure of contraband means that an enforcement effort was effective. It’s not evidence that a display ban has been a driver for larger volume of illegal sales. Another more serious point is that illegal trade has been on the increase for a long time, before the display ban, and continuing after it. That’s not proof that one caused the other, as the authors must surely be aware of but wilfully ignore to make a good headline. The suggestion that ‘a display ban undermines the belief that tobacco is legal’ is also risible. So, the authors suggest that the Irish people think a product available through *every shop and supermarket* in the country has suddenly been tainted with illegality? Give people some credit. Standard cherry picking, evidence-free, waffle from the pro tobacco industry ‘libertarians’."

"At last we have a near true report on the dissaster of this governments actions towards a legal product "tobacco" I just hope these silly political parties over here take note before Britain face the same fate as Ireland, as for 111thstreet take your head out of your governments backside and stop trying to justify and support this governments distructive, dictatorship and pointless stupid unjust laws, you sound crazy."

"SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057 concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers..... meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study: Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations. The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.) The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/ As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997 -harleyrider1978"

"The only way the UK can avert this failure is by not going down the same road as Ireland with there pointless harassful tobacco display ban or by voting UKIP at the next election, because if they follow Ireland with this display ban it will fail and make the under age smoking situation worse."

"Supply and Demand. If there is a demand for cheap counterfeit cigarettes, there will be a supply. If the cost of real cigarettes were made cheaper, then the demade for them will increase. "

"When will politicians learn that if people want something, they're going to get it, regardless of how "illegal" it is declared to be. All their so-called "laws" ever do is increase the price, and cause organized crime to get into the business. Growing, processing, selling, possessing, and imbibing the leaf of a plant is not a crime, no matter how many statues you pass attempting to make it so. No victim. No crime."

"Basham and Luik wrote, " by putting all tobacco products under the counter, a display ban undermines the belief that tobacco is a legal, regulated product and that selling and consuming counterfeit and smuggled tobacco products are crimes." Excellent point, despite the fact that 111 thinks it's "risible." Of course the one move of the display ban won't make a sudden huge difference in the perception of the acceptability of smoking smuggled tobacco, nor will it likely increase smoking among younger adults nearly as much as the smoking bans have, but it's still arguably significant. . . . . But maybe we should take things a step further and have a display ban and plain labeling on all alcohol products as well? . . . . "Lite Beer" designations cuold be outlawed since, just as with "Lite Smokes" the imbibers will just consume more for the same effect, and seductively advertised brand names could be replaced with three letter codes, identifiable through a print out list if customers wanted to get their old brew. E.G. "XQZ Beer" could be Budweiser, but without the child-enticing horses and funny commercials. And while the basic letter-label would be black on white, the rest of the cans/bottles could be filled with holographic color images of diseased livers, haggard alcoholics, dismembered car-wreck victims and body parts. . . . Hey, this display ban stuff could lead to a whole new world! . . . . . Michael J. McFadden, Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains""

"haha i like 111thstreet's comment... "The suggestion that ‘a display ban undermines the belief that tobacco is legal’ is also risible. So, the authors suggest that the Irish people think a product available through *every shop and supermarket* in the country has suddenly been tainted with illegality? Give people some credit. Standard cherry picking, evidence-free, waffle from the anti smoking industry ‘libertarians’ " what was the point of the ban again?"

"Many truths and untruths in this smoking ban...what about the amount of transport emmissions in the atmosphere aready..enough to corrode concrete and statues etc...I am also aware that cigarettes are very expensive now...many Irish members of the government suffer from excess drink and cigarette money..They have to go now"