That statement (about Government’s end being the preservation of property) must be taken in the proper context. It is meant to be understood as: Government has no other end than the preservation of property rights.
That falls more into line with Locke’s writings on Liberty, Property, Society, and Government.

Smoke yer bills and trade yer cigs, like in the pic!

“Government has no other end than the preservation of property.”

This is exactly the end which government should not be engaging in.

By giving the government the power to preserve your property, you are giving them the power to take away your property in the name of preserving it.

Property owners are the best suited to protect their own property and the government has no legitimate end whatsoever.

Let it organize art endowment shows and fireworks musical displays instead and let the property owners defend their own property without government interference.

What about those who are engaging in playful sodomy and want to insert cigarettes in the right place ? LOL !

I suppose then that a liberal government would regulate such practice and allow only unlit cigarettes, LOL !

Remember, it’s the tobacco that is valuable, not the filter and paper. That can (and has) been improvised on the spot for centuries.

Tobacco can be stored for a very long time with little ill effect, provided it’s done properly. In fact age will improve the flavor the same way as with wines.

I’m already laying in my stock of pipe tobacco before the trolls in DC close that “tax loop-hole” or cram it full of that awful tasting FSC chemical as well.

Of course there is the most obvious solution. Buy Tobacco seeds while you still can.

When a principle or premise defends one’s case, it is affirmed; when it doesn’t, it’s denied. Think about these two statements:

*Individuals have the right to engage in consensual private behavior even if it can harm them.

*The government has the duty to stop individuals from engaging in consensual private behavior that can harm them.

So, which does our “liberal” believe in? Well, if the issue’s smoking, the second. But if it’s “sodomy,” then the first. And the “conservative”? Just the reverse. What prevails is a now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t commitment to any tenet. Moral integrity falls to personal prejudice, and hypocrisy becomes the standard of “social democracy.”

FROM HERE

And you may not be able to defend yourself with a pack of Camels, but you sure can do a lot of bribing.

Is the shelf life really that short? I smoke about 2 packs a *year*, and by the time I get to the end, I don’t notice any difference.

Of course, a year isn’t that long, and I obviously am not a very discriminating smoker, but what would a shelf-life of a plastic-sealed pack be? I would think a few years and most people would be still fine with them…

“Also, dont’ try defending yourself with a pack of Camels!”

Are you gonna defend yourself with a handful of bullets?

You can keep the smokes, I will buy GOLD !

Also, dont’ try defending yourself with a pack of Camels!

Yeah — they’ll get smoked!

*rim shot*

That effort led me instead ultimately to put a combination lock on my refrigerator.

Fortunately, I don’t smoke. But I do drink the beer I keep right next to my Luckies.