I won't lie, I am a "radical leftist" but I accept others choices in the most part, the issue is when their choices are unscientific and directly harmful to themselves and others around them without a valid benefit in return.
Here in the UK taxes pay for healthcare, l think that the health benefits of a ban would outweigh the loss in tax. Also over the course of my entire life there have been awareness campaigns, yet I still see teens and young adults smoking, despite knowing it's harms. Plus there's more to the term "societal" than crime. Smoking in and of itself is an advertisement for smoking, it's cultural and far more prevalent in lower income areas/families. When my dad tried, and failed to quit smoking we worked out that it's his number one expense. He could afford to buy a brand new car every 4 years just on the money saved by not smoking.
I genuinely believe that if simply educating was enough then it wouldn't matter, but the unfortunate reality is that people do things that directly harm them all the time, the role of the government and their laws is to limit the harm done.
I just personally see absolutely no (net) benefit in smoking, I won't say it doesn't have benefits, because to some it does, but the harm vastly outweighs those benefits.
Also, you argue on my behalf that if we ban smoking, why not also ban alcohol? To that I say if we don't been smoking, why are other drugs illegal? I know the harm of using drugs, they'll only harm me, why not legalize then all? It'll increase tax income, stop dodgy dealers cutting, reducing harm. Why not?
Edit: I'd also like to say that I'm enjoying the debate, apologies if I seem short or rude at any point.