We all know the adage that if we give a man a fish, we feed him once, but if we teach him to fish, we feed him a lot.
If we get out of a rut, we get out of a rut, but if we repair a rut, many others also do not fall into it. We may stop smoking, but if we don't stop the selling of tobacco, many will smoke.
But again - principles that compete. Without the availability of the tobacco, agency for that particular "choice" is gone. We can't always be sure which path is best, the freedom of choice, or the safety of non-availability.
If a plan were available which included complete safety, no choices available for error, would many of us choose to live under such a plan?