With mixed emotions I can say this thread has delivered but in other ways.
JimmyH: Coming back on topic, I would have no problem using bait tactics to catch thieves. Personally, I would feel no compulsion to seal a car just because it was unlocked with the keys in, or similar, and I doubt that such tactics somehow convert law abiding people into crooks. I have no issues with using those tactics to catch them.
I don't agree with robberies and I feel sorry for the victims. But ... there is no compulsion to sell tobacco products.
No, but so what? There is no compulsion for a jeweler to sell diamonds, but would you qualify an expressuin of sympathy for a violently robbed jeweler with an inference that it's somehow their fault for having a "wrong" business, or that they should give up their business in response to being robbed? What about a liquor store owner - there is no "compulsion" to sell alcohol.
In my view, retailers going about their lawful business are being aggressively and violently robbed, and as such they are deserving of the protection of the law. Equally. All of them. Not just those with businesses you may or may not morally approve of.
Your quote truncates my post which can be summarised as: If you choose to sell tobacco in small retail premise then ... given the associated risk of violent robbery, you should have adequate safety measures in place.
I agree that people operating lawful businesses should be free from the threat of attack. They aren't. Therefore they have legal obligations to have security measures in place for safety purposes.