CONSTITUTION DOESN'T CONFER RIGHT TO HARMFUL ADDICTION

Editor, the Tribune:

I am confused by the controversy surrounding the smoking ban. Are the
smokers actually saying that their right to be addicted to nicotine
is more important than public health? Is it not bad enough that
smokers subject their children to secondhand smoke? They want to
infect the rest of us too? They say that smoking is their right, but
I don't see anything in the Constitution protecting a person's right
to inflict their addictions on others.

I do, however, see where a person's life is protected by the
Constitution. Smoking kills people. It is not a right. Stop crying,
smokers - you need the breath.