Are smoking bans a reflection of the ME generation?

The biggest argument from anti-smokers is that smokers have no right to cause them to inhale anything they find UN-acceptable. I find this thinking a bit self-centered and self-entitling that one would say no-one else has a right to do something because it affects what one smells or finds irritating.

How many anti-smokers smell of perfume, body odor, dump massive amounts of car exhaust, go camping and smoke up the air, have smelly feet, emit paint fumes, drive diesel trucks (for no apparent reason) and etc... The list could go on endlessly. Do Anti-smokers only consider the ME-Sided-Rights and others (IE. smokers) have none? When did Anti-Smokers get rights to all air, even the air within someone else s property. (IE. pubs/bars/restraunts.)

I'm sorry there has been so many that have been mis-informed and manipulated so easily by the media. It's still just smoke and no matter how much one tries to dramatizes it and tries so hard to call it names like secondhand smoke and labeling it as major health concern - it still doesn't break the laws of science; The only death that could ever occur from smoke is in massive concentrated amounts like being inside a house on fire.

------ Court rules that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is NOT a Class A carcinogen

http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/980717o%E2%80%A6

“There is evidence in the record supporting the accusation that EPA ‘cherry picked’ its data” … “EPA's excluding nearly half of the available studies directly conflicts with EPA's purported purpose for analyzing the epidemiological studies and conflicts with EPA's Risk Assessment Guidelines” (p. 72)