Why shouldn't we ban smoking in public?

The act of banning smoking in public has become a recent issue. The government has been trying to reduce the risks of secondhand smoke amoung the younger population because of the health risks when they reach their forties and higher. Some people don't believe smoking should be banned because of certain governmental rights.

A certain liberal Stephen Tall believes the government shouldn't be able to limit specific rights such as smoking. He states that the health officials have not yet proven that this smoke from cigarettes is harmful to the health of other nonsmokers.

"Do you think the occasional waft of smoke inhaled down the pub is more likely to harm society than a child who lives with two chain-smoking parents? ...Children and adults are far more at risk from constant exposure to smoking in private places than they are from occasional dalliance with smoking in public places." Tall is stating that if a child is exposed to this secondhand smoke at home with parents who smoke, then they are still at risk and the banning of smoking in public places does nothing for this child. What he is getting at is if smoking should be banned, it should be banned altogether and not just in public places. He makes a very legible argument for this in that if we ban smoking altogether, then it would be very hard because of all the people who smoke now, and it would be like everything else that is supposedly illegal illegal.
Another source believes that smoking shouldn't be banned in bars because it is all adults who have already been in contact with secondhand smoke, but it should be banned in restaurants because young children come into contact with the secondhand smoke. This source also states that if adults do not want to be around secondhand smoke, then they should not enter the building. What about the nonsmokers right to live a healthy life? There is always a second side to every story.

--I had this story written, but I forgot to publish it.. I had only saved it instead..