Dear Editor, I'm 90% sure I'm voting against the smoking ban because the free market appears to be solving the problem of smoke-free venues. That said, I'm sick and tired of hearing two groundless arguments propounded against the ban: 1) It will kill small music venues, and 2) it interferes with smokers' rights. 1) A venue that goes under because people can't smoke there is not a music venue. It's a smoking venue. Saying the smoking ban will hurt live music is like saying a prostitution ban will hurt bead curtains or lava lamps. 2) The right to smoke is the constitutional, or legal, equivalent of the right to drive a Maserati. The activity is so inherently dangerous to the actor, as well as others, that the state has broad authority to regulate it much more heavily than a fundamental right – which smoking is not. Smokers have the right to buy a carton of Luckys, take them home, and smoke them a pack at a time for all I care. But they have no legal entitlement to public places wherein to satisfy their drug habits. Now I'm going to enjoy a nice, smoke-free game of pool at Click's.