To the editor:

Is there any logic or common sense behind the appeal that the smoking ban violates a business owner’s constitutional rights? The concept that the smoking ban somehow violates Mr. Steffes’ constitutional rights is absurd. This is equivalent to saying that it is Mr. Steffes’ constitutional right to expose any employee or patron of his businesses to the documented health risks of secondhand smoke. Heck, if you follow this logic, then it would be Mr. Steffes’ constitutional right to serve food that has been stored, prepared and served with unsanitary methods and the laws prohibiting this are also unconstitutional.

It is quite apparent that businesses that can’t adjust to changing customer patterns, codes and laws will go out of business. This is OK. They do not have a constitutional right to be in business; rather, in this great nation they have the opportunity to run a business that complies with national, state and local laws.

The smoking ban is simply common sense. Smoking is still among the top modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease death for men and women in this country. Secondhand smoke is a health hazard, and smoking is not permitted in any other venue where people congregate (i.e., churches, schools, courtrooms, sports stadiums – even those outdoors) so it defies logic that it would be permitted in the bars and restaurants where people congregate.

Dennis Jacobsen,

Lawrence