MIKE Race objects to the imminent smoking ban on the grounds that tobacco consumption in pubs is a tradition with a 400-year history (Letters, February 27).

So was hanging, drawing and quartering, and most people would surely be relieved that we've seen the back of that.

The consensus of scientific opinion is that you can't get cirrhosis of the liver by keeping me company when I down several large G&Ts, but you can get lung cancer by keeping me company while I work my way through a packet of fags.

The civil liberties argument against banning things only applies when those activities don't directly endanger innocent third parties.

For that reason I wouldn't ban, for example, alcohol consumption, the right to take part in dangerous sports or any form of sexual activity between consenting adults.

But it's perfectly acceptable to ban, say, drink-driving, because its consequences affect other road users besides the drink-driver.

The overwhelming majority believe that smoking falls into the latter category.

And even if you reject the "passive smoking causes cancer" thesis, a smoky atmosphere is still very unpleasant.

I can't wait for the ban to take effect, not least because I'll be able to leave a pub after an hour or two without a sore throat and stinging eyes.

Leo Enticknap,

Ingram House,

Bootham,

York.

Updated: 10:12 Wednesday, March 01, 2006