"No one disputes the evidence [the dangers of "second-hand" smoke...]"
Nobody? I am quite sorry to bust your insulated bubble, but that is a patently false statement. I present you dissent here and here. In addition, I ask you to use a little common sense (if you have any that is, the evidence of it's existence is shakier than that of "global warming," or "second-hand smoke" for that matter...)
We are to believe that casual contact with diluted cigarette smoke is dangerous, even though first hand smoke takes over 40 years or so to kill? Just how much smoke do you think that you are exposed to "second-hand?"
I hate to slap you with a little scientific fact, but researchers have yet to discover the link between smoking and cancer. I do not deny the link, simple observation and anecdotal evidence suggests such a link, but let us be honest here. The debate is far from over.
You do not like cigarette smoke, fine. There are a lot of things that I do not like either. I sure as hell don't go around and use the heavy hand of government to force others to conform to my values. The link to male homosexual sex and various diseases is not in doubt and has cost the government billions of dollars and still counting. Am I to believe that you are about to outlaw that practice? Perish the thought! Fattening foods? Shall we ban alcohol again? If I remember correctly, that policy didn't work to well the first time.
If petty dictators like you spent more time tracking criminals and patching potholes rather than butting your nose where it does not belong, this would be a much better (and freer) country.