Why stunned? The example would be one of public drunkenness. Do we have a right to stagger around drunk in public? Well, it could be so-argued (and you could probably find a FR libertarian to argue it). But in reality it doesn't seem to violate anybody's legal rights if drunks are instead taken to the tank for the night.
If you enter a privately owned establishment that allows smoking, and then complain because of the "threat" of second-hand smoke, you're responsible for the decision you made to enter in the first place.
Back in the good old days, before the Nanny's were actually taken seriously and freedom still prevailed, nobody wanted an annoying drunk around, especially the other drinkers. This is why barrooms have always had privately-hired bouncers (and/or) the bartender with supreme authority.
And guess what, everyone who drank entered the barroom knowing they might be annoyed by obnoxious drunks, and the free market took care of it by hiring the bouncers. The bartender has in recent years been required by law to perform this duty.
I don't recall any drinkers calling for laws to demand that bars be shut down because some drunks become obnoxious. They know going in that they might encounter the obnoxious types. This is a tacit acknowledgement that they're entering private property, and they accept the conditions.