Smokers claim that they have the right to light up wherever they want and any non-smokers that dislike it can walk away. But why should the majority have to please the minority, even when it is proven that the minority's activity is harmful?

Don't forget that non-smokers also have the right to breathe fresh air.

Some argue that the exhaust fumes of private cars are also bad for your health, so why not ban the use of private transport?

The government has tried to tackle this issue by raising tariff duties and introducing regulations to limit toxicity. Also, the quality of fuel has been improving year by year and the fumes are now far less toxic.

But what about cigarettes? The quality of cigarettes has remained as poor as ever. To minimise the hazardous effects on the public, banning smoking is

a must.

This is not discrimination against the minority. It's clear that public health is reasonable justification.

After the ban's been imposed, many smokers have been seeking help to kick their habit.

Smokers and non-smokers should both support

this policy.

Phoenix Lee Ching-Kwan, 18 Tin Ka Ping Secondary School

I don't think it is necessary to have a complete ban on smoking in all public areas. It is without doubt that smoking is harmful to everyone, but when it comes to passing a law, the government should consider the interest of the minority.

Smoking brings about damage to health. Not only are smokers affected but also everyone around them. That's why so many people have been campaigning for the ban for so long.

It seems that the anti-smoking law is justified because it's the will of the public. But what about those who are genuinely in need of tobacco? The elderly make up a large proportion of the smokers in Hong Kong.

Suppose you are one of them, and have been smoking for decades - it's not easy to quit an old habit. A complete ban is too harsh on them.

Smokers are members of society, we should respect their needs.

As for the catering business, liquor and cigarettes are as common as coffee and tea in restaurants. If smoking is banned in those spots, business will be affected.

It is true that smoking is detrimental, but for those who go to bars, does it really matter? Any radical measure will only result in disharmony.

Why don't we consider the smoking ban in public areas transitional? With public education continuing, I believe that the problem of smoking and second-hand smoke can be reduced further. Making Hong Kong a smoke-free city is just a matter of time.