Argumentative Essay: The Dangers Of Smoking

Americans who had an assault weapon before, will still continue to have it. Banning the assault weapons is just a waste of time because society will continue to do what they do best. It is pleasant to say, the banning of assault weapons will most definitely reduce crime rates. Numbers might not make a drastic difference, but you will be able to see the difference in society. After all of our information we gathered, we can infer assault weapons are very harmful.

Most liberals say that more guns must mean more homicides (The Financial World). Although it may seem like taking guns away from our citizens will stop this problem, it will only worsen it. Think of it like this; if you smoke marijuana regularly, you’re going to find a way to get it, even though it’s illegal. The same goes for guns. If you are willing to

Jean Paul Balzac Ms. Seijo English 10 4 February 2014 Marijuana In 1919, alcohol was made illegal across the United States with the goal to better people’s lives and make society safer. During the fourteen years that the prohibition lasted, crime rate nearly doubled, unemployment rose, and tax revenue decreased. Eventually the ban on alcohol was repealed because of its negative impact on the economy and society. Now fast forward to the year 2015, where a common substance known as marijuana is illegal. It was made illegal in the 1930’s for the same reasons as alcohol, because it was believed that it was going to do harm to society.

(Jordan 1). Secondly not only does it affect smokers but even people who don 't even partake in the activity of smoking cigarettes. Second hand smoke is a serious issue and can cause cancer almost easy as being an actual smoker can. Stanford University had released a study that shows that secondhand smoke exposure levels are very close to the amount of cancerous smoke active smokers are affected by. According to a 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure.

In the E-cigarettes article, the opponent argued that e-cigarettes offer a way to quit smoking tobacco cigarettes. There are one billion people who smoke cigarettes daily. Six million people die every year because of the use of tobacco. Oxford dictionaries states, “When smoking traditional cigarettes, users inhale smoke from the burning

The government argued that Tobacco was a toxic product which caused death when consumed as the companies intended. Statistics from the World Health Organization show that tobacco consumption has caused 3 million deaths in 1990 and it is projected that the number would increase to 10 million in 2030. On the other hand those who oppose the idea felt like the government was taking away their right of free choice, since adults who consume tobacco products understood that the risks of smoking fell on them completely. Another argument in favor of the ban was the fear of governments, that companies were encouraging children and young people to smoke. That was the case for the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company.

In the first 24 hours of the Hiroshima bombing more than 90000 people died from the fires and the initial blast. Just because the bomb has already been dropped the death toll rises everyday because of injuries from the blast and radiation from the bomb. People who live 10 - 15 miles from the drop zone will most likely have health issues and some will die because the radiation doesn't immediately kill you but if you're exposed to it it starts to destroy your insides which makes you extremely and results in a long slow death. Deaths from radiation in Hiroshima are expected to kill another 50000 people over the next decade. One of the reason so many more will die is because there is no hospitals left in the city capable of caring for the now injured and sick In Nagasaki the effects were bad but not nearly as bad as Hiroshima.

Although this wall could potentially stop illegal transactions, and also people fleeing the law, but the “wall” would also prevent millions of tourists, workers, students, entrepreneurs traveling crossing the border everyday, resulting in a social and economic decline. I am not saying the America shouldn 't have borders (similar to the European Union) but that we need better actions to stop the people from entering illegally. I also believe that the amendment 14 should be changed or updated because the amendment was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War. I believe that people from out of the country should have a right to have their kids here, but for those who are not legal citizens and do not hold a visa into the U.S should not be allowed to classify their child as a citizen. In addition I think these decisions should be dealt with by the state not the federal government.

They are paying to hurt themselves, and at that point you really know what you’re doing and why you’re responsible for your actions. Even if the result of this ban is minimal, at least it keeps people protected from themselves for drinking too much soda. All in all, it is mostly companies that want the consumer to keep buying their products so they can make more money. They will pour in millions saying this ban will infringe your consumer freedom and how it keeps the market “unfair”. At the end of the day, the companies don’t care what you do with their product, only what you’ve spent to get it.

Would it still be exciting then? Probably not, considering that you would likely either be dead or very severely injured. Just one battle with a superhero could kill thousands of people and destroy whole cities. We think that the terrorist attacks we have now are horrible. Imagine if we had something worse, something like this, happening every week.