Tobacco Companies Blamed For People’s Actions People remain responsible for smoking and should not blame tobacco companies for their own actions. People should take responsibility for their actions and should not blame tobacco companies because of what they did. Tobacco companies cannot tell people in society how many cigarettes people can smoke per day. People are responsible for themselves because tobacco companies cannot follow a person wherever they go to smoke. Tobacco companies only make the product and try to advertise it.
Electronic cigarettes provide the smoker with an experience like cigarette smoking and help smokers to quit more easily. But at the same time a smoker has turned to electronic cigarettes addiction, which does not guarantee the process of quitting nicotine completely that electronic cigarettes do not help people quit smoking. People thought that the e-cigarettes (electronic cigarettes) help smokers to quit smoking, but it is not enough to help them. E-cigarettes and smoking tobacco have the same risks, but it takes long time to see and feel what happen. Doctor Mayo said, “Mayo Clinic doctors don’t recommend e-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking or as a method to stop smoking.
This adds more and more to my reasoning of just banning guns from unworthy people completely. Since the second amendment is not applied daily to all citizens, this indicates it is fully flawed and shouldn’t have to take people dying in order to change our unfair system. Most of the time -if not always- your skin tone defines how situations are handled for you. In certain cases of mercy, colored people don’t get into as much trouble but aside from that, people with a lighter color of skin are found hardly ever guilty of crimes they wrongfully
More specifically, I believe that gun violence will always be an issue whether they are banned or not. If someone plans on hurting someone, they will not care about rules. For example, Guns are very easy for people to buy, but how is the seller going to know what they plan to do with it. It is not like they are going to say that they are going to kill someone with it. Therefore, I conclude that banning guns is not worth it because people who want to use them for negative reasons will even if they are banned.
For example, cigarettes or smoking in general. It affects people who are not even committing the action, but people who are near it. The soda ban should not official because of those bigger problems. Stated in ¨Soda´s a Problem But…¨ on page 288, ¨There are times when the government has to step in on obviously dangerous situations- especially those, such as smoking, that affect the people other than the person whose behavior would be curbed-...¨ (Klein, 289) Furthermore, Cigarettes affect more than one person. The Soda Ban is something we shouldn't be worried about if we have another problem possibly killing someone faster and quickly.
People should be allowed to protect themselves no matter where they are at. A responsible gun carrier could protect the innocent from the violent act of a shooter. A lot of people believe that gun-free zones are safety zones, but families of victims of shooters can disagree. Firearms aren’t the only thing that can be dangerous, yet chemistry majors create explosives without any concern. Guns aren’t the only thing that people should be concerned about, yet they overlook other dangerous factors.
Just the possibility that victims could have been killed in the various fires Abner set, make it enough reason for him to be a public menace. Although I believe my father would never put me in a position like Sarty’s, our morality is something that once it’s taken can never be returned. After someone commits the crime of falsely testifying or lying under oath, their morality becomes diminishes until they have none left. After the first instance, an individual who would falsely testify might feel bad over contributing to the needless suffering of individuals, but they tell their selves that nothing is wrong and that they are only protecting someone else at the price of others. It is this vicious cycle that strips a person of their morality, so if I were ever in a situation where my morality or protecting someone else were the question; my morality would come
People shouldn 't some either of these types of drugs or any other type of drugs so you won 't get any type of disease/sickness.People believe that drugs won 't do anything bad to you but they do and no one seems to care.You should just be drug free to have a healthy life.Its way better to keep away from drugs so you have to worry about getting in trouble by the law.You can go for a run,play with your dog,go for a swim rather then doing drugs.The FDA adminestration tested that most e-cigrattes were toxic with multiple chemicals e-cigrattes even contain nicotine.On the other hand some FDA results claim that e-cigrattes aren 't as bad as regualr cigrattes.The problem of e-cigrattes is going to be handle im court to see if they should ban them
Society today think that just because guns kill a majority of people, if the government bans them, everything in society will be perfect and there won’t be murders or a police officer can always eliminate the danger. These accusations are not true and it’s all based on the place and time. In conclusion, assault weapons should not be banned. Previous bans have not been successful,
America expected to solve these problems by banning alcohol; never did the country expect the problems to worsen. The country was trying to control America’s alcohol problems by law. The ban on alcohol worsened America’s alcohol problem, in fact, it did quite the opposite of its intention. All caused by prohibition, America had an increased crime rate, death rate, and to top it off, America was losing slathers of money.