Assignment Project Three Argument For Project Three You Will

Assignment Project Three Argument For Project Three You Will Write

For Project Three, you are required to write a researched argument paper on a controversial issue. You must choose a specific topic, take a clear position, and aim to persuade your audience to accept or consider the validity of your argument. The paper should be 5-6 pages in length, double-spaced, typed in Times New Roman 12-point font, with one-inch margins, and formatted in MLA style. A minimum of five credible sources must be included in a Works Cited page.

The topic selected for this assignment should be specific and debatable. For example, rather than addressing a broad subject like "smoking," a more precise question such as "Should smokers be allowed to be on lung transplant lists?" is appropriate. The overarching theme for your essay could be whether cigarettes should be legal or not, with a focus on persuading the audience that they should be made illegal.

The essay must present well-researched arguments, include scholarly and credible sources, and conform to the specified formatting and length requirements. Originality and clarity in argumentation, supported by evidence, are essential. Given the strict grading standards of the instructor, extensive experience in academic writing is preferred to ensure quality and adherence to guidelines.

Paper For Above instruction

Cigarettes have been a long-standing controversial topic concerning public health, individual rights, and societal costs. While their legal status remains unchanged in many regions, mounting evidence about their detrimental health effects and social impacts has intensified the debate over whether cigarettes should be banned outright. This paper argues that cigarettes should be made illegal in order to protect public health, reduce societal costs, and promote a healthier future for all citizens.

Firstly, the health consequences of smoking are well-documented. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death worldwide, contributing to diseases such as lung cancer, heart disease, strokes, and chronic respiratory diseases (CDC, 2020). Despite awareness campaigns and public health initiatives, millions of individuals continue to smoke, exposing themselves to severe health risks. The addictive nature of nicotine makes quitting difficult, perpetuating these health hazards and increasing the burden on healthcare systems.

Secondly, the societal costs associated with cigarette smoking extend beyond individual health. Smoking-related illnesses cost billions of dollars annually in medical expenses and lost productivity. The American Lung Association (2021) estimates that smoking-related illness costs the U.S. over $300 billion each year, including healthcare costs and economic losses due to premature deaths. These costs strain publicly funded healthcare services, insurance systems, and economic productivity, implications that justify considering a ban on cigarettes to mitigate these financial burdens.

Moreover, cigarette consumption contributes detrimental environmental effects. The production and disposal of cigarettes result in pollution, including deforestation for tobacco cultivation, chemical runoff, and non-biodegradable cigarette filters littered in public spaces. Studies have indicated that cigarette filters account for a significant proportion of plastic pollution in oceans and waterways (Jahan et al., 2018). Banning cigarettes would help address these environmental concerns while promoting sustainability and ecological health.

Opponents of banning cigarettes often cite personal freedom and individual choice as reasons to maintain legalization. They argue that adults should have the right to make their own decisions, even if those choices are harmful. However, similar to other substances with proven health risks, societal interests and public health policies typically override individual freedoms when the wider community's welfare is at stake. The public health imperative to reduce preventable deaths and healthcare costs outweighs the argument for personal liberty in this case.

Historically, prohibition efforts, such as those for alcohol and certain drugs, have faced challenges, including illegal markets and enforcement issues. Nevertheless, evidence suggests that restricting access to harmful substances leads to reductions in usage and associated harms. Countries that have implemented strict tobacco control policies, including bans, have observed declines in smoking rates and health improvements (World Health Organization, 2019). A comprehensive ban on cigarettes could replicate these benefits on a broader scale.

In conclusion, given the overwhelming evidence of health risks, societal costs, and environmental damage caused by cigarettes, it is justifiable and necessary to make cigarettes illegal. Such a measure would not only save lives and reduce healthcare expenses but also promote environmental sustainability and societal well-being. Policymakers should consider implementing a comprehensive ban on cigarettes to foster healthier populations and a more sustainable environment for future generations.

References

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2020). Smoking & Tobacco Use. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/index.htm
  • American Lung Association. (2021). Tobacco Costs. Retrieved from https://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/economics
  • Jahan, M., et al. (2018). Cigarette Butts: A Systematic Review of Environmental Pollution and Impact. Environmental Pollution, 236, 931-943.
  • World Health Organization. (2019). WHO Global Report on Tobacco Control. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/tobacco/global_report/en/
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2018). Tobacco 21: Raising the Minimum Legal Sale Age for Tobacco Products. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/market-and-distribute-tobacco-product-approvals/tobacco-21

Related Assignments