Month: November 2021
Zabol is a City and the Capital of the Zabol
County within the Sistan and Baluchestan Province of Iran. It is on the eastern border of Iran alongside Afghanistan. Here, around 132,000 live their everyday lives; however, it has greatly been affected by the rise of air pollution. The air has become contaminated by dust coming from the dry grounds. In the 1990s, an impactful drought occured Hamoon Lake, near Zabol. The lake unfortunately dried up due to the Persians changing the land from agricultural land to wasteland.
The aggressive winds, which occur because of the low amount of pressures, are moving the debris into the sky. Along with that, there is an event that occurs within the summer months called the ‘120 days winds’. Here, the winds blow at rates up to one hundred and twenty kilometers per hour for extended periods of time. As a result, huge clouds of dust blow around making it very difficult to breathe. These brutal dust storms affect around forty-three thousand five hundred people living with Zabol. After looking at data, most of the major dust storms are in the summer months: June, July, and August (Miri et al.). Despite that it being so high during the summer months, Persians living in the air experience dust storms year-round.
They also reported that doctors claimed in 2007, “33% of the population (132,000 people) was considered as patients that suffer from respiratory diseases caused by dust storms”. As a result of breathing in the dust, many different respiratory problems like Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease better known as COPD rise in locals. As the problem continues, the number of people it will affect will continue to rise not only in Zabol but around the world. Forty-three thousand five hundred people may not seem like a large out number of people compared to the world population; however, thousands are still becoming extremely sick and even dying because of this.
To put this into perspective, Zabol’s affected population is twice the number of people living in Paducah, Kentucky. That being said, it mainly affects the residences living in Zabol; however, it does affect more than just them. Winds bring polluted air to surrounding areas within Iran. The air, according to a study done by Aeolian Research, “The dust loading was measured using dust traps up to four and eight meters height (with a one-meter distance between the traps) at two locations near the Hamoun basin during the period August 2009 to July 2010” (Miri et al.).
Along with that research, the evidence found said that sixty-one percent of the days tested were at elevated health risks and thirty percent of that amount was also diagnosed as being exceedingly dangerous (Miri et al.). Many residents living here are exposed to a copious amount of health problems due to the harmful particulate matter within the air. As the winds become more intense, it begins to travel to neighboring countries. This problem is not just occuring in Zabol but happening all over the world, even in the United States of America.
Although many places experience air pollution, it can be caused by numerous things. For example, places like Saudi Arabia and India have very bad air quality but for different reasons. Not only does it affect the people on Earth, it as well damages other things we rely on such as farming. The World Meteorological Organization states, these dust storms decrease the percentage of usable crops, escalate erosion, and deprived plant tissues. Not only does it affect farming, it also affects water quality in nearby bodies of water (n.d.).
With the problem of air quality in Zabol, there is not any major environmental conflicts that is causing the air quality to become more hazardous. However, there could be some environmental racism within Iran from countries outside the Middle East. Many countries, including the United States of America, look down upon Iran since numerous countries do not have the best relationship with them. Since the 1900s, the United States of America along with other countries have created an embargo against Iran. These resources that are being cut off could potentially help clean Zabol’s air and help decrease the amount of deaths due to respiratory diseases.
Cite this page
Zabol is a city and the capital of the Zabol. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
The Modernization of Society Influences the Constantly Evolving Problem of Global Pollution
Radioactive pollution is not as common as other pollution but it is very harmful to the environment and people. There are many ways radioactive pollution is formed by humans form inventions we have made. Radioactive pollution is used in many things that are harmful. When radioactive pollution is being caused it could harm people or the environment, which could lead to death or cancer. We breathe in radiation every day but it is not harmful because it’s such a small level of radiation.
There are some radiations that can’t reach us such as cosmic radiation which is in space, but when you're flying in airplane radiation is increasing because you're getting closer to space. Nuclear waste is a liquid substance, when it escapes its canister it kills the environment near it for example if the smallest bit gets on grass some of the grass dies. If an animal gets near it in the environment they could die but if the animal is outside and there is a wall and the nuclear waste is inside the animal is most likely not to get harmed.
We make bombs that have radiation in them that when they blow-up the radiation is carried by the blast wave. Even if the area that got bombed you might still get to live there if you're house didn’t get bombed you can’t live there anymore because of the radiation, neathere can the animals. Since 1945-2017 we have dropped 2,073 bomb tests, keep in mind those are only the tests. If you counted the amount of bombs dropped in war world one there would be way more bombs that were dropped on buildings and people.
We used mountains to store nuclear waste and the nuclear waste we made and that we put in the mountains killed the mountains grass and trees. We build these super harmful weapons that harm people and animals. Bombs are used for one thing but do more than one thing to the environment and people. When bombs blow up this blast wave which is a wave of air that was made when the force of the bomb blows up sends out, but it brings radiation with it which can travel super far.
That radiation travels to homes that were far away from the explosion, so the environment that is miles away gets affected from the blastwave carrying the radiation with it.Pollution around the world has to stop, because it is used for harmful thing such as bombs, and its caused by many thing like nuclear waste. Even how it is so uncommon its is devastating to the world, people, and animals.
Cite this page
The modernization of society influences the constantly evolving problem of global pollution. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Fresh Outdoor Air is Foundational to Everybody’s Well-being
Air quality is more important than what people think it effects the environment and people’s health. The average person inhales about 14,000 liters of air everyday and to have any presence of impure contaminants can affect the nervous system or irritate the eyes, nose, or throat. Individuals with pre-existing health problems such as respiratory or heart conditions are vulnerable. Meaning more hospitalization, lost work days, medical treatments, even premature deaths.
It was such a coincidence after reading the L.A. Gets First Big Smog article my son and I recently moved from Los Angeles a year ago to Murrieta. The air quality Murrieta compared to the rest of the cities I visited I’d say it’s the air quality is above average. In the article I do agree how much smog the city has you wouldn’t be able to see downtown if you’re 15 miles away because of the thick smog. I’ve noticed a big difference on our health since we moved as well, we haven’t gotten sick often and for me personally my skin is clearing up from acne. The outdoor air challenges exist in Murrieta would be the heavy traffic flow that comes through when people go to work.
The factor influences of the air quality in Murrieta from what I’ve seen would be the casinos and winery mainly on the weekends. For the three steps I would propose for reducing air pollution in my region would have to be conserving energy at home, work, everywhere. Decreasing the power plant emissions to burn less coal, crude oil, fossil fuels. Second would have to be the usage of wood for fireplaces and use gas logs instead. I’ve notice this when walking my dog at night of how many people using their fireplaces during these harsh cold nights.
Many people don’t realize how unhealthy whether it is visible or not the amounts of smoke lingering in their living rooms can cause respiratory irritation. Lastly would be to carpool, use public transportation, take a walk or ride a bike. This is something I am personally guilty of and trying to improve myself on. This is what causes the massive amount of stress in our environment, the natural resources, and for the commuters as well. The benefits my region would get after taking these approaches would be the continuation of air quality we already receive.
From the second article Take a deep breath it revealed the possibility Murrieta air quality can end up as the cities they mentioned because of the population is increasing because people see the potential in this area. Better school for their children, safer neighborhoods, and people who had enough of the city are trying to find a better location, but still nearby cities.
Cite this page
Fresh outdoor air is foundational to everybody’s well-being. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Daily Emission of Pollutants into the Atmosphere
This can be done via number of different ways including driving less, driving wisely and using fuel-efficient vehicles. Reducing idling as well as maximizing home deliveries without going to buy from stores each time is another good way to maximize efficacy. If each person can reduce the number of miles he drives the car every day there can be a significant reduction in emitting air pollutants daily by cars only.
This can be done by using public transit like the MARTHA system in Atlanta, MTA in New York. Whenever you can or carpool with colleagues and friends instead of driving alone, rideshare options as well as planning ahead to make most trips in a chain would be a few options you can use to minimize this. And other environmental and health-friendly options like walking or riding a bike is good way to reduce pollution as well as increase individual health. There is a number of bike-share programs in major cities at affordable cost.
For example, people in Atlanta which is considered as the 22nd in the USA for most air polluted city, (Garfield L.) “Relay” bike system is a good option to use over 500 bikes and more than 70 stations over the city of Atlanta. A good community design can enhance the individual’s ability to walk or ride a bike without using a car. Access to sidewalks, good street lamp systems and safety measures all increase the likelihood of people using more walking options in everyday life.
Apart from reducing air pollution it is also increased physical activity, reduced car accidents, lower the stress levels in the body as well as improved savings. Good community design may enhance the feasibility of living within walking distance to work which can reduce traffic and air pollution vice versa. Longer commute time can increase blood sugar levels, cholesterol levels, blood pressure as well as increased risk of anxiety depression and social isolation.
There can be so many options you can do to increase wise and efficient driving. It is said aggressive driving wastes more gas whereas driving efficiently which can be done with the help of feedback devices helps to increase the fuel economy by 3%and can save the fuel by about 10%. (Institute of transportation studies.) And, the gas mileage usually shows optimal fuel economy at certain speed levels and after that it decreases rapidly, so we must pay more money if we are speeding more, so maintaining the speed levels may help to increase fuel efficiency and another safety method.
Avoid hauling cargo and reducing the excess weight is other two ways which we can increase fuel efficiency. Using cruise control if its available in your car is another way to reduce waste by maintaining constant speed in highways. Maintaining your car and get regular tune-ups and maintenance schedule improves the condition of the car and fuel efficiency. Using fuel-efficient cars with low greenhouse gas emissions can be another solution for reduction of air pollution. Electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel vehicles, cleaner-burning gasoline vehicles are some of the different options available.
Researching EPA’s Green vehicle guide would be a good option before buying a new car to minimize pollution and maximize efficiency. (Green vehicle guide) Unnecessary idling causes emission of air pollutants more and causes fuel waste and excessive engine wear. Especially in school buses which use diesel, emissions can be dangerous to children. EPA’s clean bus program includes information and resources that can help you to reduce the ways to idling in the community. (Clean school bus idle reduction) Maximizing home deliveries with minimal packages and in one shipment is a good way to reduce the number of trips to stores and number of delivery visits. And scheduled home deliveries are a good option with a flexible longer time windows, to avoid unnecessary extra trips.
Cite this page
Daily emission of pollutants into the atmosphere. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
A Review of Air Pollution and its Impact on the Environment
What is Particulate Matter?
Particulate matter (PM) or aerosols, most ranging from between 2.5 and 10 micrometers in diameter, have many sources and can be anthropogenic or naturally occurring. Some examples include marine aerosols like salt, mineral dust from agricultural practices, biological particles such as microorganisms and their spores and pollen, wood combustion for residential heating, and transport-related aerosols (Fuzzi et al., 2015). The latter will be the focus of this section.
Composition and concentration of anthropogenic PM
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website, www.airnow.gov, anthropogenic sources of PM2.5 (considered fine particles) are generally produced from all types of combustion including motor vehicles, power plants, and residential heating. Human-produced PM10 (considered coarse dust particles) are associated with airborne residue from rock and mineral processing operations like the mining and transport of coal.
In the urban setting, concentrations of PM emissions tend to spike during the morning and evening rush hours when modes of transportation reach their zenith (Fuzzi et al., 2016). The combustion of diesel fuel and its byproducts mixing with exhaust gas is a major contributor of sulfur (SO2 & SO3) emissions into the atmosphere (Merkisz et al., 2002). sulfuric oxides and heavy metals such as Pb, Ni, Zn, and Cu are known to be primary sources of PM2.5 in a region of Finland where copper, nickel, and industrial fertilizers are produced (Eeva et al., 1998). In their 2005 global update, the World Health Organization published a PM2.5 exposure guideline of 25 ?g/m3/d and a guideline of 50 ?g/m3/d of PM10.
PM impacts on fauna
Airborne heavy metal pollution from an industrial copper and nickel smelter affected populations of lichens, mosses, pine trees, and the bird species Parus major L. (P. major) in the coniferous forests of southwest Finland. The study found a significant reduction in the density of green caterpillars and sawfly larvae, the birds’ primary food source, nearest the smelter. This set off a chain reaction within the P. major population as their characteristic bright yellow plumage began to fade. Dulling of plumage led to increased competition for brightly colored mates and consequently produced faded coloring in the nestlings. In addition to disruptions to the mating/offspring cycles, male-male competition, battles for social dominance, and the decreased ability to use crypticism in avoiding predators may be attributed to PM pollution. Conditions slowly improved as radial distance from the smelter increased (Eeva et al., 1998).
PM pollution studies carried out on mice and metropolitan transportation emissions have produced startling results in the area of reproductive cycles. As Carré et al. writes, “Two studies were carried out on mice in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil, which has a high level of air pollution. Mohallem et al. found a significant reduction in the number of newborns per mouse and a significant increase in the embryo implantation failure rate in female mice exposed as newborns for 3 months to the city polluted air and then mated with non-exposed males as adults” (Carré et al., 2017, p.2).
The other study in Sao Paulo was conducted by Veras et al. They found, in adult mice exposed to urban traffic pollution (PM2.5) compared to mice exposed to filtered air, significantly more time was needed to mate, decreased number of pregnant females as a percentage of total number of females, and an increased occurrence of spontaneous abortion (Carré et al., 2017). The pollution pathology is a bit unclear but the work of Maluf et al. may shed some light in this case. Carré writes of their work, “...they [Maluf et al.] did observe a significant effect of PM2.5 exposure on the cell lineage allocation at the blastocyst stage between inner cell mass (ICM i.e. cells participating in the ontogeny of the future fetus) and trophectoderm (TE i.e. cells participating in the ontogeny of the future placenta)” (2017, p. 5). Cells in ICM were greatly decreased and cells in TE greatly increased in the mice exposed to urban automobile pollution. The opposite is expected for healthy pregnancy.
Impacts on the climate system
Light absorbing PM has been identified as a major climate warming agent, second only to carbon dioxide (Bond et al., 2013; IPCC, 2013). Carbon-rich soot particles from industrial and residential combustion have been shown to increase warm and mixed-phase cloud development (and therefore drizzle and rain development) and negatively modify the ability of clouds to reflect incoming solar radiation back into space. These dark colored aerosols transfer solar radiation into the atmosphere increasing its thermal energy and gather in concentrations dense enough to produce an apparent dimming effect of the sun’s visible light (Fuzzi et al., 2015).
What is Tropospheric Ozone?
While it is a naturally occurring greenhouse gas with dense concentrations located in the Earth’s Stratosphere, the focus of this section will be the ozone appearing in the lower Troposphere of our atmosphere. Ozone is most commonly emitted from automobile exhaust and is the main component of smog. Other sources of tropospheric ozone include biomass burning, chemical manufacturing, and fossil fuel combustion (Logan, 1983). Tropospheric ozone formation is the result of complex chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide and is driven by exposure to sunlight. It forms most frequently on the sunny, hot days of summer when the sinking air of high pressure prevents atmospheric mixing (Mauzerall and Wang, 2001). According to its website, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently set new, strict standards for ozone exposure to not exceed 0.070 ppm average per 8-hour period. This is the second standards revision since 1997.
On crop yields
Most crops around the world are grown in the late-spring through summer months. As ozone concentration peaks during this time, it is more reason to consider crop damage by O3. Studies conducted in the United States and Europe are progressing our understanding of the physiological mechanisms and effects of ozone pollution on crops. In both studies, a variety of common crops including beans and wheat were grown in open-top chambers to allow for control and monitor of O3 levels.
In the US, the results were varied based on the plant tested. According to Heck, soybean yields decreased by 40% when exposed to O3 concentrations of 70-90 ppb. However, broccoli yields appeared unaffected when exposed to 63 ppb of O3 (Heck, 1989). This seemed to indicate different crops have ranging levels of natural sensitivities to O3 exposure. The times of day when experiments were being conducted were of special note as 8:00am-8:00pm is when the leaf stomata remain open and gas exchange between the atmosphere and crops is maximized (Lee and Hogsett, 1999).
In Europe, studies included crops such as barley, beans, wheat, and even grazing pasture and exposure methods were the same as previous studies. A cumulative reduction in crop yields was observed over the exposure threshold of 30-40 ppb per hour during daylight hours (Fuhrer, 1994). It was noted that environmental factors tend to play a role in O3 uptake in sensitive plants including soil moisture, temperature, and vapor pressure deficit (Grunhage et al., 2001). At the time of publication, Mauzerall and Wang report no Asian government had yet to undertake an organized effort to study the effects of O3 concentrations on crops (2001).
On temperate forests
Aerodynamically speaking, forests are rough terrestrial surfaces where large amounts of mass, heat, and atmospheric gases exchange by frictional drag (Fowler et al., 1999). These take place by an order of magnitude or more than over lands covered in grasses. With such concentrations of O3 potentially harming crops which tend to be short in stature, it is valid to wonder if the taller, more exposed trees of the world’s forests are also susceptible. According to Lapinski et al., “in the mountains near Los Angeles, millions of ponderosa pines have been severely damaged by ozone pollution” (361).
Just as in the crops studies, it seems degree of O3 effects on trees depend on the sensitivity of each species. The free-air O3 exposure experiments conducted by Matyssek et al. showed a higher level of ozone sensitivity in pioneer trees than in climax species, although variations may exist within different genotypes of the same species (2010). In Open-top chambers where the concentrations of O3 are controlled and monitored, there is noticeable impact in the trees of the temperate forest (Skarby et al., 1998). In their study, Karenlampi and Skarby used an O3 concentration of 40 ppb because it has become a benchmark in developing a dose-effect relationship in biomass yield (1996). “Elevated ozone levels reduce the supply of carbohydrates to roots reducing their biomass”, (Bytnerowicz et al. 441). Grulke noted a similar danger to that of the crop studies in that toxic levels of O3 exposure directly impair stomatal function diminishing regulation of water loss in trees (2010). If current trends in ozone formation and concentration continue, Fowler et al. predict nearly half of the world’s forests will be exposed to phytotoxic levels of O3 by the year 2100 (1999).
More study is needed to more fully establish the links between biotic infections and climatic factors and O3 uptake and defense in conifers.
On boreal forests and possible mitigation
A team of Finnish researchers tested two native European species of aspen trees and eight hybrid clones and their response to ozone exposure. These trees are typically found in the boreal and temperate seasonal forests or northern and central Europe and central Russia. Free-oxygen generated the ozone compound used in testing. Fumigation of trees in the field ran 24 hours a day except in very high or very low winds, in heavy rain, or if the ambient ozone concentration was greater than 10 ppb. Two hybrid aspen species experienced decreased leaf-level net photosynthesis by 40% early in the growing season as a result of elevated ozone exposure. The hybrid clones were the most ozone-tolerant. Researchers suggest cross-breeding ozone sensitive species with tolerant clones as a way to mitigate O3 damage in the boreal and temperate forest tree population. Researchers found no changes in total biomass as a result of ozone exposure in either native or hybrid aspens (Häikiö et al., 2007).
On pollinators
A team of researchers at the University of Virginia used the behaviors of bees combined with historical ozone data to model how air pollution could be impacting floral pollination. Computer simulations run with this data modeled a sharp decrease in the distance floral scents travel compared to the 1840s (Mitchell, 2008). Under historic conditions, researchers found only 20% of scents would have been altered by air pollution and could have been picked up by pollinators for kilometers around (Fuentes et al., 2008). Modeling the conditions of many of today’s urban centers where air pollution consisting of hydroxyl radicals, nitrate radicals, and ozone can reach concentrations of 120 ppb by volume, Fuentes et al. report a meager 25% of floral scents would survive past 300 meters downwind. This is likely impacting bees’ ability to find and pollinate flowers as they use both sight and scent during daylight hours to pollinate. Moths, however, are expected to be most negatively affected as they only use scent because they are nighttime pollinators (Fuentes et al., 2008).
Connection to climate change
A survey of available literature indicates there is a connection between carbon monoxide and climate change (Ramanathan and Feng, 2009). While not a greenhouse gas, CO is considered a chemical precursor and a secondary climate forcing agent (AMS, 2016). In the late 70s, Weng et al. were the first to discover the roles methane and nitrous oxide played as greenhouse gases (1976). Carbon monoxide chemically reacts in the atmosphere with methane and other trace gases (AMS, 2016). This increases lower tropospheric ozone which is a primary warming agent of the lower atmosphere. Air pollution like CO and nitrous oxides are important contributors to global warming due to these atmospheric interactions (Fishman et al., 1980). Sources of carbon monoxide include biomass and fossil fuel combustion (AMS, 2016).
On animals
Carbon monoxide is known to bind to hemoglobin cells in blood. Hemoglobin is responsible for carrying oxygen in the body via red blood cells. If hemoglobin is carrying carbon monoxide, it can’t carry oxygen through the the bloodstream which can stress the heart and cause headaches (Lapinski et al. 360). Animals can be affected by air pollution in the same way humans can. Animals can suffer from such symptoms as lung and eye irritation, cancer, bronchitis and , at high levels, even death (Lapinisk et al. 361).
Cite this page
A Review of Air Pollution and its Impact on the Environment . (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
How Pollution Can be Reduced to Limit its Health Effects
Despite the provisional solutions initiated in order to solve environmental matters, indelible consequences linger and will impair the health of civilians presently and in the future. As time progresses and the effects become more prevalent, one may question ways in which pollution can be reduced to limit its impact on public health. In the future, physicians, epidemiologists (those who study disease within a population), and exposure scientists (those who study synthetic, natural, and biological agents in the environment), must collaborate effectively in order to protect individuals from unfavorable health complications (Landrigan).
Although past research has led to recent advancements in pollution, future investigations will introduce solutions in hopes that the insidious effects of pollution on public health and the environment will be answered, as well as further experimented. Essentially, improvements are illustrated when referring to the general public’s knowledge of pollution because there is a strong foundation when it comes to historical research. Dr. Pamela Das, senior executive editor of The Lancet, a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal, and Richard Horton, University of Birmingham graduate and editor-in-chief of The Lancet, express their concerns for the contaminated environment within the past century, attributing it to industrialization, urbanization, and globalization.
Portrayed by Barbara Mantel, holder of a Bachelor’s degree in history and economics, her scholarly work illustrates that during the mid 19th Century, U.S. factories were powered by steam engines running on coal, used to generate electricity. Although these occurrences led to greater productivity and extensive technological advancements, many of the enhancements were succeeded by illnesses including cardiovascular diseases, lung cancer, and asthma, exemplified by a peer-reviewed, academic journal published by the Public Library of Science (Pimpin et al.). This is because the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal, led and continue to lead to toxic amounts of carbon dioxide emission and other pollutants in the air (Mantel). Similarly, Philip Landrigan, creator of The Lancet Commission, established to express pollution and health risks after merging ideas between
The Lancet, the Global Alliance on Health and Pollution, and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, states that pollution caused by industrial discharge, such as nonrenewable fuel emission and toxic chemicals, has increased in the past one hundred years and will continue to in rapidly expanding countries. Because of these historical findings, the State News Service, a Board of Directors, entailing journalism professionals, faculty and students of Michigan State University and the EPA, claims there will be a need for supplemental physicians due to a rise in hospital and emergency room admissions for heart attacks, strokes, and respiratory issues in the future (“Air Pollution: Current”; “Air Pollution Reduces”). In addition to public health, the environment is heavily affected by pollution.
Exemplified clearly by Jill U. Adams, a science journalist and academic journal contributor, the world will have a massive predicament if pollution’s effects continue to worsen. In the near future, if air, water, and chemical pollution, to list a few, are not addressed, there will be severe consequences. This is because toxic gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen dioxide will lead to environmental changes such as drought and climate shifts (Adams; Pimpin). As a result, there will be dramatic effects on food supply.
This includes decreases in crop yields due to temperature variations, as well as soil erosion leading to reliance on agronomists, or crop production experts, and less farmland available to grow much-needed produce. Nevertheless, the scare amount of food supplied to civilians will be encompassed by pollutants that are simply unhealthy for all living species. Currently, Adams claims pollution kills over three million civilians per year, supported by the States News Service exemplifying that life expectancy is down 1.8 years due to air pollution.
Based on these findings, lifespans are going to continue to decrease as times progress and globally, populations will decrease drastically. Inclusively, revealed in “Pollution and Global Health-An Agenda for Prevention”, by Philip Landrigan, pollution has and will continue to ravage the earth's ecosystem and endanger the continuity of the human species. Regardless of the many efforts to reverse the repercussions of pollution, long-term consequences damage the health of many. With help from organizations that have attempted to coordinate with federal agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to illustrate its importance on the world in which civilians live.
The EPA, an objective, official association run by the United States government, conveys the vast issues surrounding pollution within the world, specifically the United States. Presently, pollution in the U.S. far surpasses air quality standards for many common pollutants, displayed by doctor and epidemiologist Laura Pimpin, and many others. These pollutants include fine particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide, found not only in toxic fertilizers, but the air society breathes (Pimpin et al.). Because of these uncontrolled amounts of pollution in the air, it is no surprise that there are more than 88,000 deaths per year in the United States due to fine particulate matter air pollution exposure (“Your Heart”). Unfortunately,
The Lancet Commission states that the US Government's Environmental Protection Agency is failing to established ancillary environmental regulations for the future (Das and Horton). If agencies, such as the EPA, receive more financial backing, however, they can regulate an abundant amount of laws and baselines for states to follow. Decreasing the amount of air pollution in the environment by receiving proper funding is key because there are major assets at stake, such as quality of life, if the circumstances are not altered for future generations (Pimpin et al.). Beyond the past and present, future methods of prevention will make pollution more easily detectable and avertable.
Due to the extensive effects, innovators, scientists, and environmental organizations must be vigilant in order to determine solutions for this epidemic. Encompassed in the article “Your Heart Hates Air Pollution; Portable Filters Could Help.”, medical experts and exposure scientists like Robert Brook, a cardiovascular specialist at the University of Michigan Frankel Cardiovascular Center, state that designers have created an inexpensive, portable air purifier used indoors that is powerful enough to accumulate an exceptional portion of the extremely small particles and remove them from the air. Additionally,
The Journal of the American Medical Association found that three days of using a low-cost air purifier in a home decreased fine particulate matter exposure by forty percent (qtd. in “Your”). Although the experiment was conducted in an area that met with the air particulate standards, results are still promising in heavily polluted locations, as well. Furthermore, to combat pollution outdoors, International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health professionals, such as Mawutor Nyarku, share that mobile phones are the most logical choice for exposure monitoring because people carry them virtually everywhere.
After laboratory and safety evaluations were conducted, researchers found that the phone could be useful as an alarm in very high concentrations outdoors in order to detect unsafe emissions, shown in their scholarly work. Definitively, low-cost air purifiers could be used indoors while mobile devices could be used outdoors, leading to cleaner air and more knowledge on a specific area (Nyarku et al.; 'Your heart”). Additionally, to hinder pollution further, environmentalists desire cleaner, natural gases and zero-emissions solar and wind power to do away with coal-fired electricity plants by 2030 (Mantel). Conclusively, with less particulate matter, air purifiers can put a civilian at a lower risk of becoming ill or developing cancer because research links this toxic air directly to the two (Pimpin et al.; “Your Heart”).
Pollution is clearly preventable if these precautions are taken seriously. Advancements in pollution can be obtained because there is a sufficient amount of information, government-led programs, and environmentally-friendly technologies. Although future research supports decreasing survival rates if a massive transformation is not made, equipment that is currently in the beginning phases, such as screening and monitoring devices, can be the answer. The public should continue examination for unregulated particulate matter with contemporary equipment until pollution is a story of the past.
Cite this page
How pollution can be reduced to limit its health effects. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Present Scenario of Air Pollution in Dhaka City: a Burning Issue
- 1. Introduction
- 2. AQI (Air Quality Index)
- 3. State of Global Air 2019
- 4. CASE PROJECT
-
5. Reasons for air pollution
- 5.1 Traffic Jam and Vehicular emission
- 5.2 Dust pollution and Particulate Matter
- 5.3 Population
- 5.4 Brick kiln industry
- 5.5 Industrial emission
- 5.6 The burning of fossil fuels
- 5.7 Indoor and Outdoor Air Pollution
- 5.8 Seasonal impact on air pollution
- 5.9 Depletion of the Ozone layer, Global Warming, and Climate change
- 5.10 Smoking
- 5.11 Pollution from Air Conditioners
- 5.12 Natural sources of air pollution
- 5.13 Deforestation
- 5.14 Mining operations
- 5.15 Waste
- 6. Health Effects
- 7. Environmental Effects
- 8. Conclusion
- Bibliography
Not only the capital city,Dhaka is also the center point of business activities in Bangladesh. For this, people from all over this country always look forward to shift here. The population of Dhaka is increasing tremendously every year, it is recorded as one of the most populous cities in the world and therefore it is almost impossible to maintain a clean and sustainable environment.
Dhaka has positioned top several times among cities with worse air quality index (AQI) that indicating very unhealthy environment. Urbanization, industrialization, and motorization cover the significant part of the total percentage of air pollution. This paper investigates on the data of population increasement, harmful emissions from brick kilns and other industries, registered and unregistered vehicles, different significant polluting agents such as CO (Carbon Monoxide), Pb (Lead), PM2.5 (Particular Matter), PM10 (Particular Matter), CO2 (Carbon Dioxide), NOx (Nitrogen oxides), SO2 (Sulfur Dioxide), O3 (Ozone), HC (Hydrocarbon) for the last ten years. By analyzing this information the result describes how the air pollution has become a notable reason for the rising mortal rate in Bangladesh. This paper explores the existing quality of air and the effects of pollution in Dhaka city.
1. Introduction
The current population of Bangladesh is around 160 million, equivalent to 2.11% of the total world population [1]. Being the center of economic, cultural, and academic activities, air pollution is the greatest among all cities in this extremely populated nation. As stated in the ‘Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics 2014’, among all the densely populated cities in the world, Dhaka ranks four having a population density of about 28,000/ km². At present, it has become an unacceptable place to live in for the highest air pollution, and according to AirVisual, Dhaka has been ranked one of the leading towns owning the most polluted air in the world [2] Numbers of deaths in Bangladesh due to air pollution from 2000 to 2017 is shown in Fig.1.
Following Worldatlas, Bangladesh ranks 6th position for the premature pollution-related deaths per year, and 207,922 deaths take place concerning this issue [4]. An estimation declared air pollution to be the reason for the death of seven million lives worldwide every year [5].
2. AQI (Air Quality Index)
Air Quality Index delivers information on air quality daily of any city or country. How clean or polluted the air is, and the associated health concerns can be predictable from AQI data [6].
3. State of Global Air 2019
The report “State of Global Air 2019” states that “Air pollution is the 3rd leading risk factor for mortality in Bangladesh, accounting for approximately 14% of deaths (123,000) in 2017 alone.” Individually, household air pollution and outdoor air pollution are ranked as the 4th and 8th leading risk factors [7]. Around 72% of national household use solid fuel, which contribute to air pollution [8]. It is also reported there are ten major risk factors for death and disability in Bangladesh in 2017 and air pollution is one of them.
4. CASE PROJECT
To observe major air pollutants which are Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Ozone, Sulfur Dioxide, PM10, and PM2.5 and generate real-time air quality data was the main objective of this prolonged project. The data includes air quality index by developing 11 Continuous Air Quality Monitoring Stations (CAMS) installed in Dhaka, Narayanganj, Gazipur, Chittagong, Rajshahi, Khulna, Barisal, and Sylhet [8][9]. The project focused on two components-Environment by addressing emissions from brick kilns, and Transport by including traffic management and engineering issues to regulate emissions [8].
5. Reasons for air pollution
In a report of the ‘1st National Conference on Environmental Health’ by Akhtar Ahmed, held in Bangladesh in the year 2002, revealed that the factors behind air pollution in Bangladesh are different automobiles, industrial emissions, bad civic practices along with underprivileged government services [10].
5.1 Traffic Jam and Vehicular emission
According to Bangladesh Road and Transport Authority (BRTA), each year almost 37,000 cars are added in Dhaka, of which 80% are private cars. Nearly 10% of Dhaka’s commuters own one private car, which is increasing every day [11]. There were 1 million registered motor vehicles in September 2016 in Greater Dhaka. And 400,000 unregistered motor vehicles are also running on the roads of Dhaka [12]. In Table.1 some data of the total numbers of different types of vehicles in Dhaka from 2015 to 2019 is shown.
Traffic jam shares 58.6% and industrial sources release 15.7% of the total annual NOx emissions. And CO emissions from automobiles share 40.5% of the total CO emissions, while 27.1% from fossil fuels, 16.4% from brick kilns and other industries [14].
5.2 Dust pollution and Particulate Matter
Air pollution is characterized by the presence of PM in atmospheric air. Particles float in the air, caused by dust and combustion, is known as suspended Particulate Matter (SPM), a significant reason for air pollution [15].
Substances of 10 micrometers in size or smaller (gas and solid) are Particulate Matters PM10. These substances are severe health hazards. Annually each brick kiln emits 83 tons, steel re-rolling mills 17 tons, cement factory 130 tons, and ceramic factory emits 20 tons of PM10 [8]. In Fig.2, PM quantity in some countries (India, Pakistan, China, Australia and USA) are compared with that of Bangladesh showing that the PM quantity is always greater than any other country shown here.
5.3 Population
The people should be treated as the asset of any country. But in Bangladesh, it has been considered as one of the greatest problems which is getting worsen day by day. The total population of Bangladesh is almost 160 million (160,000,000) and nearly 10 million people live only in Dhaka [17]. In Fig.3 the increasement of population in Bangladesh from 2008 to 2019 is shown.
The area of Bangladesh is 147,570 km². It can be seen that around 6.25% of the total population are living in Dhaka. Total land area of Gazipur (1,806.36 km²) is greater than that of Dhaka (1464 km²) but the population is very much high in Dhaka district (10,356,500) in comparison with Gazipur (3809000). The population density is very much high in Dhaka than any other cities Bangladesh. Lack of awareness, illiteracy, preconception, the expectation of male child and many other reasons are behind the high growth of the population in Bangladesh.
5.4 Brick kiln industry
Brick kiln industry is the biggest source of air pollution in Bangladesh. There are almost 7900+ brick kilns in Bangladesh and around 1000 kilns are only in Dhaka [8]. Most them use coal and wood as the major sources of energy consistently producing black smoke having Particulate Matter, oxides of Carbon and Sulfur, and volatile organic compounds [19]. Fig.4 shows that every year in Bangladesh, Carbon Doxide emission has been increasing in a linear pattern.
The energy-efficient kilns are hybrid Hoffman, and tunnel kiln should be used to reduce harmful emissions. As reported in Sustainable and Energy Efficient Brick Production Roadmap in Bangladesh, in 2019, 91% of bricks produced in Bangladesh are made using highly polluting traditional firing technology, Fixed Chimney and zig-zag [21]. And in 2018, the overall percentage changed in 70% zig-zag kiln, 28% Fixed Chimney, and 2% modern technology [21]. Each year around 100 million tonnes of topsoil was used to manufacture 25 billion pieces of conventional clay bricks resulting in 20 million tonnes of Carbon Dioxide annually as a byproduct. Moreover, the Brick Production and Brick Kiln Building (Control) Act 2013, was amended in 2019. The DoE says 71.64% brick kiln use technology that reduces emissions [8].
5.5 Industrial emission
Various industrial processes like petroleum refineries discharge a large amount of Carbon Monoxide, nitrous oxide, hydrocarbons, organic compounds, and chemicals into the air. [4]. Bangladeshi leather industries were set up mainly in Hazaribagh, located southwestern of the capital city Dhaka enlisted as one of the top ten most polluted places in the world [22][23]. Almost every leather tannery uses metal-containing chemicals in the process of converting animal hides into leather [24].
5.6 The burning of fossil fuels
The combustion of fossil fuels like coal, Petroleum and other factory combustibles results in emitting Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides and so on. The consumption of natural gas and primary energy is shown in Fig.5, natural gas covers the maximum percentage of the total energy consumption. The poisonous, odorless and colorless gas, Carbon Monoxide is emitted from vehicles resulting from improper combustion.
Generating electricity in power plants has a role in polluting air as mechanical power is acquired from the burning of fossil fuels to produce electrical power.
5.7 Indoor and Outdoor Air Pollution
Each year, almost 3.8 million premature deaths are triggered by indoor air pollution and the vast majority of them is in the developing world [27]. Burning of kerosene, wood, coal, and other fossil and biomass-based fuels produce Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, Methane, volatile biological compounds, ash, smoke, which make breathing difficult, can stick to walls, food, clothing and contaminate air inside the house [28]. Outdoor pollution is linked to power generation, industries, building heating systems, and vehicles. High PM10 level is one of the leading causes of respiratory diseases [29]. Both the indoor and outdoor air pollution are responsible for deaths in Bangladesh which is shown in Fig.6.
5.8 Seasonal impact on air pollution
In Bangladesh, Air Quality Standards have been set out for CO, Pb, NOX, SPM, PM10, PM2.5, O3 and SO2. In Dhaka, the concentration of Particulate Matter in the dry season has found to exceed NAAQS for more than 100 days of a year. [32]. Continuous Air Quality Monitoring Stations (CAMS) represents that PM10 and PM2.5 are the most critical pollutants that generally exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) during the dry season. Dhaka suffers air quality of below standard during particular days of this season, especially from November to March.
5.9 Depletion of the Ozone layer, Global Warming, and Climate change
Greenhouse gases like Carbon Dioxide, Methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases are the catalysts of global warming. The concentration of these gases in the atmosphere, mainly Dioxide of Carbon, increases on average by 1% per year [34]. Industries and factories release CFCs, Bromine, Chlorine which causes depletionof the Ozone layer, which protects of the earth from direct sunlight and Ultraviolet (UV) Rays and helps to filter the excess harmful radiation into it. Annual Greenhouse gas emission has been increased in a linear way from 2000 to 2012, which is shown in Fig.7.
5.10 Smoking
Smoking releases Carbon Dioxide, Methane and other chemicals that cause air pollution. Annually around 2.6 billion kgs of Carbon Dioxide and 5.2 billion kgs of Methane are released globally [35]. Tobacco smoke contains up to 40 carcinogens, a fatal form of air pollution [36]. Tobacco farms also emit harmful gases from the machines used there by burning the fossil fuels. A nonsmoker can be the patient of respiratory diseases if he stays very close to a smoker for an extended period. Percentage of smokers in Bangladesh of different ages from 1990 to 2016 is shown in Fig.8.
Smoke can also be absorbed into bedding, carpet and furniture in a house leading to a variety of breathing and health concerns in the home [38].
5.11 Pollution from Air Conditioners
Air conditioners can be a secondary reason of air pollution. There are a lot of refrigerant gases used to run refrigerators and air conditioners and some of them are CFC, HCFC, HFC and so on, some are responsible for the depletion of the Ozone layer. [39].
5.12 Natural sources of air pollution
Natural events that pollute the air include volcanic eruptions, forest fires, wind erosion, evaporation of organic compounds, pollen dispersal, dust storms, and natural radioactivity, and many others.
5.13 Deforestation
By cutting down trees and firing wood in a large amount, the percentage of oxygen reduces and the Carbon Dioxide and Carbon Monoxide increases, eventually results in deforestation and global warming [26].
5.14 Mining operations
The minerals are extracted from the surface ground using large equipment releasing harmful substances in the air. Mercury is released from goldmines which can be the reason for lung cancer and Petroleum release a great portion of nitrous oxide and Carbon Dioxide. [15].
5.15 Waste
Open waste burning and organic waste in landfills release destructive dioxins, furans, Methane, and fine Particulate Matter (PM) like Black Carbon (BC) in the environment. Almost 40% of waste is openly burned all over the world.
6. Health Effects
Among the top 10 diseases which cause death in Bangladesh, it relates five to air pollution - lung cancer 13%, lower respiratory tract infections 7%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 7%, ischemic heart disease 6%, and stroke 5% [8]. Both ambient and indoor air pollution alone causes about 21 percent of all deaths in Bangladesh, the highest among South Asian countries [40]. Short-term effects like irritation of eyes, throat, or skin, allergies, coughing, sneezing, high fever, asthma, dizziness, conjunctivitis, fatigue, anxiety nausea, and headache can be seen due to dust pollution.
Dust mixed germs and metals cause diseases like lung cancer, asthma, bronchitis, dermatitis, pneumonia, tuberculosis, kidney damage, high blood pressure, nervous system damage, damage to reproductive organs, birth defects, etc. Irritating and bad smells in factories, garbage, sewer systems are also unpleasant. Skin cancers from Radon exposure, as well as secondhand and thirdhand smoke, vision problems, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), abnormality in the mental development of the child are also seen.
Each year around 2.5 million people die globally due to air pollution. Young children, older adults, pregnant women, and the sick should avoid exposure to air pollution due to having a weaker immune system [34][28]. Researchers declared relationship between the increase of polluting particles in cities and the thickening of the internal wall of the arteries or atherosclerosis [34]. Some of them have found that long-term exposure to air pollution is associated with lower scores on tests of mental acuity as provokes modifications in brain structure that resemble those of Alzheimer’s disease. Again, PM 2.5 is associated with increased brain atrophy. [41]
7. Environmental Effects
Like other types of pollution such as water pollution and soil pollution, air pollution has also its negative consequence on environment.
7.1 Ecosystem
Air pollution includes some microscopic particles and toxic pollutants which directly contaminate the water and soil surface damaging the sea animals, reduction in growing crops, demolition of young trees and other plants take place in great numbers, even force wildlife species to shift to a new place which disturbs the ecosystem, including photosynthesis.
7.2 Acid Rain
The land pollution due to acid rain is a huge threat for maintaining the quality of the grown crops as it changes the soil composition; degrades water quality in rivers, lakes and streams; damages crops affecting food chains; and can cause buildings and monuments to decay [28].
8. Conclusion
A brief explanation of how the population, excessive vehicles in Dhaka, Brick kilns and other industries, and other sources are contributing major portion of polluting agents to the environment for the last couple of years is given in this paper. The explanation with the corresponding figures clearly shows that air pollution in Dhaka is increasing destructively every year. This is a great threat to the people of Dhaka city. This increasing air pollution results in various health effects and environment instability as well as damaged ecosystem.
Bibliography
- 'Bangladesh,' [Online]. Available: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/Bangladesh-population/.
- 'Explore the air quality anywhere in the world,' Careers, Sitemap, [Online]. Available: https://www.iqair.com/.[Accessed13April2020]
- Number of deaths from air pollution,' Our World in Data, [Online]. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/air-pollution-deaths-country?tab=chart&country=BGD.[Accessed 25 March 2020].
- V. Kiprop, 'Countries Suffering From The Most Pollution-Related Deaths,' 8 January 2020.[Online].Available:https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-suffering-from-the-most-pollution-related-deaths.html. [Accessed 13 April 2020].
- Air pollution:Overview, 'Air pollution:Overview,' [Online]. Available: https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution#tab=tab_1.
- 'About Air Quality Index (AQI),' [Online]. Available:http://case.doe.gov.bd/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9&Itemid=31. [Accessed 5 April 2020].
- 'State of Global Air 2019,' Health Effects Institute, Boston MA, 2019.
- M.A.Amin,'https://www.Dhakatribune.com/Bangladesh/2019/11/07/what-is-Bangladesh-doing-to-combat-air-pollution,' Dhaka Tribune, 07 November 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.Dhakatribune.com/Bangladesh/2019/11/07/what-is-Bangladesh-doing-to-combat-air-pollution.
- 'Air Pollution in Dhaka, Bangladesh: Real-time Air Quality monitoring project,' [Online]. Available:https://aqicn.org/country/Bangladesh/#footnote-1. [Accessed 25 January 2020].
- S. A. I. Mahmood, 'Air Pollution Kills 195,000 Bangladeshis Each Year,' 17 March 2011. [Online]. Available: https://patimes.org/air-pollution-kills-195000-Bangladeshis-each-year/.
- F. Sebastio, International Growth Centre, 26 January 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.theigc.org/blog/data-jam-could-congestion-data-reduce-road-congestion-in-Dhaka/
Cite this page
Present Scenario of Air Pollution in Dhaka City: A Burning issue. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Hong Kong’s Strategies Toward Sustainable Transportation:the Air Pollution Problem
Introduction
In recent years, there are more people care about the environment and try to strike a balance between economic development and environmental protection. However, more complete transportation network implies a more well-developed city, more transport implies more emissions and pollution. Pollution problems are always significant issues that the government should handle. The air quality of Hong Kong is worsening. The air pollution problems will lead to public health issues, increase the government medical expenditure and the cost of living, decrease the live quality of Hong Kong and damage the living environment. If the government can carry out more measures to lower the pollution caused by transportation, this city will have better economic performance and improve the image of Hong Kong.
The transport problem ---air pollution Under globalization, Hong Kong becomes a cargo hub in both air freight and marine. Hong Kong also is a well-developed city with a relatively perfect transportation network. However, the main source of air pollutants in Hong Kong is transportation, which including aviation, shipping, and land transportation. According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2018), air pollution can be defined as the air which is contaminated by chemical, biological, or physical pollutants and can be divided into visible and invisible air pollution.
There are some key pollutants are harmful to health. For example, particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide (CO) and ozone (O3) (WHO, 2018). 3. The causes of social concern 3.1. Public health issues When the air quality decreases, the higher the potential that people will have related health problems. The effect of air pollutants on the human body depends on the level of exposure. As WHO (2018) mentions that the longer the exposure time to the particulate matter (e.g., PM2.5) the more serious damage to human organs will be caused. For the short period of exposure, the contaminants will irritate eyes, noses, and throats.
Prolonged and continuous exposure, it may increase the risk of suffering respiratory infection and lung impairment. It may also lead to more serious chronic effects like reducing the lung function, increasing the chance of suffering from lung cancer, ischemic heart disease or stroke. Since there may be more citizens need medical services due to the low air quality, the medical expenditure of the government will increase. The government has the responsibility to provide proper medical care to its citizens. Therefore, the government will pay attention to this problem.
As mentioned in the above, the air pollutants will cause damage to the human body and lead to different health problems, which will also lead to a decrease in income and live quality. People may be unable to work under a high level of air pollution or because of the disease caused by air pollution problems. Less income is earned, less disposable money can be used. This will lower the live quality as the level of satisfaction in both material and mental are lowered. Since the air pollution problem will increase the cost of living and decrease the quality of living, more citizens will concern about this problem.
Environmental damage The air pollution problem is affecting not only humans’ lives but also animals’ living condition. According to Mann (2018), greenhouse gas (GHG) is any gas that can absorb or trap infrared radiation and cause climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O) are the greenhouse gases which come from burning fuels for transportation. If there are more GHG are produced, the situation of the earth will be more dangerous. For instance, when the average temperature of the earth increases, the sea level is rising because of melting glaciers.
This will damage the living condition of many people and animals who live in coastal cities. Therefore, environmentalists will raise the awareness of protecting the environment. The current understanding of the problems Land transportation The air quality of roadsides is affected by the emission of vehicles. Most of the vehicles on the road are using petrol as fuel to drive the car. However, this type of vehicle will emit N2O and other pollutants which are harmful to human health. Brimblecombe and Ning (2015) report that the air quality had obvious improvement during the road blockage when there was a protest. This implies that the vehicles on the road have important roles in the air pollution problem.
Aviation and Shipping Apart from the local transportation, regional and global transportation that related to Hong Kong also contributes a lot to global warming issues. According to the report written by To (2015), shipping has more cargo movement than aviation; however, aviation produces relatively more air pollutants than shipping
Cite this page
Hong Kong’s strategies toward sustainable transportation:the air pollution problem . (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
The United States Government should not Decrease Environmental Regulations
There are many different types of regulations, laws, and acts under EPA, such as the Clean Air Act. The Trump administration believes that the CAA is a “job-killing” environmental regulation that is oppressing the U.S. economic growth, nevertheless, the CAA and a healthy economy can go hand in hand, because the public health and environmental benefits are far greater than the costs of achieving them.
The CAA was established in 1963, however important amendments we know today were added to the Act in 1970 and 1990. The CAA started by getting the federal government involved with interstate pollution issues, then in 1965 it required the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Services to create and enforce auto emission standards (Clean). In 1970, three major amendments were added;
it placed National Ambient Air Quality Standards that targeted crucial polluting chemicals to protect the environment and public health, New Source Performance Standards determined how much pollution is allowed by different industries, and the CAA specified standards for controlling and reducing various gases of auto emissions. 1990 was the last time the CAA was amended, it focused on environmental issues like acid rain, where certain gas emissions were decreased and controlled; an increase of regulation for toxic pollutants; areas that were not at regulation standard received deadlines; and ozone layer depletion that had the three vital chemical components phased out (Clean).
Apart from the regulations the CAA produces, it is beneficial to the economy, because the money that is used towards reducing pollution does not just disappear or go to one CAA industry. It is transferred throughout many different companies that design, build, install, maintain and operate the equipment that all goes into pollution-reducing processes (Economy). In 2010, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s and EPA’s peer-review study showed that the CAA had gained approximately $1.3 trillion in public health and environmental benefits for a cost of only $50 billion, that is of more than nine percent of Gross Domestic Product for a cost of 0.4 percent of GDP.
For comparison, the NRDC spent roughly five percent of their GDP on the defense budget, the ratio of benefits to costs being more than 26-to-1 (Johnson). By 2020, the study’s predicts a gain of $2 trillion in benefits at a cost of $65 billion, that is a value of more than 14 percent of today’s GDP for a cost of 0.46 percent, The ratio of central benefit-to-cost being more than 30-to-1, higher benefit-to-cost estimate being more than 90-to-1, and lower benefit-to-costs estimate being more than 3-to-1 (Economy; Johnson).
Pollutant control industries contribute to overall economic growth and activity should not be overlooked. According to 2005 data from U.S. manufacturers, their total pollution reduction spendings represented less than one percent of the $4.74 trillion value of the goods they shipped. The reduction costs included capital and operating costs for all pollution controls, not just those related to clean air. Air pollution control is responsible for less than half of these costs (Economy).
In 2011, EPA’s study found that clean air programs yield direct benefits to U.S. citizens which vastly exceed compliance costs. Economic growth rates and welfare improved because cleaner air means less people are likely to get air-pollution-related illnesses, which in turn means lower absenteeism among U.S. workers. The study projects that the beneficial economic effects of clean air improvements more than counterbalance the economic impacts from spendings for pollution control. Shows how the CAA can prevent workers from being absent and losing out on pay because of air-pollution illnesses.
Environmental regulations should not be reduced to promote job creations and economic growth, because they already have an abundant quantity of jobs within their respective fields and the economical benefit on public health helps economic growth. Getting rid of or diminishing any part of the CAA could cause major health risks for U.S. citizens. Fifty-five years of the CAA has shown that the U.S. can shape its economy and create jobs while minimizing pollution to protect the health of U.S. citizens and their workforce.
Cite this page
The United States Government Should Not Decrease Environmental Regulations. (2021, Nov 30).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Firearms have been Around Since about the (Supica)
Guns are a technological revolution for mankind. From being used to hunt or protect, guns have multiple positive uses. However, they also possess a negative connotation. Guns have been used in shootings, war, and many other deaths. Some want more gun control, while others advocate for less. Gun control laws are defined as “laws that control the sale and use of guns and who is allowed to own them,” according to the Cambridge Dictionary. Countries such as Australia and Japan have enacted stronger gun control laws (Kiprop). While, others like Canada and Norway, have less gun laws (Capella).
Some believe that gun control is not beneficial because it takes away the ability of people to protect themselves. From stopping armed robberies to home intrusion attempts guns have saved many lives (Chilson). In addition, gun control laws do not inhibit criminals from obtaining guns (Braga). Black markets allow criminals to acquire guns illegally. Another point made by anti gun control advocates is that to solve gun related issue the public needs to be educated about guns, rather than just taking them away (Gopnik).
Conversely, more gun control advocates cite countries like Japan and Australia which have instituted harsh gun laws as examples of how gun control has worked (Masters). Another reason for more gun control is to reduce the chances of mass shootings (Almasy); examples of this are evident in countries such as France and the United States. This paper will discuss the two sides of the gun control debate, and provide global information to reach a conclusion.
The main facet of the argument for less gun control in a country is that the ability to get a gun is essential for the people to have the ability to protect themselves and others. Guns stop shootings, muggings, domestic violence, and other robberies. One story in which this is evident is Craig Everette, “a combat veteran and purple heart recipient” (Chilson). When he was with his aunt and her new boyfriend at their house, the aunt’s “estranged husband” showed up and started shooting into the home in September 2017. Everette was outside when the ex-husband showed up, so he went back inside, armed himself, and shot the man to death (Chilson).
Moreover, in Kennesaw, Georgia in 1982 a law was passed locally requiring “at least one firearm in the house”. The direct results of this was an 89% drop in residential burgarly rates (How). Furthermore, in a recent study by Florida State University guns have helped to reduce property loss and injury to the victim. Also, these researchers found that when a gun was used for self protection only ten percent of those instances resulted in injury (Kleck). This study by Florida State University wass done by two criminologists: Gary Kleck and Jongyeon Clark. These men both have criminology degrees and are experts on gun control and self-defense (Kleck).
Also, this study was done by a prestigious university, further raising the source's credibility. In addition to using guns for self defense purposes, gun advocates state countries such as Iceland and Israel as examples of places where less gun regulations have been beneficial (Masters). Guns are apart of “everyday life” in Israel. Boys at the ages of eighteen are conscripted into the military, screened, then trained with weapons. Thus, in this country there is an “ease of justification” in owning a gun, said Leil Leibovitz. Leibovitz further denotes the low gun related homicide rate of Israel to the country’s “unique gun culture” (Masters). Israel is a prime example of a place where guns are readily available and easy to access, but has a low homicide rate, trumping most of the arguments for more gun control.
Jonathan Masters is a writer who specializes in civil liberties and the Mideast, making him a very credible source about guns in Israel. Master’s argument is strong as he brings in other experts such as Leil Leibovitz to support his points. Master’s article is a very credible source. Iceland is another country in which its “unique” culture about guns and less restrictive gun laws result in a very low gun related homicide rate (Why). The United States in 2009 had 15,241 homicides, and in Brazil there were overall 43,909. In Iceland there was only one homicide overall in 2009 and it was not done by guns. The reason for this is the culture and society of the country. Iceland’s police officers remain unarmed except for a select few. The only people allowed to carry firearms is a special unit named the “Viking Squad” (Why).
Iceland’s own normal police force not having arms helps shows how the country does not find guns as the answer to all, lowering gun deaths. Another rarity in Iceland is how the country lacks a class hierarchy. In a study by the University of Missouri, 97% of Iceland’s population saw themselves as middle or working class (Why). This unique approach to society helps could result in less strife among groups individuals, which could be a reason for the lack of gun deaths. Iceland is in the top 15 countries for guns per capita, but has one of the lowest homicide rates (Why). This anecdotal article helps provide a credible source. The anecdotal writing shows the author has experienced this first hand and is an expert on the subject.
Also, the author’s argument is strong as he uses facts from highly prestiged places such as United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. However, the article may also be seen as bias due to the author’s close association with the issue. Iceland and Israel help to prove the point that instead of taking away, or making it harder to obtain a gun, societies should try and change the connotation around guns and inform people about them. Contrarily, most pro-gun control arguments provide examples of countries as their evidence that gun control works and is beneficial. The most common example is Australia.
Gun control first began in Australia after the Port Arthur Massacre in April 1996; where a man with a semi-automatic rifle killed 35 and wounded 23 more (Masters). After this, a “conservative led government” instituted gun control laws that regulate firearms (Masters). Examples of these laws are a buyback program on all banned guns, the banning of semi-automatic, automatic weapons, and a mandatory “firearm safety course” (Masters). The results of these guns laws have been no more mass shootings, about a five percent drop in gun suicides per year, and “gun-related homicides declined by an average of 5.5% per year” (Griffiths). Australia enacted the laws, enforced the laws, and the laws have helped reduce gun related homicides. This examples shows the effectiveness of gun control laws in the real world. The source is CNN, a major news corperation. However, the program at times has a leftist bias.
The author, James Griffiths, is a head reporter for CNN in Asia. He writes mostly about censorship and human rights. He is very knowledgeable about Asia and the areas surrounding it. However, he does not usually write and research about the topic of guns, making him not the most credited expert on the subject. The result of this is he is a moderately reliable source.
Moreover, Japan is another country used to help show how effective gun control laws have been in countries. Demilitarization after World War II was the start of gun control in Japan (Masters). In 1946 when the Allied Powers occupied Japan they were ordered to take all swords and guns in possession of the Japanese (Aoki). In 1958 this was replaced by the Firearm and Sword Control Law (Aoki) which only permitted “shotguns, air guns, guns that have research or industrial purposes, or those used for competitions” (Masters). Furthermore, one must pass a written, drug, mental test and background check prior to obtaining a weapon (Masters). Lastly, gun owners need to provide the information of how ammunition and the gun will be stored , which is checked annually (Masters). The results of these is a very low gun-homicide rate, one out of 10 million (Masters). This statistic shows how the strict gun control laws in Japan have proven beneficial. The source by Aoki is from the Japanese Times website. The source is about the website’s own country, making it valid. On the contrary, Aoki graduated from Hitotsubashi University with a social sciences degree, thus she is not an expert in guns, docking the source’s credibility slightly.
The argument presented by the article cites sources such as a worker at the Technical Museum of the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force’s Ordnance School. This helps strengthen her argument by using an expert about gun laws speciffially in Japan. Overall, the source is credible. In addition to providing examples of how gun control has worked in econimcially developed countries, many point to how gun laws will reduce the number of mass shootings in the world. An example of one of these people is Mark P. Gius, a proffessor of economics at Quinnipac University. Gius suggests from his research study that gun control, particularly an assault rifle, has proved to lower mass shootings percentages (Gius). An assault rifle is a rifle that “has selctable firing modes” and “can fire in fully automatic mode” (Miles).
Evidence of this is that the mass shootings percentage was “reduced the number of school shooting victims by 54.4 percent” (Jacobs). The source used for this data, by Jacobs, provides studies, such as the one by Gius, to support his argument. Gius, being a credible source, makes the argument more valid and believable. Also, the author of the article adresses counterclaims, showing he is relatively unbiased on the subject. Altogether, the source is credible.
Based on the evidence provided, more gun control laws should be enacted around the world. There has been various worldwide examples, ranging from more economically developed countries to lesser economically developed ones, where gun control laws have worked. A prime example is Australia; whose conservatively run government enacted major gun restrictions after a large mass shooting. The result of these heavy gun regulations was a large drop in gun-related homicides, at about 5.5% (Griffith). The community in Australia did not repeat a past tradegy, and were willing to sacrifice some gun rights for the country’s safety.
Another less economially developed country where gun laws have proven beneficial is in Brazil. A place with one of the highest gun homicide rates was turned around in 2003 with very few new regulations (Alencar). Examples of new laws were: control of firearm flow, purchase age raised to 25, and tougher gun-related penalties. The study overall concluded that these minor tweaks, which did not include in taking away any guns, resulted in gun violence being reduced with the mobilization of the society and tougher gun laws (Alencar). In addition to multiple examples proving its effectivness, gun control has also been proven effective in lowering the number of mass shootings.
A studies by Gius and Jacobs show how the laws created will protect people in “soft targets”, such as schools, from those who want to create mass casualities. Overall, making it harder to get a gun, regulating how to store it, and other gun control restricitions are worth it if they have the ability to save a life. If the research done was to be continued, it would be beneficial to learn more about the effects of taking away all guns in a country or community. The paper written discusses the ability to still own guns under gun control laws, but these abilities are regulated heaviliy. It would be interesting to see the pros and cons of a gun ban.
Cite this page
Firearms have been around since about the (Supica). (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
IN the HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES of the UNITED STATES
Make common sense gun control that both parties can agree on. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled.
In America the amount of gun violence is far too high. An issue with gun control is that there is not enough. One of the issues with purchasing guns is that, people with mental disabilities can purchase guns without any mental health testing and can harm their self and others. According to the CDC the number one-use for homicide and suicide is done with firearms.
Another issue with not enough gun control is that people can buy guns without a high school diploma or equivalent. People who are uneducated do not understand the importance of fire arm safety which can lead to accidental shootings and death. According to the CDC the number sixteen cause if accidental deaths is caused by firearms.
The third issue with not enough gun control is that people can 3-D print their own guns. These people can be dangerous and felons which can make their own unregistered firearm over the head off government. These guns are untraceable since they have no serial number. These guns can be used to get away with crimes. The guns can pass through metal detectors undetected.
In order to stop people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns and hurting their self and others. There should be mandatory mental health testing to see if someone is eligible to purchase a firearm. To help make sure that current gun owners still have mental health stability is to test them every two years. If the owners fail the test or refuse to take the test, they are at risk of having their guns taken away by the government.
To help stop the uneducated from accidently hurting someone or their self is to require at least a high school diploma or GED in order to purchase a firearm. Another way to help prevent accidental gun violence is to require people wanting to purchase their first gun to take gun safety classes like they require people to do for wanting to go hunting. To help prevent people from 3-D printing guns is to outlaw the ability to share files of 3-D printed guns. Another way to not completely ban the guns is to make people who make 3-D printed guns bring the guns to get registered and make them easier to track.
Everyone is going to benefit from this bill with their own safety. But for the people wanting to buy guns this will help because it will help limit the people you should not be receiving guns for obtaining them. This could also in turn help people realize the importance of gun safety and mental health, when it comes owning firearms.
This bill will go in effect on January 1st, of the next year after the bill is passed.
Cite this page
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
United States of America Gun Control
While opening this essay on United States of America gun control, I can remember many news reports that have intervened in a show that I was watching just to announce a story of yet another erratic shooting that has wounded people, and even killed others. Shootings like these take place in malls, churches, schools, and other numerous places in the United States of America.
In these events, the people (or person) that were held accountable were brought into custody or killed by police. Prior to being arrested by the police officers, some suspects even took their own lives. Violence in gangs, altercations, domestic violence, and countless additional causes are also results of shootings. Cases like this do not just happen in public locations.
There should be a more strict laws when it comes to gun control. If there were, there would be less public shootings, gang fighting resulting in shooting, arguments resulting in shooting, and domestic violent cases resulting in shooting. If the gun laws were stricter they could, in some ways, restrict people from just easily going out and buying a gun. Doing this could help prevent all of the events that I have listed above. In chapter 7 of the MWM text it talks about wounds, rifts, and wars. This ties in with gun control. In the book it states, “…We move now to the far more brambly territory of betrayals, rifts, and violent hostilities” (MWM Text Page 299). It also goes on to talk about what happened during a horrific war. When it comes to wars it can be a bit harder to discuss gun laws.
In the second amendment, it is stated that, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms. Shall not be infringed” (Noel, Gun Violence Page 4). This amendment came to place on December 15, 1791 and since it is part of the first ten amendments, it is also part of the Bill of Rights. Many people agree that there should be more gun control in the United States of America, and others think that having gun control laws would break the second amendment of the constitution, which was given to every person in America.
Weapon control advocates trust that the Assembled States legislators ought to and must execute firearm control laws so as to decrease, if not evacuate, gun related viciousness. The issue of weapon control in the United States of America is an exceptionally confounded one since it will remove second amendment rights. The thought to actualize weapon control laws in the Assembled States has turned into a major issue. Hostile to firearm control, activists contend this point about the rights in the second amendment being removed.
They additionally contend that laws, for example, ones to control guns would anticipate subjects that are not mishandling the utilization of guns the capacity to shield themselves from lawbreakers that look to hurt them. It is likewise accepted by a few residents that weapon control isn't the response to the country's rising issue of the utilization of guns being manhandled. Weapons have dependably been a piece of America from the earliest starting point. Firearms have been utilized to chase for sustenance, for insurance and furthermore in brandishing recreations.
As we are made mindful of how unsafe weapons to can be, it appears that crimes and firearms are firmly related. Firearms are control weapons that can cause extraordinary death and harm. Numerous residents utilize firearms to secure themselves and friends and family while others utilize them to compromise and damage others. Throughout the years, weapon control has turned into a best subject of discussion. This could be on the grounds that almost 30,000 individuals here in this country die from a discharge every year. Firearm control is not just an issue here in the United States of America. Weapon control and arrangements have turned into a hotly debated issue among a developing number of countries. The expansion in wrongdoings by the utilization of guns and the way that it is anything but difficult to get to guns has made the Assembled States and different nations reexamine their situation on weapon control laws.
The battle between firearm control and the privilege to have weapons has been a standout amongst the most disputable issues for a long time. It has been one of the most sweltering themes of discussion in the second 50% of the twentieth century and it proceeds into the twenty-first. The issue of firearm control is being debated among government officials and administrators on both the liberal and preservationist sides. These discussions are energized by contradicting contentions between supporters of weapon rights and the individuals who are against them. Alongside these contentions come insights and actualities concerning how guns have and can affect society.
There are solid and subsequent focuses being made for the two sides of the weapon control issues. The embodiment of both the contentions for or against firearm control is the topic of what will truly be cultivated by picking one side over the other. In what capacity can gun limitations be established without disregarding rights that were allowed in the second correction of the constitution? Another inquiry is that if these limitations are established, will this limit or confine wrongdoing? Considering the proof and certainties that help the two sides it ends up hard to give an undeniable answer.
Despite the fact that numerous individuals have chosen where they stand with regards to the issues of weapon control, the discussion still turns out to be a complexed one with solid help on the two sides of these issues. The supporters of gun control contend that 75% of the weapons that have been utilized in excess of seventy mass shootings in the United States of America over the pass thirty years were practiced with firearms that were lawfully gotten by the executioners. Supporters of weapon control advocates trust that the vast majority of these slaughters may have been averted if there had been harder firearm laws. Genius weapon control advocates say that laws controlling guns help to ensure youngsters and families. Some people unequivocally trust that due to firearms in America there is a general wellbeing emergency that is currently assaulting our youngsters.
As indicated by statistics, about eight American kids are shot and killed day by day. Many people believe that more grounded laws on firearms will secure children. Ace weapon law supporters additionally trust that there ought to be individual verifications done on a person before they are permitted to buy a gun. They trust that this activity would help in the endeavor to keep weapons out of the wrong hands. Laws requiring individual verifications are in charge of keeping 2 million individuals from purchasing firearms that ought not to be permitted to have them. Background checks keep firearms out of the hands of lawbreakers and genuinely rationally sick individuals. These individual verification necessities are a direct result of the Brady Handgun Savagery Counteractive action Demonstration of 1993.
Individuals that are against new laws or harder laws for firearm control contend that weapons are required for self-preservation which is a 'principal right'. The National Rifle Affiliation's Foundation for Authoritative Activity advises us that the privilege to remain battle ready for self-preservation is ensured in the United States Constitution. Against weapon control advocates say that fierce wrongdoing diminishes when more individuals are permitted to legitimately convey firearms. They contend that right-to-convey has expanded since the mid- 1990s and that fierce wrongdoing rates have declined. Hostile to firearm control supporters say that weapon control does not work in counteracting deaths by weapons since it doesn't really make it harder for individuals to get firearms. Some concur that the state should not have an 'imposing business model' on savagery. They contend that more individuals are killed by cops in a year than by mass shooters.
They are suspicious of the legislature growing its capacity. Numerous enemy of weapon control contentions originate from individuals that don't confide in the Assembled States government. Numerous African American enemy of weapon control advocates trust that firearm control in the late twentieth century in the United States of America has been an exertion more to incapacitate non-white individuals. For some Americans, weapon possession is viewed as an image of opportunity. To remove this would be an infringement of their established rights. Seekers and game/amusement shooters feel that their rights to do the things that they appreciate ought not to be removed on account of the activities of others. These individuals say that they are not harming anybody and should not be rebuffed because of what criminals do.
Recently, the discussion over weapon control in the Unified States has gotten more warmed due to up ascent of the arrangement of mass shootings by shooters in regular citizen settings. Ongoing mass shootings in schools, working environments, shopping centers, and other open spots has conjured another national discussion with respect to firearm laws. Enactment that would have prohibited self-loader ambush weapons did not go in the senate despite the fact that there was an extensive variety of help by people in general. The second correction of the constitution has been referenced a few times in this paper and it states that a very much controlled civilian army, being important to the security of a free state, has the privilege of the general population to keep and remain battle ready, will not be encroached. Despite the fact that this privilege is given in the Assembled States Constitution, the privilege is not unbounded.
There are bans on hidden weapons and there are additionally bans on the responsibility for sorts of weapons. These confinements are bolstered by the Assembled States Preeminent Court. While these gun confinements are supported by the Incomparable Court, there are other firearm laws that have been lifted by the court. A law that disallowed the ownership of handguns in Washington, DC was tossed out. Like Washington, DC, there are different states that have endeavored to change or disintegrate Government Laws that have been established concerning guns by passing new laws in their state, however these laws were said to be unlawful.
Among the world's most created countries, the United States has the most elevated rate of killings that are submitted by weapons. 35-half of the world's firearms possessed by regular folks have a place with Joined States subjects despite the fact that the United States makes up under 5% of the number of inhabitants on the planet. The ten nations with the most weapons are: “USA-112.6 firearms per 100 occupants, Serbia-75.6 firearms per 100 inhabitants, Yemen-54.8 firearms per 100 inhabitants, Switzerland-45.7 per 100 inhabitants, Cyprus-36.4 per 100 inhabitants, Saudi Arabia-35 for each 100 inhabitants, Irag-34.2 per 100 inhabitants, Uruguay-31.8 per 100 occupants, Sweden-31.6 per 100 occupants, and Norway-31.3 per 100 inhabitants” (Gun Control Page 16). On Wednesday March 14, 2018 countless understudies everywhere throughout the United States left their classrooms so as to stand firm and request harder laws concerning firearm control. A few understudies poured onto lanes and football fields and others sat in the lobbies of their school as a major aspect of a national dissent on firearm brutality. The dissent occurred a month after a mass shooting happened at Majory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida where seventeen individuals lost their lives and seventeen others were injured.
Fatima Younis, who is 17 years old, stated this, 'We need our congress to realize that a few of us will be mature enough to cast a ballot in the midterm races, and whatever remains of us will be ready to cast a ballot in 2020 or 2022 and they will lose their employment on the off chance that they don't do what they need to do to guard us' (Just Facts Page 150). Ms. Younis is an understudy coordinator with Ladies' Walk Youth Engage. The 'Enough' school walkouts had the help of in excess of 3,000 enlisted showings. There was investment from each of the 50 states. This expert firearm control exhibits understudies everywhere throughout the country with broad communication consideration. People who are against firearm control are taking up for what they believe also.
It was April 7th on a Friday Afternoon in South Carolina and Congressman Ralph Norman, while holding a get together where he got a notification from constituents on various political issues, saw the red shirts that individuals from an 'enemies of weapons' support amass were wearing. Surprised by the red shirts, Mr. Norman began discussing weapons. At one point while he was addressing the audience, he ventured into the coat pocket of his suite and hauled out his hand firearm and set it on a table. Mr. Norman said that he was endeavoring to demonstrate that guns themselves hold no risk. Ralph Norman has a concealed-weapon permit. Congressman got overwhelming feedback for his activities. Ralph Norman stated this concerning what he had done, 'I securely put my firearm on the table, pointed far from individuals.' 'The eatery does not boycott covered weapons and I trust no laws were broken' (Eligon, Guns and Gun Control Page 5).
Since the shooting in Florida at Majory Stoneman Douglas High School, the gun control problem has turned out to be much more essential. Hopefuls of the two gatherings in the 2010 midterm decisions have started to reconsider their place with regards to weapon control laws. There is currently a more noteworthy push for gun limitations in the Unified States because of this terrible occasion. Political applicants are under the careful gazes of voters regarding where they remain on weapon problems. The weight is on for these competitors.
The utilization of guns is profoundly established in this nation's history. From the beginning of time, firearms have been utilized for things, for example, chasing for sustenance, sports amusements, and furthermore for self-preservation. At the point when utilized the correct way firearms can be exceptionally useful, yet when weapons are utilized inappropriately or far more atrocious, on the off chance that they fall into the wrong hands, they can cause mass demolition and the loss of lives. The discussions over guns has been continuing for a long time and it is my estimate that the battle will proceed for a long time to come.
Some trust that weapons are not protected and private nationals should not be permitted to possess them. Each side reaches inverse determinations from the occasions that include firearm related savagery. It is my expectation that a tradeoff can be come to concerning this critical issue, however more so than that, it is my expectation that no more lives will be lost because of firearm brutality or the improper utilization of, or the capacity, of a weapon. It is vital that legislators met up to determine firearm control issues with the goal that we will have the capacity to lie in a more tranquil society. Firearm control is something beyond one issue; numerous different issues interweave.
Works Cited
- MLA Formatted
- Eligon, John, et al. “Guns and Gun Control.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 30 Nov. 2018, www.nytimes.com/topic/subject/guns-and-gun-control.
- This NewYorkTimes article by John Eligon talks about laws, recent shootings and issues with guns and gun laws.
- “Gun Control - ProCon.org.” Gun Control - ProCon.org, gun-control.procon.org/.
- This website gave a lot of information regarding both sides of the argument.
- Gun Control – Just Facts, www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp.
- This website gives factual information about gun control.
- Tavris, Carol, and Elliot Aronson. Mistakes Were Made (but Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. Pinter & Martin, 2016.
- This book was a very good reference while typing this essay because it gives examples and forces you to think critically.
- Merino Noe?l. Gun Violence. Greenhaven Press, a Part of Gale, Cengage Learning, 2015.
- This book contained, speeches, articles, essays, and facts.
Cite this page
United States of America Gun Control. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Mass Shootings and Indiscriminate Shooting in Schools
Gun control has been the main subject of the mass shooting has been happening recently. But I think that gun control is not a reason why the massing shooting have happened. People kill people not guns kill people. Also, if people learn how to own a gun responsibility and take classes I feel that it will help America with part of the problem we are dealing with.
A lot of people keep arguing that guns are the ones killing people when it's the person who is using the gun that is actually killing the people. A person needs to be an evil person to use them for killing human Bones. You cannot blame guns for these deaths of these people that died from mass shootings. People are dying but gun control laws are not going to stop that but make this happen more frequently instead. Gun control is a term used to describe the regulation of firearms from citizens.
Some people believe that by controlling the number of firearms and assault weapons in civilians’ hands it will result in less gun related homicides. When it wouldn’t help get fewer guns put pf population because people will still find ways to get a gun into their hands. Also, others think that gun control will not stop deaths from guns but give criminals more power, by making them the only ones with guns. But does gun control is not the only thing that will solve the problem that America is dealing with today.Yes, if America should step up and consider reviewing the laws on gun ban in each state. No state should be different from another. No personality should own a gun just for a caprice. Everyone should be subject to strict rules. But more than just the rules, we should exercise discipline.
Children and adults alike should be educated on the effects of gun ban, or what could happen when a gun control law does not exist in country. It might take some time for people to accept such law, especially this hunting and ammo enthusiasts. We can all take measures to be responsible in using guns and in convincing people to buy only when they use guns in their line of duty. We need guns to protect us, but we also need to protect our lives from ourselves.Owning a gun is a huge responsibility. It takes more than sheer discipline to convince people that you would not use them for anything else other than self-defense.
Those teenagers who massacred half a school used to be sons and daughters. They were not violent. They were the safe kind, and probably those who promised their parents they would not touch any weapon. But then again, tables turn when you least expect it. Other people argue that they need firearms because they use it for self-defense. They acquire a license for it, and as such, they are expected to use their weapons only when the need arises. Burglars, hostage attacks, and other forms of violence require people to stand up and fight, preferably with their weapon of choice. Life is precious, they say, and they can only protect their lives if they have the proper equipment.
It is interesting to note; however, that despite this rather smart take on gun use, there are people who go beyond the set perimeters. Gun control will not make it harder for criminals to obtain firearms. But with the heightened fear of terrorist’s attacks happening in the U. S and the shootings that are occurring in public places. More and more people are pushing for stricter gun control laws out of fear of these events happening again and hoping that these laws can contain and minimize these events.
Many other controls have strict gun control laws, and they have lower homicide rates with guns. But do stricter gun control laws get to the root of the problem, or do they just get in the way of average citizens trying to protect themselves? Guns are a big problem in America because they are used to commit murders, suicides, as well as other crimes. With criminals having access to guns, it just makes the good citizens feel the need to purchase a gun for protection or self-defense. There may never be a solid solution to stopping the crime and violence completely but there are other solutions to limiting the amount of gun related deaths in this world. Whether it’s a mistake or intentionally, guns can do a lot of damage and that’s why stricter laws and other solutions need to be brought upon to prevent such
Cite this page
mass shootings and indiscriminate shooting in schools. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Gun Control is a Serious Problem in America
All around America, there are tens of thousands of shootings yearly, which is quite significant. Guns kept at home have been proven more likely to be used as a means of killing an innocent person, rather than an intruder. Due to the terror being brought upon citizens as a result of frequent mass shootings, it has been debated whether or not gun control laws would ameliorate this problem. Despite the evidence, there is still an ongoing controversy regarding gun laws. Gun control laws need to be expanded. An increase on gun control would increase people’s sense of safety, decrease crime and death rates, and allow people to consider what is best for the whole of our nation.
Every year, thousands of Americans are victims of gun violence. Not only are these people directly affected, but many more are affected by the loss of loved ones to gun violence. So many lives have been ruined or lost due to guns being so readily available.
Other countries have controlled the problem.
After mass shootings, other countries have tightened laws for gun control. After these laws were passed, there were fewer shootings and casualties, so why haven’t we yet?
So many people are dying unnecessarily.
Americans own the most guns per person in the world, and consequently have the most public mass shootings in the world. This shows how more access to guns results in a greater amount of homicides.
Fewer deaths and less crime.
Statistics have shown that states with stricter gun laws consequently have lower crime and homicide rates.
The Constitution is made up of our rights given to us as citizens. This leads people to believe that due to being given this right, it should be exercised. People are blindly exercising their rights without considering the effects. As statistics have shown, allowing people to bear arms has resulted in more crime and homicides than when it was more controlled. Waters expresses his idea that not all rights are just. It is stated that “Our Constitution is unusually difficult to amend, but amendment is possible.
So it's our responsibility to consider not just what the Constitution says, but what it should say” (Waters). As Waters stated, a right should not be perceived as “right” solely based off of the fact that it is the law. Even though it’s the law, does that mean it’s just? Many people ignore the evidence proving this law is detrimental simply due to the reason that we have been given this right. Another reason attributed to their lack of involvement is that it’s known to be extremely hard to change the constitution, so they are discouraged, as it seems pointless to work towards something virtually unattainable. However, with work, these laws could be changed and lives would be saved. If our Constitution allows something at the cost of many lives, we should not indulge it so readily.
Cite this page
Gun control is a serious problem in America. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Policies Affecting Mentally Unstable People,
New York mental health professionals must report when a person is likely to commit a crime that would endanger themselves or others. After this report is sent, those who own a gun will have their license suspended and police have the authority to remove the gun. This also goes for someone who may endanger their families. Under this act, a judge can issue an order of protection for the family, and if that person has a firearm they may use against their family, the judge will require the surrender of the gun (governor ny).
In Texas, there are few restrictions on gun purchases and other gun safety laws. Unlike New York, Texas does not limit the purchases of multiple weapons per month nor is there limits of the number of rounds a magazine can have. Texas also does not require background checks for private sales or guns sold at gun shows. Surprisingly, Texas does not require a license for someone to carry a rifle in public. The main state policies are similar to the federal laws. Anyone who have been convicted of a felony or domestic violence misdemeanors are banned from purchasing firearms. Like in California, those who purchase guns are to have their background checks ran through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, with the exception of those who already have a concealed carry license (the trace).
Overall, it is not only the duty of the federal government to enforce safety measures to prevent those who may struggle with mental health issues, but it is also the state’s responsibility. In places such as Texas, where guns may be more easily available, stricter regulations on gun purchases and specifically regulations pertaining to at risk mentally unstable people would not be a bad idea. If anything, it will prevent suicides or homicides with guns from happening.
When looking at current gun regulations, there are certain loopholes that display the need for more defined and stricter gun laws. For example, under the 1968 Gun Control Act, any person who has been convicted of committing a felony or has been issued a domestic violence protective order is banned from owning guns. Even with this law, felons are able to buy guns at places such as gun shows where gun sellers do not have to be licensed due to the gun vendor selling from their private collection without the intentions of making a profit. Since gun show sellers are not licensed, it allows for people who are banned from buying weapons under the Gun Control Act of 1968 to avoid background checks that would otherwise prevent them from purchasing the gun (The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence). To stop gun show loopholes, the Brady Law should be extended to include those who sell guns without a license.
In addition to this, federal law allows for people to purchase a gun “if the background check system does not return a decision in three business days” (New York Times 2018). In Binghamton, New York, Jiverly Wong obtained two pistols through a gun store after the background check did not come back in time. The following month, on April 3, 2009, Mr. Wong shot and killed 13 people. The necessity for faster and stricter background checks are important in stopping individuals who should not have weapons from obtaining them (New York Times 2018).
When it comes to ways to stop gun related violence, the first necessary step is to look at why people may become angry or upset about their lives. With the daily stressed of working, school, and many other responsibilities, it is necessary for people to be able to take breaks. The current federal policy regarding mental health leaves up to 12 weeks paid for mental health related issues under the Family Medical Leave Act (National Alliance on Mental Health). It is imperative that students be given similar breaks, if not more, as their brains develop because due to this, they are not fully able to control their emotions. In 2019, according to Washington Post, Utah added a mental health day as a valid excuse for being absent from school. Similarly, Oregon passed a law that also allows students to take days off from school due to mental health issues.
Creating a federal law that allows students to take a mental health break from school may decrease the risk of a school shooting from occurring. Furthermore, states could create their own system that tracks how many mental health days students are taking in order to access if they may be at risk for violent behaviors towards themselves or others. In places such as Connecticut, there was a law passed in 2015 for school districts to use attendance teams in order to track each students’ absences. There is also an organization called Attendance Works that helps school track the absences in these school districts (Barrett and Greene 2017).
Some limitations for this proposal would be finding a way to ensure each state in the U.S. would accurately track each students’ absence from school as well as their reasoning. This has been seen in the past with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Although it was available for each state to use, most states did not until there was an incentive for then to start running the background checks. According the Federal Bureau of Investigation, there incentives were grant opportunities for state and tribal entities. These grants were made possible through the FBI and other federal partners. In addition to this, the FBI made it easier for people to submit background checks through electronic submissions which reduced the costs of submitting the background checks in other means such as through paper or fax submissions (Lindquist 2017). By creating similar incentives through school funding and other private grants, a system to track absences would be possible without extreme efforts. Not only could grants be considered, but class parties or bonuses for the teacher who has the best records kept could be a way to positively enforce this record keeping. In fact, this idea has been brought up by U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham. In March of 2019, Senator Graham introduced a bipartisan bill with Senator Richard Blumenthal that would create a program that provides grants to help states pass their own Red Flag Laws. The program grants are also used to pay mental health professionals to evaluate and counsel at-risk individuals before removing weapons from them. (Vasilogambros 2019).
Another limitation would be a decline in performance if a student is missing a large number of days per month and using the mental health excuse as a way to skip school (Fazel et al. 2014). Even if teachers keep records of how a student behaves and why they miss classes, the true nature of an absence may not be known. Some students may put on a façade in front of people to avoid been seen as weak while at home they are struggling with various issues. Due to this, skipping school with made up reasons may always be one downside of allowing mental health days. Teachers may endanger children if they involve family members, so there is not much else to do to prevent a mental health absence excuse from being abused.
This mental health day ties in with gun related violence due to the aggressions people build up over time. For example, in Aurora, Illinois, Gary Martin shot and killed 5 coworkers and injured six others. Before he acted out, the company fired him for violating multiple workplace rules the same day as his shooting occurred. He wanted to have his internship turned into a full-time position at the company. If he had possibly taken a mental health day and his supervisors were made aware of his feelings, they may have been able to work with him to give him the raise that he wanted or even given him a severance pay before firing him to lessen the amount of anger Mr. Martin had. (New York Times 2019).
To tie into this aggressive behavior, the U.S. government should encourage states to enforce Red Flag Laws at the state level, similarly to what they did to encourage the usage of the background check system. Red Flag Laws allow the local courts to grant local authorities the power to remove weapons from individuals who are seen as a danger to themselves or others. Currently 19 states have Red Flag Laws while 11 states have a Red Flag Law bill being proposed. This would mean those 11 states as well as the remaining 19 states would need to create laws of their own (Campbell, Mascia, and Yablon 2020). One strong example to support the need for Red Flag Laws would be the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooter Nikolas Cruz. Mr. Cruz had a long-documented record of misbehavior and threatening actions which, if the Red Flag Laws were being enforced in Florida, his legally obtained weapons would have been taken away thus preventing high school students and faculty from dying on Valentine’s day.
To start, Nikolas Cruz started school at Marjory Stoneman Douglas in January of 2016. Shortly after, On February 5, 2016, Cruz posted on social media about his plans to shoot up the school. In September of 2016, the Sheriff department received multiple reports about him hurting himself, and the Florida Department of Children and Families creates a medical neglect case on him as well as his intentions to buy a weapon. Two months later, his case is closed, and his threat is noted as low (Washington Post 2018).
In February of 2017, Nikolas Cruz follows through with his intentions and purchases an AR-15 from Sunrise Tactical Supply. That September, Cruz is interviewed by the FBI after leaving a YouTube comment about him going to become a professional school shooter.
On November 30, 2017, Broward County Sheriffs receive a mentioning how Cruz has weapons and they believe he may injure himself or become a school shooter. Then, a cousin of Cruz’s deceased mother requests for his weapons be taken away due to her death in November of 2017, but that does not occur. Once again, the FBI receives a tip about Cruz’s intentions to shoot up a school as well as his unusual behaviors. Lastly, on February 14, 2018, Nikolas Cruz kills 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas (Washington Post 2018).
Cite this page
policies affecting mentally unstable people,. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
My Sight on the Prohibition of Firearms
I have not, traditionally, held entirely orthodox liberal opinions on the issue of gun control. For political reasons, for practical reasons, even in part on principle, I never thought a far-reaching gun ban was realistic, or even necessarily desirable, in the United States. (A strictly enforced ban would necessitate massive, nationwide police action, for one thing, and would assuredly also involve disproportionate policing and additional incarceration of people of color.) I continue to believe that, as Democrats attempt to win victories across the entire country, there will be tough trade-offs and brutal internal arguments on gun rights—much more so than on other hot button issues, including even abortion access.
Spree shootings have become an epidemic. Six of the ten deadliest spree shootings in American history have occurred in the last decade. Three of the five deadliest happened in the last two years. Rampage spree shootings might be culturally “contagious.” Or perhaps they are simply becoming deadlier because it is easier than ever for killers to obtain incredibly over-powered weapons. Regardless, we’ve become numb to garish death tolls.
And yet, those mass shootings still represent just a fraction of the tens of thousands killed by guns annually in the United States. The number of yearly firearm homicides is well below historic highs (along with nearly every other form of violent crime) but that rate stopped falling years ago. It has remained steady at an unconscionably high level for nearly two decades. Our rate of gun deaths remains many times greater than the rates of every other wealthy nation.
There are a few positive signs. There is support for more regulation. Much, much more regulation than we currently have in place. And we should fight for it all: Ironclad background checks and gun registries and assault weapon bans and whatever else can mitigate the problem. But it’s clear that the historical era in which America’s many responsible gun-owners could’ve joined with liberal gun rights opponents to beat back the nuts and install sensible regulation is long behind us.
I think it did exist once. In the Midwest of my youth, gun ownership was common and didn’t seem to conflict with progressive values. It was much easier to believe that people genuinely owned rifles because they enjoyed hunting, and not because they fetishized weapons of mass death. And people didn’t walk around in public openly displaying handguns, because that is lunatic behavior in a civilized society. That is the context in which the Brady Bill and the assault weapons ban were achievable.
But we can’t get back there—we’re too far gone. The decades-long intentional derangement of white conservatives and the unchecked profit-seeking of arms manufacturers brought us here, and now “gun culture” is a grotesque death cult.
I’d love a compromise, where no one had (or felt they needed) handguns, and hunters and recreational shooters got to enjoy their registered and safely stored shotguns and old-fashioned repeating rifles. But the “responsible” owners are a dying breed. The future of the gun debate in the United States is a ruthless political fight between an anti-gun majority and a hysterical, well-armed revanchist minority. That minority will have one of our two major political parties, the Supreme Court and much of the judiciary, and a lot of arms industry money on its side.
So what should we fight for, knowing the near-impossibility of full disarmament? We will probably not nationalize or expropriate our arms manufacturers any time soon, though we obviously should. We can at least make it possible to sue them into dust. But if you want a gun ban in the United States, here’s a thought: Even if you accept the (obviously, stupidly, grandly wrong) conservative interpretation of the Second Amendment, there’s still no actual right to sell guns. So why not ban that?
For years, the media has extensively covered mass shootings leading to a large movement towards trying to prevent the terrible deaths of innocent children and adults. While it is good to recognize that we as a country have a problem with violence, the extensive coverage from the left-wing media has led to a multitude of people being misinformed about guns and violence, which leads them to push for measures that don’t have any evidence of working. Furthermore, the magnitude of the problem is often blown out of proportion with skewed statistics and over-coverage.
I am not saying that the deaths by use of firearms are insignificant or mean any less to friends and families who are affected by this kind of tragedy, but there are many other causes of death that kill countless times more people. For example, the top 10 leading causes of death contribute to almost 75% of all deaths in the United States, and firearms are used to kill less than one percent of all deaths excluding suicides, according to the CDC.
The top two causes of death being heart disease and cancer are very serious illnesses, but yet the media seems to ignore the fact that more than 3,300 people die every day from them. Regardless of the huge causes of death that are plaguing our country right now, the media has insisted we start to fix the problem of gun violence, and laws are starting to be proposed and signed into action.
The proposed measures right now such as banning the sale of firearms like in “BAN GUNS.” By Pareene, or even banning certain firearms or accessories are not effective solutions and go against the rights the Constitution provides to all law-abiding citizens. BUT, since we can always make this country a safer and better place to live, there are many things we can do to minimize these horrible deaths while still keeping our rights intact. I have lots of ideas that I believe would help minimize these deaths, but because of time and length restrictions, I want to focus on allowing more trained individuals to carry firearms especially in schools, along with educating the public on this issue.
The overall message I will be giving is we need to allow more access to firearms and education to the average American. Our rights, not just gun rights, being stripped away in this process of making America “safer” is unacceptable. We need to come together to take actions that will be effective at saving innocent lives while also allowing Americans to defend themselves and exercise all their rights.
First, I believe we need to have more on campus police officers in schools. Not only will more police deter a violent crime from happening in the school, it also allows authorities to respond faster in case one does happen. For example, in the Parkland shooting, there was only one officer on campus. This man was outside when the attacker started open firing at students, and he never even entered the building to try and stop him to save lives like it is his job to do, which was covered by many media sources including CNN.
The shooting may have gone differently if more officers would have been on campus with the students not having to depend on one man. Not to mention one who wasn’t close to the attack when it started and was not ready to step up to do his job. Having more officers on campus would make this scenario less likely to happen because if there are more officers, the more likely one of them will do their job and be near the source of the attack. This goes along with why I also believe we need to allow teachers across the nation the option to conceal carry a firearm in schools. I am not saying we should force or even incentivize carrying a firearm because of the responsibility it takes, and many will not want to take on the extra stress.
But since the teachers are with their students or in the building the vast majority of the time, which is much more than officers are, allowing these willingly trained, responsible individuals to also deter and respond to a violent crime in the building, would be beneficial. Overall, we need to introduce more trained firearm holders onto campuses whether that be campus police or teachers to schools to deter crime, and in worst-case scenarios, stop an active shooter quickly to save as many lives as possible.
The next step I think we need to take, is having more firearm education not only in schools but readily available to the public. There are many misconceptions about the process of acquiring a firearm or how they function, and more education would help clear these up. For example, there is a political comedian Steven Crowder who runs a late-night show called Louder with Crowder and posts some of his content on YouTube. He recently gave two college students the opportunity to “learn the basics of firearm safety and shooting, and the process of actually purchasing a gun (StevenCrowder).” They were blown away by how much they learned, such as how stringent background checks are, which you must go through for any purchase in a gun store or gun show, and how many things can disqualify anyone from buying a gun.
Because of this experience, they now have a very different opinion on firearm legislation, and I think many people would change their mind about stricter gun legislation after getting educated. There are also many other statistics that I believe everyone should know. Some of them include: According to the CDC, between 1998 and 2015, 96.2% of public mass shootings occurred in gun free zones. They also cite that in 2008, there were from 500,000 to over 3 million defensive uses of firearms in the United States, and with a huge rise in concealed carry permits according to gunscarry.com so this number could be even higher today.
This leads me to see that gun free zones seem to be targeted by criminals and guns are saving much more lives than they are taking. This is just the conclusion I have drawn from this data, and I encourage you to take your own. We need to start incorporating firearm education into high schools at least. Having a dedicated class where firearm safety is demonstrated, practiced, and statistics and facts are shown would be greatly beneficial to the general knowledge of the public. This could just be a one-day class, or a couple of hours spread throughout a certain time period, but we need to better educate ourselves to minimize misconceptions about firearms because to start to fix this problem, we all need to have this kind of knowledge to actually make a positive impact.
Now I am going to talk about why I have found Pareene’s proposal to be not as effective as many other options if acted upon, and completely unconstitutional. It seems he is calling for us to ban the sale of all guns. By common knowledge, just banning the sale of an item will not make the number of that item in America decrease, so for those who are willing to break the law, there are still options to get one such as theft or manufacturing one.
The accessibility of firearms will certainly go down, but crimes will continue to happen, and this does not guarantee that overall crime will drop by the lack of ability to buy a gun, which is the overall goal of new legislation. Even though the United States is very unique, and it is hard to compare us to any other country, I will try to use Britain as an example to make my point. Ncc-1776.org states that in 1988, all semi-automatic rifles were banned unless you acquire a very hard to get license and register all weapons that were able to be kept. Then in 1996, handguns were also banned requiring the same licensing and registration process. If we compare these dates to the total homicide rate in the country we can see it had little positive, if not completely negative effect. In 1988, the homicide rate was 10.9 per million people according to the Office of National Statistics, raised to 11.4 in 1996 when pistols were banned, and made its way up to 17.3 by 2003.
Though I am not claiming these bans to be the cause of the huge raise in homicide rate, it seems that criminals found other methods to commit the crimes they intended to commit, and incidentally committed more homicide in the country. My point is, criminals obviously were not deterred from committing crimes by new laws, so I do not believe that banning the sale will help our violent problem because much like Britain, criminals here will not stop trying to achieve their goals when a tool such as a firearm is less accessible. What we need to do is help better defend and educate our citizens to deter and stop crime faster.
I very strongly believe that there are much more effective ways of making America a safer place other than restricting our citizens rights. We can put legislation in to make the second amendment work in our favor to defend the things and people we cherish by deterring crime with more citizens owning and carrying firearms. By putting more police officers in our schools and allowing teachers to willingly carry firearms in school, we will start to fortify and defend our children who are the future of this country from criminals with evil intent. Intentions will not be stopped by the lack of access to a certain tool. They will find a way around as we have seen in Britain.
Educating ourselves is also going to be a very important part in enacting solutions that will make a positive difference. The average person, or college student as we have seen in Steven Crowders video don’t actually know a whole lot about firearms and the laws that we already have in place. Getting educated on these laws first, and then seeing what we can do to change, add, or take away, to make America safer is crucial. It is foolish to think we can make changes that we expect to be good if we are not knowledgeable on the topic in the first place. By making these few but impactful changes to start, I truly believe we can start to make America a safer place for everyone to live in, while not taking our rights away.
Cite this page
My sight on the prohibition of firearms. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
The Early Leaders of the United States Confirms that Firearms have
Been part of the American tradition as protection and apart of the second amendment. As we come to reality the use of guns has changed dramatically, because of fast and steady increase in crime and the deaths of americans by far just handguns itself. Thereby the writer affirms that all handguns must be banned because they are the causes of many deaths amongst the people of the world today. To begin, the writer has observed in a recent article about young teens being killed by firearms. Over the years it seem as if its becoming a trend which is very tragic to say. Stating that “Guns will probably kill more young Americans than car accidents in 2015”.
This evidence affirms that guns are a huge problem and something that can be down to prevent so many deaths is to educate people on the effects of handguns and take them off the street. Moreover, according to the writer’s personal experience of a friends death by a handgun as well. Teens in this generation believe that playing with guns are popular and it makes them seem hard. In reality it's a dangerous weapon that is killing innocent people. The writer friend was playing with a gun and it went off which struck him to his death. This undoubtedly demonstrates that handguns need to be banned and only used for emergency.
Although its legal to have a handgun for safety with papers, many people seem to get a hold of guns illegally. For instance if people continue to get illegal guns than that's going to increase the deaths of people. Opponents of of gun control would say that restriction violates an individual liberty guaranteed by the Constitution and cite the need for armed self-defense the. However, they fail to see that it would increase gun violence, such as mass shooting, club shootings, and even robbing. Additionally of gun control would defend the notion that supports gun control would say that since it's so much violence going on, people need guns to protect them against people that are determined to do harmful to others. To conclude, the writer wants readers to understand the major purpose of the effect of gun control and why it should be required. The second amendment may need to be rewritten because the violence in the world is increasing dramatically everyday. Gun control is an issue that need to be discussed.
Cite this page
The early leaders of the United States confirms that firearms have. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Ethical Problems are Self-awareness and Self-care
There are many types of ethical issues that we have in our world today. One ethical issue that exists and that is important today is self-awareness and self-care. We should be able to focus on the awareness of ourselves and our health because not everyone thinks about how important it really is to maintain this.
Although we often don't think about it, not having self-care and awareness is an ethical issue that should be more known. It is an important factor that we know about ourselves and know what keeps us going. In order to take care of ourselves, we should do so physically and mentally. Having this self care and awareness in life could lead to better possibilities as well as the present along with our future lives.
Some ways we can maintain self care is by keeping our mind and bodies healthy. This ethical issue in particular is one that is not very thought of yet should be because of its significance. We as people must take responsibilities for our own well being. Some may say that this is the few of the serious ethical issues out there, but I would have to disagree with this statement. Many people suffer from illness whether it would be mentally or physically mainly because of lack of self-care and awareness. If we make use to ourselves, we could live a healthier lifestyle.
For example, going to the doctor often for physical health and keeping mental health stable, can keep away the negative things that can be thrown our way. This issue can be known as underestimated because us as people could be too caught up in what is around us to even think once about self-awareness and self-care. A couple things that can distract us from taking care of ourselves are working and social media. In order to take control of this in the best way possible is to create a schedule to balance out when we should take time to do these certain things. Everything we do should be done in not too much and in not too little amounts.
Overall, we learn that this ethical issue is for surely not impossible to prevent. As long as we remember to keep self-care and self-awareness in mind, life could be better for us in all ways. Addressing ethical issues instead of simply ignoring them lead us to something greater and a change for what could be made better as well.
Cite this page
ethical problems are self-awareness and self-care. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Extracting Morality from the Prisoner’s Dilemma
Following the publication of his On the Origin of Man, from which the infamous term “survival of the fittest” was derived, Charles Darwin presented The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, applying evolutionary theory to the process of social human evolution. Compared to other species who regularly let their weak members die off for the greater good of the population, humans often create frameworks within society from which we preserve the weaker members of our race.
Perhaps surprisingly, Darwin does not advocate for the former. Instead, he argues that sympathy for our fellow man is in fact an evolutionary strength, and that sympathy is a trait that proves more likely to regenerate, and to be passed on to future generations. It may seem contradictory to think that Darwin’s social evolution theory is in line with his survivalist leanings, but the thought experiment of the prisoner’s dilemma has provided empirical data to support Darwin’s beliefs. This paper will explain what the prisoner’s dilemma is, how the prisoner’s dilemma is a form of game theory, how the rationalizations of the human mind can offer an understanding of decision making and interpreting decisions, and the ways in which our decisions ultimately inform basic morality.
A simple explanation of the prisoner’s dilemma is that it is a thought experiment. More specifically, a situation is posited in which a person must make a choice. The details vary, but the take home is the same: that while each player would individually benefit the most from defecting, both players would benefit the most together through cooperation (King, 2015).
The gist of the story of the prisoner’s dilemma is that both Smith and Jones are brought into the police station, held in solitary confinement, and told they are being charged with a crime. The prosecutors offer a sort of deal: if Smith betrays Jones by confessing while Jones remains silent, Smith goes free and Jones will be sentenced to ten years in prison. Alternately, Jones might rat while Smith remains silent, resulting in Jones going free while Smith is sentenced to ten years in prison.
If both players confess, both are sentenced to five years in prison. If neither confesses, both men will be held for just one year. The dilemma lies in knowing the best solution (where neither man confesses) while also knowing how appealing it might look to the other player to confess and go free, sticking the other man with the sentence for a crime he may or may not have committed (King, 2015). The likelihood of both men confessing grows when we add another piece of information to the storyline: the men are strangers, essentially owing nothing to each other, and acting simply out of self-interest.
The thought experiment of the prisoner’s dilemma can be considered a form of game theory, which attempts to explore decision making through the mathematical analysis of interactions between rational thinkers. Game theory has informed analysts about how to think decision making problem in a systematic fashion, through applying mathematical values to certain behaviors (Ross, 2014). These games typically set two or more opponents opposite each other, either in real experiments or hypothetical ones, in order to assess the choices players make.
Game theory can be applied to economics, military strategy, psychology, business strategy, and so on. These games simulate situations in which one player might take advantage of the other player’s trust in order to best serve his interests: to win. As such, this becomes a kind of abridged example of competitive interactions between humans, using strategies found in Darwin’s evolutionary theory and survival of the fittest (King, 2015). It is in every player’s best interest to always act in his best interest, based on what he thinks the other player will do.
The prisoner’s dilemma and game theory can be used to help us understand how we rationalize, as well as how we interpret such rationalizations into decisions. In the case of the prisoner’s dilemma, the rational thinker might choose to confess, because it is reasonable to believe the other player will also confess, in which case the first player is likely to earn either freedom (in the case player two does not confess) or five years in prison (if both players confess), which is considerably more appealing than fifteen years in prison.
To test this theory, in 1980, Robert Axelrod held a tournament of iterated prisoner’s dilemma games, where he invited game theorists to submit computer programs to play the game against each other. The winner of each game would go on to play another game, with the ultimate goal of accumulating the highest number of points over the course of hundreds of games with other computer programs (DeWitt, 2010). Surprising to most, the simplest program won the majority of games.
It was called Tit for Tat (TfT), and worked as follows: the first time around with a new program, TfT would always cooperate, and the second time TfT saw an opponent, it would either cooperate or retaliate, depending on how the other program treated TfT the first time around. TfT did not simply win the most points, but won by a surprising margin. Thus, in evolutionary terms, TfT was able to reproduce the greatest number of times, thereby providing empirical data about how cooperative behavior is advantageous on an evolutionary scale. This data helps us understand how cooperative behavior emerges in situations that seems particularly oriented toward promoting only self-interest (DeWitt, 2010). While at the outset, cooperation seems like the fool’s move, it has the greatest number of reported successes in long-term, grand scale reiterations of the original prisoner’s dilemma game. This suggests that cooperation can evolve naturally through reason (King, 2015), thereby giving credence to the decision to cooperate despite initial apprehension.
Taking this one step further, the prisoner’s dilemma then helps us understand how we interpret our decisions on a moral basis. In reincarnations of Axelrod’s experiment, in which the players reproduced to play the game against each other hundreds and thousands of times, what began to emerge was a population that shifted from long cycles of “Old Testament”-like behavior (be nice, but retain “eye for an eye” rationalization) to long cycles of “New Testament”-like behavior (be nice, forgive, “turn the other cheek” mentality) and reverting back and forth between the two over the course of many generations (Holodny, 2016).
As applied mathematician Steven Strogatz explains, the evolutionary shift expressed in the many computer simulations sounds a lot like human history, where civilizations that became too nice were eventually taken over by brutal cultures, which were eventually replaced by softer civilizations, and so on (Holodny, 2016). The shift in behaviors according to what decision is reasonable during each subsequent reincarnation of civilization in these computer simulations suggests that we can extrapolate normative ethics or morals from evolutionary evidence. One explanation of moral reasoning explains that it is 1) how we recognize moral considerations, 2) how they move us to act, and 3) opportunities for gathering insight about what we ought to do from how we reason about what we ought to do (Richardson, 2018). Thus, we can assert which decisions are moral based on evolutionary experience, because morality is self-organizing, forming as a result of natural selection (Holodny, 2016). This is how we extract morality from the iterated prisoner’s dilemma.
Having explored what the prisoner’s dilemma is, how it is a form of game theory, how humans tend to rationalize and interpret decisions, and how we can extrapolate morality from those rational decisions, we can see how the prisoner’s dilemma can be used to help us understand moral actions. It would be unwise, however, to proclaim that the data gathered from the iterated prisoner’s dilemma provides us with a clear-cut path to morality. For starters, the prisoner’s dilemma begins on the assumption that cooperation is morally superior to defection, but either can be better depending on the circumstances.
Certainly, there are some situations in which cooperation would be the less moral thing to do. Take cheating for example. A group of students sharing answers on an exam are cooperating, but the moral action is do not cheat; in this case, the defector would be the more moral agent (Hayden, 2013). Furthermore, the experiment run by Axelrod produces an idealized version of real life, by assuming that we perfectly understand the other player’s intentions at all times. In reality, we are likely to come across misunderstandings, in which players will retaliate out of perceived defection, even if their opponent is intending to cooperate. “In a social dilemma, an individual’s prediction of how others will behave can reveal the outcome this individual is intending to realize…the judgments of morality and competence then become an interactive function of observed behavior and perceived intention” (Krueger & DiDonato, 2010). As such, we might begin to extract morality from the prisoner’s dilemma, but we cannot declare the morals derived to be true in all circumstances.
Cite this page
Extracting Morality from the Prisoner's Dilemma. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Ethical Egoism in the Criminal Justice Field
Abstract
Ethical theories are built on ethical principles and bear many characteristics in one’s decision-making process. Each ethical theory tries to follow the principles of ethics, and separately highlight different aspects of the moral dilemma. Each theory attempts to follow the ethical principles that will lead one to make the right decision. When trying to understand each theory, we must look at its weaknesses and strengths to see how one can make an informed ethical decision to an unethical problem. So; that why it is important to remember that each situation will have a different ethical theory behind it. One ethical theory that is covered in this chapter was ethical egoism which as defined by Banks (2017) as a theory about how we ought to behave and how one must do what is best for oneself. Though, ethical egoism has certain pros, it can also have its cons that society cannot be ignored.
Ethical Egoism in the Criminal Justice Field
An ethical egoist with an extreme regard for themselves can lead them to act unethically and have no disregard for others. Also, it can also motivate those in the criminal justice profession to abuse their authority. Ethical egoism has its pros and cons because some ethical egoist may look at their good or self-interest purely as terms of pleasure such as logical views. But it should not be confused with psychological egoism which is defined as the view that motive for the actions are of self-interest.
Pros and Cons of Ethical Egoism
There are several pros of ethical egoism. One pro that Lombardo (2016) noted is can help ensure that a person’s personal needs are met by using their concept of morality. In, other words a person that practices ethical egoism will always ensure their basic needs are meet before another person’s. Another pro that her article talks about is how it can help establish a greater sense of identity, personal identity that is.
She states that when a person practices ethical egoism it will help them identify themselves in a hasty manner and will concentrate on the differences on their own self-interest because they see it as a way to further themselves. Lastly, she talks about how ethical egoism promotes a sustainable household because it reflects a person’s self-identity and can define themselves and their household which in turn means that this household will be more effective because their needs are placed above the outside world’s needs.
All, these pros offer an egoist a self-sacrifice which they believe is not a moral decision, and it offers them short term satisfaction. Looking out for oneself sounds selfish and most people would feel uncomfortable with the of actions that surround ethical egoism. Therefore; let’s look at the cons that surround ethical egoism. Lombardo lists the three cons of ethical egoism as, one it can destroy relationships she explains as if one had a friend that only spent time with you after all their needs had been met.
This action may make some feel as they are only friends at one’s convenience. Second, she states it would eliminate the opinions of what other thought of you. So, basically the opinions of others would not matter to the egoist because they are only looking out for themselves. And lastly, she argues that it would require everyone to practice its philosophy which not everyone agrees with the action of an ethical egoist (Lombardo, 2016). Role of Ethical Egoism in the Criminal Justice System
While all the pros and cons are weighed in ethical egoism and how it plays a role in society let’s look at how it plays a role in the criminal justice system. Ethical egoism will bring up many questions and opinions as to what ethical behavior is and what is not in the criminal justice field. Some ethical problems may arise when judicial judges, officers, or even prosecutors are muddled about the correct thing to do because from time to time the right thing to do may carry a substantial price (Neyround, P. and Beckley A., 2001)
Yet, there are some efforts to those in the criminal justice system behave with standers in the code of ethics and conduct. Primarily those in the criminal justice system will always have their choices made as the focus of their ethical behavior when performing their duties. Mostly, because in this profession you are to exercise your ability to use discretion because it comes with that responsibility and those that act unethical are held accountable for their actions, at times.
However; when we hear of corrupt agents or officers in the criminal justice system, it makes the system look bad. The past actions of many corrupt officials will reveal a pattern of unethical activity, and it is also noted that their behavior is acted on by their ethical egoism. Corruption, excessive force, discrimination, negligence, violation one’s rights, violation of policies and procedures, or the abuse of the code of ethics, are just a few examples of possible ethical problems that are faced in the criminal justice system. Many of these problems only will create an immoral perspective of the system and its ethical egoism (Miller, 2017).
Characteristics of Ethical Egoism
Ethical egoism also occurs in the criminal justice system because there are many personalities throughout the profession. Some imagine being considered a hero in society, and they develop a great pleasure from this role. But there that same pleasure may carry out decisions that are motivated by one's own personal gain which is characterized as self-interest or egoism. For example, an officer may feel compelled to rid the world of crime and could use any means they deem necessary to get rid of the criminals in society (Cohen 1991). Yes, an officer should have a mentally to try and rid the world of crime, but that should not be their only interest in their profession. This behavior shows the inappropriate and disregard of the value of ethics and impacts the public's image of police officers, or any professional in the criminal justice system.
Conclusion
Thus, taking the pros and cons into account as mentioned, it is possible to conclude that the concept of ethical egoism is the view in some way leads with contradiction. It persuades one’s action to be one that promotes their own self-interest, and typically, egoists advocate the pursuance of the good things in life regardless of the feelings or concerns of others (Banks, 2017). Ethical egoism no less is looked like a personal interest and may sometimes require one to sacrifice their own interest to create balance.
References
- Banks, C. (2017). Criminal Justice Ethics: Theory and Practice, 4th Edition.
- Cohen H., Feldberg M., (1993). Power and Restraint: The Moral Dimension of Police Work, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice
- Miller, S., & Blackler, J. (2017). Ethical issues in policing. Routledge.
- Neyround, P. and Beckley A., Straw, M. P, R. (2001). Policing, Ethics, and Human Rights. London: Willan.
- Lombardo, C. (2016). Pros and Cons of Ethical Egoism retrieved from:
- http://visionlaunch.com/pros-and-cons-of-ethical-egoism/
- Broad, C. D. (2014). Five types of ethical theory. Routledge.
Cite this page
Ethical Egoism in the Criminal Justice Field. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
A Hero’s Ethical Decision
During the war in Afghanistan, a four man SEAL team was tasked with a reconnaissance and surveillance mission in the Hindu Kush region of Afghanistan. The SEAL team, led by LT Michael Murphy, was inserted into the mountainous region where they had issues with communications back to the operations center. Despite the communications problems they found a concealed spot in a wooded area above the village to survey from. While surveilling the village for they were spotted by a young goat herder.
At this point the team knew they had two choices: Kill the goat herder and continue the mission or let the herder go and abort the mission knowing that he will inform the Taliban leaders about their presence. LT Murphy ordered the team to let the herder go and abort the mission. As they suspected, the goat herder notified the Taliban of their presence and location. While the team was attempting to retrograde out of the area they were intercepted and outnumbered by Taliban forces. A fire fight ensued and all but one of the SEALs was killed in action. Marcus Luttrell was the “Loan Survivor” who lived to tell their story.
I chose this story because it outlines the ethical foundation set in us by the American culture. It also shows the ethical foundation of people from other cultures. The most obvious ethical dilemma in this situation was whether or not to kill the goat herder. This was a “no win” situation in the eyes of the team leader. To kill the goat herder was a violation of the rules of engagement and violated the ethical values of the team. To allow the goat herder to go free would guarantee that the mission would not be successful and would also expose the team to the risk of being compromised and killed. Unfortunately the latter was the decision and the outcome.
There were more ethical dilemmas in this situation that were overshadowed by the main point of the story. For example, LT Murphy had to make a decision to leave his cover and concealment while engaged with the enemy in order to get a satellite phone signal to call for immediate evacuation. He could have remained in cover until they were either found by the Taliban or the Taliban forces retreated due to darkness. His other option was to expose himself in a high clearing to get a signal. LT Murphy’s ethical values and warrior ethos wouldn’t allow him to risk the team to be captured. Thus, LT Murphy exposed himself in the clearing, got a satellite signal, and called for support. Unfortunately, he was mortally wounded in the process. He would die as a selfless hero in the eyes of Americans because of his ethics.
Later in the story, after three of his four team members were killed, Marcus Luttrell was evading capture. He made his way to a small body of water near the Afghan and Pakistan border. He was eventually found by a Pushton villager. At this point Marcus was near death due to his injuries and could have been left for dead or turned over to the Taliban for a reward. However, the Pushton man followed the Pashtunwali communal code of ethics called nanawatai. This means to provide forgiveness and asylum, or protection and refuge from one’s enemies at all costs (Banting, 2003). This is why the Pushton villager saved Marcus’ life and continued to protect him from the Taliban forces. The Pushton man’s decision to follow his ethical values of providing refuge to Marcus from his enemies, including physically fighting off the Taliban when they were searching for Marcus, resulted in his rescue by friendly forces and receiving treatment for his injuries (Luttrell, 2007).
The question is; what made that team of four elite operators make the decisions that they did on their final day on earth? Why did LT Murphy choose to expose himself to the enemy in order to call for help for the rest of his team? And, why did the Pushton villager risk his own lively hood to save the life of Marcus Luttrell.
When we, as learners, were in a pedagogical state of learning, we were learning at a rate faster than we could process the information. This means that we were building our information banks but not really reflecting on what was being stored (Craik, 2006). Now that we are adults, we are in a full andragogic state of learning. This means that we are self-directed learners. We are self-motivated and bring vast experiences to the learning environment. Our ethics were embedded in us at an early age. We learned the information and stored it for later retrieval. We rarely if ever reflected on it until we reached our adult age.
As adults we are now reflecting on that information and the information that is being learned now (Keiser 2013). This is what brought Michael Murphy, Marcus Luttrell, Danny Dietz, and Matthew Axelson to make the decisions that they did. They were acting on ethics that were embedded in them from an early age. This wasn’t a new concept for them. There wasn’t much question or debate about what needed to happen. They all agreed that they couldn’t detain or kill the goat herder even though letting him go would mean extreme risk for them. Even as highly trained warriors who are experts in neutralizing enemies, they knew to take this young man’s life was a violation of their ethics and values.
We could assume that at the time of this situation each of the team members asked themselves the five questions of ethical problem solving. The first question being; what benefits and what harms will each course of action produce, and which alternative will lead to the best overall consequences? This would have guided them down the utilitarian approach leading them to choose the solution that provided the greatest benefit and the least harm to all involved. We can assume that at the time the team thought that they could egress and evacuate before the goat herder could notify the Taliban.
If this would have been the case then the goat herder lives, all the members of the team live, and the only thing hurt is the mission being aborted. The second question that they should have asked themselves is, what moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course of action best respects those rights? This is the rights approach to ethics. They likely answered this question by realizing that the goat herder was a non-combatant and a minor child. Therefore this guides them to realize that the goat herder has a right to not be harmed or injured.
The next question was likely, which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there is a morally justifiable reason not to, and does not show favoritism or discrimination? This is the fairness and justice approach. This again would guide them to let the boy go. The fourth question would have been; which course of action advances the common good? This is the common good approach. Again, if their initial thought process was that they could extract before the boy could notify the enemy then they were looking at the common good of all involved. Finally, they would ask, which course of action develops moral virtues? This is the virtues approach.
This is more based on the character of the individual making the decision. This is where the team would have had to decide what to do based on virtues like courage, generosity, integrity, fairness, and compassion. This, of course, would not have been the formula to find the final solution. As we know the end result was not favorable. However, this method would have helped them to identify important ethical considerations.
Of the five approaches to ethics one sticks out as the most relevant in this scenario. That is the rights approach. Ultimately, not knowing the intentions of the goat herder, the team could not say with full certainty that the goat herder would cause them physical harm. Therefore, based on the rights approach, the goat herder still had his right to not be harmed. This is likely what led the team to let the goat herder go (Velasquez, 2015).
Respect, responsibility, integrity, competence, and concern played a role in the team’s decision. Despite the team being an instrument of war, they still maintained the respect for human life and the fact that the herder was just a boy. They didn’t act on their impulse to self-preserve, instead they spared the boy’s life when they could have easily silenced him and continued the mission. They knew that they had a responsibility to do the right thing even though they could have killed the boy and continued the mission. Their integrity prevented them making any other decision besides what they deemed to be ethically right. The team had the knowledge and competence of their standard operating procedures to understand how to act in the given situation. Finally, they had concern for the life of the boy who they spared. These five characteristics were the foundation for their code of ethics.
The team had a decision to make. LT Michael Murphy had a decision to make. The Pushton villager had a decision to make. Even the goat herder had a decision to make. It all boiled down to their individual core values and what they believed to be right or wrong based on what they learned from an early age and what they grew to value as the matured. The special operators spared a life that cost them their own. LT Murphy gave up his own life to save those of his team. The villager risked his life to save the life of a stranger and the young goat herder gave up the position of the team even though they spared his life. Four different people from different cultures and backgrounds made different ethical decisions that would save, change and cost lives for years to come.
Cite this page
A Hero’s Ethical Decision. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Abortion is the most Controversial and Debated Topic
They found themselves in ethical dilemma as so many emotional aspects attach with that decision. Abortion can be discussing in my point of view by different people based on ethical, moral and medical ground. As controversial topics there are argument in favor and against the abortion.
In our whole life we come across so many moral and ethical dilemma which is very hard to resolve and accepted. Abortion is one of them, as strong point in favor of him and against it. As a nursing student I found this issue is very heart touching and emotional issue. Because it deals with the human life, so it is obvious that has big ethical dilemma whether it is right to do it or not. Around the world women has unequal rules and issue for abortion. According to me key point is does abortion need due to any kind of medical reason.
During the antenatal visit of pregnant women if it was found out that may be new born baby born with any kind of congenital malformation or deformity. In this kind of scenario, it is very critical for parents to make decision, because now they know that if they go with pregnancy child born with deformity. Other hand they have choice to go for abortion. So many times, we see cases that parents come with accidental pregnancy means they does not want child at time, as they are not prepared for new responsibility due to carrier or job. This kind of unwanted pregnancy occur due to contraception failure. No matter any reason abortion remains most arguable topic now a days. In any case abortion been most controversial topic with different opinion in favor and against. I think morality play a major role in making decision when it comes to abortion.
Applying Kant’s Categorical formula, every human must obey the law of morality no matter what the situation. His first categorical imperative is following,” Act only on that maxim whereby toucans at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Yudanin 2015). So according to Kant morally it is very hard to take decision on abortion. But many times, in such critical medical condition lead to derogate Kant moral view on abortion. And I am personally not agreed with Kant moral theory to take decision on abortion, as question of life and death come for mother and baby. I think parents must be practical and make decision to save the life no matter what the ethical and moral values says.
Some people talk of abortion on deontological point. In article by Stammers, (2016), they say parents have duty to take care of their child and not go for abortion. As deontological theory says that to always right and moral things. But the issue come when some women get raped and get pregnant, should she have right to go for abortion? Many people say encourage women to go for abortion will add more mental and physical trauma to their life. They argue that women should give birth to that child and take care. For me hard to go with or against author because I think it is personal call of person either to go for abortion or not.
One another key point of arguments on this issue is about pro-life and pro-choice arguments. Author Korcz(2002) says the arguments come from both sides of debate. The point is that should abortion be legal option. Pro-life arguments say that women have right to whether she want to go for it or not, and not limited by government or any kind of religious authority. As author Korcz says, “Given that we lack an adequate, complete criterion for determine when creatures have right to life or terminate at twentieth week of pregnancy”. I agree with author that every woman has given legal right whether to bear pregnancy or not. Because if we do not do that and have make women to have baby chances that she does not take care of him or her. As she does not want it and no any kind of emotional ties attach to child. It is not good for society I think women must have right to take appropriate decision.
Large group of people in favor of abortion laws, they argue that if due to any kind of serious medical condition to women must have right to go for abortion. Key point in their point if abortion need medically means some couple does not want child with any kind of congenital deformity and I think our legal system must give them right to go for abortion. She must have access to this medical service without any kind of restriction. ‘’ In January 1973, the U S supreme court affirmed our constitutional right to abortion, and 44 year later, most Americans believe the landmark Roe or Wade decision must be proacted (Busby, 2017)”. In so many cases birth control option is failing, and couple end up with unwanted pregnancy and that time they must give option to go for abortion. Another key point according me in favor of abortion is, it gives women time, space, mental and physical preparation to ready for that new responsibility. So, she can make better future to his kid and herself.
One of the critical points of view is about moral and ethical value involve in to making this kind of decision. When ethics and morality come to health care field it is very tricky and hard situation to make right decision. As author Patil, A (2014) says that ethics focus on moral goods than natural goods. I think moral and ethical dilemma comes when you as a health care provider thinks killing human life before it comes to world. Kant’s philosophy his metaphysics in defense of abortion rights. He always supports and advocate abortion rights. I agree with the author about abortion right to every woman.
For the abortion, I believe we know that many people and religions disapprove it, but it is still practiced. The nurse ethical dilemma here is the ethical rights and the responsibilities in the abortion processes. Knowing that nurses have the ethical and moral obligation to protect and promote life, as a nurse, I would choose to advocate for my patient, moreover the incapacitate ones, respecting the choice of the mother or her surrogate decision-maker.
Given all the above, we are concluding that the population has remained divided on the abortion question. The fact that people are different about this very point tends to render the pro-life and the pro-choice paradigms somewhat “incommensurable,” and this is probably one major reason why people are tempted to arrive at different conclusions about this topic. For my last word, I would say that abortion is a personal moral ethic and I should not render judgment on anyone`s action.
As a nursing student I strongly believe this topic in bit tricky and controversial. As it related with human life, we as a people must be more sensible and thoughtful when talk or discuss about this kind of topic. I agree with decision of abortion of parents if any kind of medical malformation may be occurred in new born child, in such case if they go for abortion is should be justified. But some parents just want to go for that because they are not ready for new child, that sound unethical because Afterall in abortion you can kill the new born baby in womb. I am not agreed with those kinds.
Reference
- Busby, Heather (2017, January 23). Abortion is health care, by Heather Busby. Retrieved May 14, 2017, from http:// www.tribtalk.org 2017/01/23 abortion -is- healthcare.
- Korcz, K. (2002). Two Moral Strategies Regarding Abortion. Journal Of Social Philosophy, 33(4), 581-605.
- Stammers, T. (2016). The Ethics of Pregnancy, Abortion and Childbirth: Exploring.
- Choices in Childbearing. The New Bioethics: A Multidisciplinary Journal Of Biotechnology And The Body, 22(3), 256-258. doi:10.1080/20502877.2016.1238578.
- Patil, A(2014). Medical Ethics in abortion, Indian journal of Clinical practice. Retrieved from May 13,2017.
- Yudanin, M. (2015). Can Positive Duties be Derived from Kant's Categorical Imperative?
- Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 18(3), 595-614. doi:10.1007/s10677-014-9546-4.
Cite this page
Abortion is the most controversial and debated topic. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Other Ethical Issues with Health Information
- 1.) Who do you think actually owns the medical records (patient, physician’s office, or EMR vendors)?
- 2.) What are your thoughts on this ethical dilemma?
- 3.) Should your medical record be own by multiple medical facilities?
1.) Who do you think actually owns the medical records (patient, physician’s office, or EMR vendors)?
I believe the physician’s office actually owns the medical records even though the patients contribute to relaying their intimate health information to their healthcare providers for guidance relative to overall wellness and treatment when indicated.
2.) What are your thoughts on this ethical dilemma?
My thoughts to this ethical dilemma would be to make sure you find trustworthiness within your provider so that you can openly discuss details about your health care information that you normally wouldn’t share with others nonchalantly. I feel that the patient does have a right to what they are willing to disclose to their provider as far as if they get a feeling like the providers aren’t listening to them, health care may be postponed or restricted altogether. Be it as it may, even though I think the physician’s office may be the sole proprietor of owning a patient’s electronic health record, if the trust, compassion, and empathy is there when developing a patient-provider relationship, then patients feel at ease and may not feel the need to request a copy of their personal records. Now I am not saying that just because this relationship may be there, that a patient can’t request a copy because they can sign a release of information or (ROI) authorization, as they most certainly can. I feel that if mutual respect is obtained then both parties can feel like they can work together as a team which is beneficial and the ultimate goal we want to see when caring for our patients.
3.) Should your medical record be own by multiple medical facilities?
I feel that my medical record should be owned by certain medical facilities I deem necessary or appropriate in which will benefit me in maintaining my overall health and wellness in the long run. Now, I believe that our healthcare provider may have expertise in certain areas or conditions we may have or acquire, therefore the need to intervene with other specialists either internally or externally can be beneficial. Most likely, your health care provider has the rights to provide care within one health system and your insurance company establishes boundaries in regard to copays, deductibles, etc. to work hand-in-hand with that provider giving discounts provided that you stay within their network.
Now, some times you may want a second opinion whether-it-be: internally (who your PCP would recommend) or externally (depending on what research you may come up with) that would be the most beneficial to your health, even if you ultimately decide to go with the internal PCP suggestion. For example, “I have my health care located within the Marshfield Clinic Health System or MCHS because it is more conducive for me as an employee of the clinic, which makes sense. However, when I had to have radiofrequency ablation on horrific painful varicose veins and a stent placed in my iliac vein to restore blood flow to that leg, I decided to go through Surgical Associates with Aspirus (an external provider) as I felt it would be more beneficial for me. I, of course, weighed my options and have done thorough research between an internal provider and an external provider; even though it may have costed a bit more as an out-of-network provider, I was beyond happy with the results and my recovery time was minimal. If I would have to do it again, I certainly would.
References:
- https://www.clinicalcorrelations.org/2010/01/15/the-ethics-of-electronic-health-records/
- https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/5def5f5f8757f/5256937?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%2
Cite this page
Other Ethical Issues with Health Information. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
Disagreeing with Ethical Egoism
In philosophy, ethical egoism is the right policy that everybody should act to endorse his or her personal goals and welfare. Ethical egoism is different from psychological egoism since ethical egoism teaches how individuals should act rather than how they behave while psychological means overvaluation of one’s importance, or of one’s activities. Therefore, the quest for one’s self-regard should at all times be individuals’ main objective. Egoism has two deviations, descriptive or normative (Matterhorn 39). The descriptive or positive variation perceives egoism as a realistic picture of people’s concerns. That is, the quest for people to fulfill and interests motivate them. The normative method suggests that society should be self-driven irrespective of what is driving their deeds. A person prefers to attend to their needs before thinking of others since nobody must uphold any person’s happiness.
Ethical egoism is regularly associated with a lack of interest in other people’s well-being to favor personal welfare. However, egotism should not be likened with self-centeredness because it is habitually a person’s concern to help others or to desist from hurting them. For example, a philosopher known as Rand uses a situation of a man who used all of his wealth to provide for his wife’s hospital bills and he also states that such noble deeds do not occur to outsiders. He further says that such situations do not often happen especially to an egoist there has to be a motivation or a connection for them to help a person. Therefore, the kind of actions we accomplish for the sake of other people such as family and friends are undeserving to everybody. Nevertheless, Rand also defines such deed as a prize which men have to get through their qualities and which one cannot provide to ordinary colleagues. Therefore, unfamiliar persons are not deserving of such deeds, and by any chance, we should avoid doing damage to people, but our responsibilities to help them are also insignificant.
Though moral egotism has some demands because of its ability to resolve moral codes and selfishness, the concept has nearly been wholly overruled as a suitable ethical model. One of the utmost simple reproaches is that ethical egoists normally falsify humanity; the policy competes against ethical egoism and the origin of ethics on a concern for others’ interests. Rand, a philosopher, claims that, if a person embraces selflessness then the individual should also embrace low self-confidence, a discern insolent concerning others as a dreadful outlook (David). Rand and Stirner fail to reflect on the need for helping others; they identify philanthropy as the only weakness to personal objectives (Stuart). I disagree with their view on how they state that ethics involve everyone, and the universal well-being of others, even if it is not the best motivation of principles, is a crucial factor of any broad ethical model.
I disagree with the concept, especially because some philosophers such as Rand’s happen to count on a tricky problem or dilemma. Altruism is regarded as the only substitute outlook to moral egoism, and once it is let go, egoism is validated. The egoism theory is unsatisfactory since it overlooks arguments and contradictions of a range of other just models. There are many difficulties associated with this theory and can only be solved in case more arguments are employed to support it since in my view the approach only recommend and overlook the puplic interests, which results to a captivating speculative problem. The question is, how can ethical egoism be reflected as ethically necessary if its supporters do not want it to be universally functional?
Moreover, the theory does not offer means of solving conflicts of concern. Ethical egoism recommends both parties to pursue their individual goals. It does not propose any form of conflict resolution. For example, if ethical egoism were more broadly used to come into decision involving two parties, preferably a person’s happiness would clash with another person’s goals and welfare. Therefore, in such a situation, it will be difficult to reach a decision so as not to look like you are favoring one party and discriminating the other. Thus, it would be difficult for both to pursue their welfare at the same time. For example, if persons A and B are to be chosen to participate in a football game A would prefer that they may be selected than from B and vice versa while it would be right picking both of them to participate in the game.
Also, James Rachels objects the ethical egoism theory. Rachels likens ethical egoism with discrimination or racism concerning its theoretical structure. People who are racists or those who discriminate separate people into groups and behave towards them in a different way grounded on the characteristics without validation that their race is any upright than the others, thus interpreting racism as an uninformed policy. Also, moral egoists emphasize how people discriminate others by dividing them in groups of people; themselves and the rest. Egoists disregard the welfares of the first group and regard the interests of those in the second set as more significant (Rachels, and Stuart). The individualist cannot provide valid reasons for the differences among both sets of the groups. Therefore, Rachels regarded ethical egoism as an illogical theory and other people from the different race should be presented with equal moral concerns same as us since their values and needs are similar to our own.
To summarize, ethical egotism is broadly rejected theory with few modern supporters. The review of the original principle of the ethical egoism will lead to the development of a just moral theory. Therefore, lack of psychological egoism can lead to people’s failure to accomplish their goals if their desire to do so does not come from within their heart and self-interest. Moral egoism states that it is right for people to do something without being motivated by any goals or interest. Just like ethical egoist claims that each person has a moral duty to follow his or her self-interest, I am the one who best discerns what I need, so egoism comes before the interests of others.
Cite this page
disagreeing with ethical egoism. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
When to Choose between Two Equal Undesirable Alternatives
Introduction
When an ethical dilemma occurs in the field of medicine, there is a need to find a practical solution. There are different ways to approach a moral dilemma. The first step is determining the situation that causes the dilemma. It is challenging to identify an ethical dimension in a problem. Discussing the dilemma with seniors or colleagues is important although learning to make a reasonable decision in the face of the dilemma is critical. The main factor influencing an ethical dilemma is behavior or attitude. Examples include organizational goals, personal character, and conflict of individual-based values. The purpose of the study below is to identify the way ethics apply to deal with different issues.
The following is a case study of a woman who had an emergency in stomach pains. The physician performs a CT scan and diagnoses her with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, which upon stretching can burst and cause death. The patient is advised to have surgery as soon as possible. She refuses the surgery giving an excuse that she is an erotic dancer and the scar left could affect it. The physicians try to pressure her on the importance, but she refuses. The physicians feel the woman needed assistance but could not make the right choice. The ethical dilemma in the case occurs when the doctor has to decide on the best action to take to help the patient. The caring response, in this case, is making sure the patient receives treatment where the six steps result to the final decision of performing the surgery.
It is advisable to gather all the relevant information from the patient before making a decision. After analyzing the ethical issue in a situation, it is easy to identify the critical aspect of the problem. It involves identifying the questions that need an answer and searching for the relevant principles that should apply. The appropriate source of information is from the patient, the field experts, and also from fellow staff. Its relevance is to ensure that the main issue is addressed. From the gathered information, one can decide whether to perform an act or not. There are various types of information that can help to analyze the patient’s situation in the case. They comprise the number of sources of income, her responsibilities, and status information. Among the questions to ask the patient include: the number of sources of income she has, her duties, how flexible she is to adjust to the change of occupation, availability of anyone to assist her in the responsibilities, and whether she has a spouse.
Different types of ethical problems comprise type A, type B, ethical dilemma, locus of authority, and moral distress. Type A focus on internal and external barriers, and type B deals with truth. Moral distress focus on whether something is wrong as well as negative consequences. Locus of authority asks whether somebody could be influencing the decision, while moral distress deals with personal behavior. Therefore, type A ethical dilemma is more relevant in this case since it involves two aspects of care. The woman is afraid of losing the dance work that helps her in raising income, and the situation is demanding for a surgery. The surgery is a barrier to the work she does as it can burst if stretched and dancing involves a lot of dancing.
Three theories can help in analyzing the situation. They include utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. To start with, the utilitarianism deals with outcomes such as performing an act that is more beneficial. Then, deontology is based on the duty to help in decision making. The most relevant question to ask in this theory is whether to focus on duties as a guide in making choices. Lastly, virtue ethics focus on the character of an ethical person. Therefore, the approach that fits in the case is utilitarianism. The approach applies when the physician convinces the woman on the importance of the surgery despite losing her job. The benefit of the physician is that she can be able to do other types of work after it heals. However, failure for the surgery will not enable her to work.
Generating a working strategy that ensures that all patients receive assistance is crucial. Hence, it is essential to look for information and brainstorm all the ideas from the answers given by the patient. The characteristics include an ability to generate information fast, put the information in an orderly manner, and offer the participant equal opportunity and find significance in all ideas. The case indicates that the patient has to receive surgery to survive.
The following are three quality alternatives in the case. The first option is the failure to do the surgery upon which the patient dies. The second alternative is performing the operation and losing the work. The third alternative is to leave the patient alone to decide on what she wants. However, it is more appropriate to convince the patient to accept the surgery. The reason is that there are other work opportunities she can get after recovery.
It may be difficult to convince the patient about the advantages of performing the surgery. However, the doctor has to apply the utilitarianism theory to assist her. There are hindrances on deciding to do it such as lack of patient’s agreement and a risk that can occur when the surgery leads to more complications. The steps to ensure the process is successfully done is being positive about the outcomes and convincing the patient on the possibility of getting another job. However, when the information acquired from the patient indicates more harm after the surgery occurs, it may not be necessary to take action.
Self-evaluation is essential in making the right decision and achieving expected results. It offers a possibility to assess the advantages and disadvantages that result from decision making. Nursing, which is my future profession, is more demanding regarding self-evaluation. It is important to review the past evaluation method results and do a self-evaluation. In case there are hardships in making the decision, it is ethically right to do some consultation from my team or more experienced persons.
Conclusion
The case study illustrates the relevant aspects of a decision-making process. There are specific ethics that apply depending on the case study. The first thing when deciding on what ethics apply in a particular case and the way to approach it is gathering all relevant information and analyzing it. The issue of analysis, in this case, was the reason for declining surgery. On ascertaining the information, the idea of the physician to perform the surgery was more applicable. The fifth step is the most difficult in dealing with this case. It is the final decision that comprises making a step where the best ethical choice has to take place. The analysis can be useful in my future nursing career when gathering information and assessing a moral dilemma.
Cite this page
When to Choose Between Two Equal Undesirable Alternatives. (2021, Nov 29).
Retrieved November 2, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/
