Recent orders
Drunk Driving
Student’s Name
Professor
Course
Date
Drunk Driving
Drunk driving can be defined as the operation of a vehicle when one is under the influence of alcohol or any other drug which has negative impacts. The act is treated as a crime in many states as it has dramatically affected so many lives as well as families. Driving under the influence of alcohol has never been of any value, and thus one is left wondering why then do people want to do it regardless of it having adverse effects rather than positive impacts. This topic majorly targets the licensed drivers and their attitudes and opinions towards driving under the influence of drugs whether legal or illegal.
It is pretty clear that some of these drivers know the harmful effects of these drugs, but they sometimes choose not to care at all. Most of these drivers show a lot of acceptance to driving under the influence of legal drugs rather than the illegal ones, and they then end up facing the same adverse effects. Research shows that many of these drivers acknowledge driving under the influence of drugs being a primary concern and they ironically suggest that more attention should be drawn to the roads. It is, therefore, correct to say that, most licensed drivers if not all know the adverse effects that are associated with drunk driving.
According to the attitudes and perspectives of these licensed drivers, I tend to think that they are just reckless and serious action should then be taken against them. I believe that they also don’t care about other people’s lives as well as their own. According to my personal view, any licensed driver caught driving under the influence of a drug that has any negative effect should have their license taken away for at least not less than two years.
I think it is possible to persuade any licensed driver who has ever driven under the influence of drugs or drives under this influence especially when I bring to their attention the fact that an effective action like that of losing their licenses would be taken against them. I would explain to them how drunk driving has no positive impact but only cause harm to them, their families as well as the people around them. Telling them to think of the pain they bring to people who are affected by their bad habits would also help in the persuasion.
My goal for this speech would be ensuring that a large number of licensed drivers do not drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Therefore, the speech can be said to be based on a value as it is up to the drivers to understand the harmful effects of drunk driving as well as the overall adverse effects to them and every person around them and then choose to leave the bad habit for the well-being of everyone including themselves.
Conclusively, people, especially the ones who operates locomotives should change if at all they are victims of drunkenness and that they should always strive to be good drivers regardless of them being watched or not. This would be determined by asking them who have been involved in drunk driving before and is ready to change as well as who will take the initiative of informing others to avoid driving under the influence of drugs
Work Cited.
Hansen, Benjamin. “Punishment and deterrence: Evidence from drunk driving.” American Economic Review 105.4 (2015): 1581-1617.
Moan, Inger Synnøve, Thor Norström, and Elisabet E. Storvoll. “Alcohol use and drunk driving: the modifying effect of impulsivity.” Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs 74.1 (2013): 114-119.
Pettersson, HaKan, and Bertil Hok. “Preventive and persuasive actions against drunk driving.” U.S. Patent No. 8,370,027. 5 Feb. 2013.
Fast foods Article Summary
Fast foods Article Summary
Author
Institution
Harvard Prevention Research Center on Nutrition and Physical Activity (2013). Where and Why are Youth Eating Fast Food? Harvard Press.
Summary
Fast foods have become extremely popular especially among the youths. It is not surprising that quite a lot of fast food establishments are located close to colleges and other educational institutions. This article outlines a research conducted to determine what informs the choice of young people regarding fast foods. Given that the alternative to fast foods is healthy foods offered in other restaurants, the study aimed at determining why students choose fast food establishments over those other restaurants.
A sample of 90 high school and college students was used in the study. The study would be carried out in fast food establishments where the students went for lunch. This was done once the participants appeared to be close to clearing their meals.
This study determined that 74% of the participants considered price in their choice for fast foods. Healthy foods were considerably expensive than fast foods in which case they chose the latter. This explains why healthy restaurants have less youth customers than their fast food counterparts. However, 49% of these stated that they would still not opt for healthy establishments even if the prices were the same, against 51% who answered in the affirmative.
In addition, about 51% of the participants disagreed with the thought of making the school environment healthier through regulation of high-fat and sugary foods in the vending machines. This research study comes in handy as far as informing policies that would be effective in solving the problem of fast foods. Rather than focusing on new fast food places, it is imperative that more healthy and cheap options are provided to promote the consumption of healthy foods.
Usefulness
The usefulness of this article is demonstrated by the precise findings that the article presents regarding the priorities of meals, by youths. Apparently, youths do not care about healthy eating habits, but the youths have other priorities and considerations as time, convenience and cost when making decisions on the place to go for their meals and what to eat for their meals. The article is also objective; as it presents both sides of the argument surrounding fast foods.
Carlson, A., Kinsey, J., & Nadav, C (1998). Who Eats What, When, and From Where? Working Paper 98-05,The Retail Food Industry Center.
Summary
This article outlines a study that is built on the premise that while consumers use a small portion of their income on food, a large portion of the same is spent on convenience and food service. It aimed at determining the sources of the foods that individuals report to eating, as well as determining whether there exist significant variations between individuals that obtain their foods in retail food stores and those that obtain them from elsewhere. It acknowledged that household composition and income have little impact on the sources, while age determined immensely the sources, times and number of meals that individuals ate.
The study used data obtained from a 1994 study by Continuing Survey on Food Intake of Individuals (CSFII), which revealed the full range of foods consumed by individuals, times and places of consuming them, as well as sources. Grouping the 5,589 individuals into different categories, the study labeled the largest cluster as Home Cookers, who it noted accounted for 59% of the food offered in retail food stores as they obtained 93 % of its food from the stores.
On the other hand, the high service cluster, despite making only 10% of the sample, accounted for the consumption of half the amount of food that is offered in restaurants, while taking about 6% of the grocery foods. This underlines the fact that income is a determinant of the places where individuals obtained their foods, as well as the quality of foods that individuals consumed. This is complemented by the results that show that individuals eating Fast Foods consumed less than average amounts of fat, while the High Service individuals consumed more fat. It is worth noting that Home Cookers consumed considerably less amounts of vegetables, eggs, and meat than the average.
Usefulness
This article provides vital information to policy makers and restaurant owners in determining the most affordable price for healthy meals. The article proved that income was a key determinant of meals that are consumed by individuals, which means that people eat the meals that they can afford. Further, the article sends a word of caution to people who do not consume adequate meat and vegetable are required by the body. All classes of food are vital for body functioning, and they should be consumed in the right quantities.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality2
StudentADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : [ { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “Journal Article”, “ISBN” : “00483915”, “ISSN” : “0048-3915”, “abstract” : “As I write this, in November Ig7I, people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. The suffering and death that are occurring there now are not inevitable, not unavoidable in any fatalistic sense of the term. Constant poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war have turned at least nine million people into destitute refu- gees; nevertheless, it is not beyond the capacity of the richer nations to give enough assistance to reduce any further suffering to very small proportions. The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering. Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way. Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demand- ing increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs.”, “author” : [ { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singer”, “given” : “Peter”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } ], “container-title” : “Philosophy & Public Affairs”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : [ [ “1972” ] ] }, “page” : “229u2013243”, “title” : “Famine, affluence, and morality”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “1” }, “uris” : [ “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6ef0dfa9-4b18-4ab8-bd6e-2b8762d469f9” ] } ], “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 0 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Singer)’s Name
Professor’s Name
Subject
Date
Famine, Affluence, and Morality
In the article, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that human beings have an obligation to help those who are in need. He criticizes the ordinary way of thinking about the nature of famine, relief, and charity. Additionally, the issue of morality is brought to light in a way that shakes the ordinary way of thinking that is widely accepted by many people. People of affluent especially those in countries like the United States are morally obligated to give more in the form of aid. International aid especially to third world countries ought to be prioritized due to the urgent nature of the matter. He acknowledges that people in affluent countries give donations to third world countries but is quick to point out that they are not enough to cater for the needs of those in need of food and medical care. The purpose of this document is to evaluate the article by giving the reasons for concluding in addition to providing a criticism of the article given the points given by Singer.
The first argument given by Singer to support his stance is the fact that it is bad when people die from lack of food, shelter and proper medical care. Whether one should help the suffering is not depended on the closeness between the two parties. Distance does not mean a lot when it comes to the issue of suffering. Distance does not reduce the effects of suffering in any way. The power of influence also comes up at this point. Ones willingness to help those who are in need does not depend on the power of the influence exerted by other individuals on them. The willingness should not go away if in the presence of other people who do nothing about the plight of those who are suffering.
The second principle given by Singer touches on the importance given to morality. If it’s in the power of human beings to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing something that is of more importance regarding the moral obligation then making a choice should not be a hard thing since it does not make one handicapped. He points out on the importance of not sacrificing anything that is morally significant thereby weakening the mandate placed on the helpers. An example given on this principle is the action of helping a child that is drowning where in fact the helper gets wet in the process. This premises on the fact that saving the child is morally significant as compared to the death of the child which would be morally costly in the process. Singer points out that there is a clear difference between what is just and what is obligatory. However, this should not be used as a justification for not donating to charity. The importance morality places on charity require individuals to look further from their society since their needs are as pressing as our own. Additionally, moral codes necessitate that expectations should not be high given the fact that people have their shortcomings that differ from one person to another. One objection to this thesis put across by Singer is that it does not generate happiness. It rather relieves suffering in addition to preventing death. It is the ordinary moral code and not the expectation of many ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : [ { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “Journal Article”, “ISBN” : “00483915”, “ISSN” : “0048-3915”, “abstract” : “As I write this, in November Ig7I, people are dying in East Bengal from lack of food, shelter, and medical care. The suffering and death that are occurring there now are not inevitable, not unavoidable in any fatalistic sense of the term. Constant poverty, a cyclone, and a civil war have turned at least nine million people into destitute refu- gees; nevertheless, it is not beyond the capacity of the richer nations to give enough assistance to reduce any further suffering to very small proportions. The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering. Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way. Generally speaking, people have not given large sums to relief funds; they have not written to their parliamentary representatives demand- ing increased government assistance; they have not demonstrated in the streets, held symbolic fasts, or done anything else directed toward providing the refugees with the means to satisfy their essential needs.”, “author” : [ { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singer”, “given” : “Peter”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } ], “container-title” : “Philosophy & Public Affairs”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : [ [ “1972” ] ] }, “page” : “229u2013243”, “title” : “Famine, affluence, and morality”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “1” }, “uris” : [ “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6ef0dfa9-4b18-4ab8-bd6e-2b8762d469f9” ] } ], “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Singer)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 0 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Singer).
Additionally, Singer notes that each person has the power to donate and prevent bad things from happening in the process. He notes that is each person was to contribute a small fraction of what they had to relief then the fraction contributed by one person would be small in the long run. There would be no reason for contributing more than a small amount to charity. This objection is irrelevant based on the fact that not everyone donates what is enough to famine relief given the magnitude of the actual situation. Additionally, since not many people donate to famine relief, it is not enough since a point would not be reached where what is being contributed is equal to that which is needed by the people who are to be helped in the process. Those in need surpass those who are ready to help by far greater magnitude. To fulfill all the needs, they would have to donate more than they should till a point is reached where their level on needs is roughly equal on both sides. This means that it would be better if they did not donate that mush in a way that makes them handicapped regarding the importance that they give to their inner needs and obligations. It would be better is they did not donate as much as they did. He notes that this situation would be achieved if those donating lacked knowledge of other people donating to the famine and medical care at the same time. It would imply that they donated less than they did.
Singer’s analysis conflicts with the prevailing standards upon which the frameworks of charity lie. Charity is beyond duty and the obligatory. In objection to this analysis by singer, it would be prudent if evaluate the importance placed on others. His viewpoint dictates that other individuals should be given priority. It is true that people should donate a lot of their belongings to charity. Having the moral authority to pursue one’s interests is something that is morally significant given the current state of affairs. One should not be working full time to avert famine. I agree with Singer to some extent on the points which would not detract us from autonomy. People have the moral freedom of living their own lives in addition to pursuing their interests to a certain point. The time one dedicates to time and energy and activities of charity should not be high enough to have a great impact on that devoted to life’s most pressing issues. However, morally it is important to devote one’s time to the service of fellow human beings. I agree with him since these pursuits may have a direct impact on others some of which may not be foreseen. It quite contrasts the freedom we would have if we were to follow our intellectual interests which would not have a positive impact on other people with more pressing needs than us. Singer’s main point is weighty given the nature of the lives of people in third world countries. I would question the second principle due to the state of affairs that is rampant in the society. We do not know the results which would come out of people offering help to others due to the distance in between. However, his conclusions are quite correct since they are considered for the best of humanity.
Work Cited
ADDIN Mendeley Bibliography CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Singer, Peter. “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 1.3 (1972): 229–243. Web.