Should smoking be banned in all public places and be raised to the age limit of 18?

Ladies and gentlemen we are here today to discuss the issue of banning smoking in all public places and raising the age limit to 18.

Broadly speaking, people begin to smoke to try and enhance their social life, yet, ironically, your social life is destroyed, or rather, gone in the opposite direction than anticipated.

And you pay money for this!?

Now I am in favour of this suggestion, infact if I had it my way smoking would be banned all together, however too much chaos and havoc would be caused in the world as we know it.

Ladies and gentlemen, please allow me to pose a question to all of you and those who are watching, but first I will give you some background which leads up to this question. Smoking kills. It is a well-known fact. You torture your body slowly, ruining your life in all aspects i.e. yellow teeth, foul breath, also you gain an unpleasant yet distinctive odour about you, and I am not sure this is not the goal intended, but it is the goal achieved.

In essence, people begin to smoke to try and better their lives, but as luck would have ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

In essence, people begin to smoke to try and better their lives, but as luck would have it, or somewhat as luck wouldn’t have it you really spoil your life.

Why!?

Yes, why do you do it? It is a simple question, which a lot of you consciously do not know the answer. Well let me tell you, you are weak and feeble. I do not mean this as an insult but, rather to make you realise that you perhaps are just being lazy and not fighting the addiction.

You are paying people money to wreck your life and then kill yourself. It is essentially suicide. Do you really want to kill yourself, is your life that bad? It isn't, is it?

The money you spend could just as easily be spent to help family or others, and yet, you selfishly use to feed a habit, which makes people dislike you because of the side effects and also kills you.

Now I ask you again, why do you do it? It is stupid really, throwing money away, not only that but really you are not doing yourself justice trying to kill yourself by literally burning hard earned money away.

Now you see smoking is pointless, there is no need to smoke in public places, and why not make it official in an legal document.

As for the age issue, those who smoke currently, wouldn’t you rather let the next generation wait a few more years to make the decision of smoking, if necessary? Give them a few more years before making the same mistakes as you lot, as a lot of them are still undergoing the pressures of adolescence, and perhaps will have a different view on the matter. Think about it, it is not as if it is going to kill these teenagers if they wait a couple more years, in fact, quite the opposite, it will probably keep them healthier. Along side this give them more free money to buy stuff they actually want and also give them a chance to think about it for a while

In conclusion, by following the logic displayed to you today, isn’t it obvious to all those who roam this earth to agree with me on the issue of banning smoking in all public places and raising the age limit to 18?

Thank you ladies and gentlemen for your time and patience, please take into account of the above statements.

By Nikhil Shah 11T

Peer Reviews

Here's what a star student thought of this essay

sydneyhopcroft

26th of Jul 2012

Quality of writing

The Quality of Written Communication (QWC) is decent as far as I can determine. There is no instance where a misuse of grammar or errors in spelling or punctuation compromise the clarity of the essay, so whilst the rest of the essay may not discreetly satisfy the question, the candidate will receive all QWC available.

Level of analysis

The Level of Analysis here is not very evident, and because of the rant-styled nature of the essay very little of it comes across well-reasoned. To counter this, I recommend, as before, using more objective argument techniques like use of factual statistics (e.g. something as simply as a percentage of under-aged smokers in the 80s and today) and also, I would encourage any candidate hoping to do well at GCSE in a Writing to Argue task the consider at least one other viewpoint than their own. An appreciation of the temporarily stress-relieving qualities of nicotine (a buzz word which is not mentioned - it is important to use field-specific lexis in arguments to give impressions or deep-set intelligence about the topic being argued), would be good, so as to show an empathetic understanding of why people choose to smoke. Instead, this candidate rather crudely insults smoking as if it were a habit that returns no pleasure whatsoever, suggesting it "is essentially suicide". This is a very heavy-handed comment and is unlikely going to sway any readers who smoke into giving up due to addiction. The candidate doesn't even mention the addictive qualities of nicotine, and so they cannot really achieve any higher than a middle D grade for GCSE.

Response to question

Though this candidate's Writing to Argue response teeters over rational discussion into mawkish exaggeration, for the most-part their argument against smoking is fair and very succinct. However, it can be argued that this is more a general rant against smoking, rather than a discussion specifically targeted at under 18s smoking and the presence of smoking areas within public buildings. Because of how general the argument then becomes, the candidate loses focus marks as their argument is not precise enough to fully satisfy the specific demands of the question. Also, a lot of features of an effective argument are missing, such as statistics and voice of the expert, leaving this argument open to criticism as a subjective rant. Candidates should look to fortify their arguments so they can be presented as "Opinion-as-fact", making their arguments seem more credible and more effective.

Did you find this review helpful? Join our team of reviewers and help other students learn