Saturday, March 12, 2016

TOW #21- Raising the Smoking Age

        "Raising the legal age for purchasing tobacco products to 21 will deter many young people from becoming smokers, saving hundreds of thousands from dying prematurely from lung cancer, heart disease, stroke and emphysema, and their families the incomprehensible grief of losing loved ones to preventable diseases." As a leading cause of death for people all around the world, it seems reasonable to make tighter restrictions on smoking products. For Stephen A. Silver, professor at Emory University School of Law, this topic is very close to heart, and is certainly one he feels worth pushing for.
       Cigarette smoking kills more than 480,000 Americans each year, including more than 41,000 nonsmokers who die from secondhand exposure, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As a son of both mother and father who died of smoking-related diseases, the need for a heightened legal age is definitely preferred. In order to deter young adults from smoking, many steps need to be taken- raising the legal age being one of the most important. Other methods can include raising taxes on tobacco products and increasing funding for antismoking programs, but the biggest impact comes from restricting those under 21 from purchasing products.
        Many argue against this saying that is the legal age of an adult is 18, the ability to purchase tobacco products should remain at age 18. "Treat all adults equally" is the motto, and honestly a very good point. Raising the legal age takes away the privileges of people ages 18, 19, and 20 from purchasing tobacco products, which seems to almost go against the fact that they are "adults". All in all, when it comes to the general well-being of the country, if raising the legal age is what it takes to save the lives of even just a few, it is worth it.

Sunday, March 6, 2016

TOW #20- Hidden Gold in College Applications

        With the competitiveness of today's high level universities, it seems nearly impossible for anyone without an A+ average or exceptional ACT/SAT scores to be accepted. Expectations are extremely high, however, as the time drags on more and more schools are beginning to peer deeper into student applications. No longer are grades becoming the most important factor, rather personalities and a combination of life skills and responsibilities are taken into greater consideration. Upon close inspection, New York Times opinionist Frank Bruni revealed some recent and highly promising changes in the admission processes of several universities. These included Davidson College and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, both of which are very prestigious schools and difficult to get into. He revealed their newly refined systems of admissions and the importance of adjusting the vision of admission officers on prospective students.
        An example of these change in admissions is shown through a young man that applied for early admission at UNC. Stephen Farmer, the admissions director, can attest to the fact that this man was not the smartest according to his grades, but by peeling back the letter grades and discovering the true issues that the student was going through, while still maintaining relatively stable grades, it was eye-opening to see his work ethic. Improvement over his four years in high school was another indicator of continued effort, as the young man revealed the fact that he was the son of immigrant parents who didn't speak fluent English, and that he has grown up constantly being relied on to translate for them and deal with all of their finances and banking. This alone proved the high responsibility and dedication of the student, which later was given the acknowledgement it needed all along when he was granted admission into the university.
        Because of stories like this, it is uplifting to see that colleges are starting to finally reconsider how they view applicants. The admissions process has only continued to become more and more competitive, and I for one am worried about just how more selective schools could possibly get before it all bubbles over into a disaster. "If we're viewing everybody through a single lens, we're not seeing most people clearly. So we need to get better at adjusting our vision, or we're going to miss a lot of talent." This goes for America as well, because the country certainly will not be able to flourish if all students are not given the chance to bridge themselves into a greater future, and prove to the world what they hold.