URBAN TRANSFORMATION IN ISTANBUL (This is a 60)

Today, the most important matter in hand for Istanbul is urban transformation. Some say that it is necessary to develop \improve  our city in terms of housing, transportation, and facilities; in return, others say that it will bring us noise pollution and deforestation. There are both negative and positive aspects of urban transformation.

            First of all, there are many advantages of transformation like providing better housing. The increasing population obliges us to have new settlements. After urban transformation, we will be able to use the land efficiently. Therefore, housing  will no longer  be a problem. Another advantage is better facilities. Using the city’ lands efficiently can  give us the ability to adjust factories’ locations. Citizens in Istanbul complain about factories (which are)  located in the city. By means of urban transformation, the problem can  be solved. The last advantage of urban transformation that should be mentioned is reducing  traffic (the reduction of traffic congestion) congestion. Traffic congestion is a problem for all metropolis but for Istanbul, it is a nightmare, also. The solution is simple. After urban transformation, not only housing or facilities but also traffic jams will be fixed (will have been dealt with )  .

            However, there are also some disadvantages. First of all, all legislation to transform the city has to be applied sparingly. Otherwise, many sources such as money, time, and labor will be wasted. We can  mention noise pollution as a disadvantage of urban transformation because Istanbul is a big and complex city. It will  take at least 10 years to modernize  the whole  city. However, all this will cause noise pollution. Another example of the disadvantages is deforestation. All these developments in the  city will create job opportunities. So, people will  want to move there. This circumstance will  cause a catastrophe because, people will  use forests to expand the city, which means  deforestation.

            As we see, there are many advantages and disadvantages of urban transformation in a city like Istanbul. The advantages outweigh the drawbacks. So, we need to transform the city, while protecting nature.

IN DEFENSE OF HANDGUNS (This is a 70)

     Considering how many people live (in) the world, it is no surprise that there exist conflicts between people. Unfortunately, guns might seem like an effective tool to solve such conflicts. Moreover, people use handguns for sport or hunting. I mean that guns have had a role in people's lives because of different reasons throughout the whole history of humankind. Nowadays, whether civilian possession of handguns should be banned has become a contentious issue. Some people think that guns should be banned immediately because they lead to the death of more people. However, anybody with a conscience must agree that guns are not the main reason for deaths and thus forbidding guns will not be a solution.

            To begin with, it has been argued that most violent crimes are committed with guns. In other words, restricting gun ownership will likely reduce the number of crimes. However; this approach is purely based on opinion with no  evidence to back up this argument. Only about 15% of guns used for crimes were stolen from legal markets, most of them are acquired illegally. This fact means guns are easily purchased behind closed doors.. Therefore, banning civilian possession of handguns will not help deal with crimes. To overcome crimes or reduce homicide rates, authorities should combat (the owners of) illegal gun markets..

            Furthermore, people who advocate the restriction of guns claim that suicides and crimes of passion are higher if guns are readily available. The justification of this idea is that committing  crimes are much easier when a gun is available. What is more, crimes that may have been less harmful can be made more dangerous due to the use of a gun. However, this approach is nothing but an oversimplification because it does not reflect the whole picture. First of all, guns are incapable of killing people, people kill people. Moreover, civilian possession of guns enables people to defend themselves/ provides people with the opportunity to defend themselves. For instance, women and weaker individuals may use guns to protect themselves from rape or similar crimes especially in the inner city. If people did not have a gun then who would defend them when they face a person who bought a gun illegally?

                To sum up, guns are used for serious crimes; it is an undeniable fact. However, the restriction of civilian possession of handguns and other non-hunting guns is not a real solution because it does not address the core issue of violence.

CİHAT KORKUNÇ

LAW ENFORCEMENT CAMERAS (This is a 70)

The population has been increasing day by day, causing the rates of crime to increase/grow in developed and developing countries as well. There are a variety of security measures that can be taken to decrease the number of crimes in these countries. Law enforcement cameras can be regarded as an example of security precaution. However, some people think that law enforcement cameras are an invasion of privacy, which has caused many debates.. People are mainly divided into two groups, one of which supports the view that law enforcement cameras are an invasion of privacy while the other opposes to it.

First of all, law enforcement cameras are not an invasion of privacy because they are one of the most useful/efficient ways to provide public safety. For example, people having bad intentions are more likely to attack innocent people in crowded areas. In addition, it is not easy to determine malicious people in such places so as to prevent attacks. Bomb attacks can be shown as an example. Therefore, we can see that law enforcement cameras do not abuse people’s private lives and they enable the public to live safely.

Secondly, law enforcement cameras stand out as one of the most prominent evidence in court. To illustrate, when a person commits a crime, law enforcement cameras can register such a situation easier than normal cameras. Moreover, these records can be important evidence for court. Therefore, these cameras provide innocent people with testimony. Overall, law enforcement cameras are not an invasion of privacy and they support testimony in court.

On the other hand, some opponents think that law enforcement cameras are an invasion of privacy because they believe that not everyone is a criminal. In other words, these cameras may violate innocent people’s privacy. This actually seems reasonable to some extent but they do not bear the other side of the coin in mind because these cameras are an effective way to catch criminals. Moreover, the records in these cameras are not shown to everyone. They are very rarely used by people who are not responsible and they get punished when they do it.. In short, these cameras do not harm innocent people’s privacy and they provide public security.

To conclude, there are people who think that law enforcement cameras are an invasion/violation of privacy because they believe that private lives of innocent people should not be recorded by law enforcement cameras. In contrast, some people consider that law enforcement cameras are not an invasion of privacy because of/thanks to providing public safety and supporting testimony in court. It is my contention that law enforcement cameras are one of the most effective ways to build a peaceful environment. (453 words)

PROTECTING AREAS OF NATURAL BEAUTY (This is a 70)

The population has been increasing in the world day by day,causing nature to suffer.In other words, this exponential increase of/in population damages the environment.However,  it must not be forgotten that natural beauty has a vital role to play in living a healthy and happy life.Therefore, people should protect nature.There are a variety of benefits of protecting places of natural beauty, two of which are environmental and ecnomic benefits.

First of all, one of the most widely recognized favorable influences of natural beauty is environmental benefits. For example, people try to protect natural beauty, which  can  make it easy for people to live comfortably because the better protected the places of natural beauty, the greater the number of healthier people. In addition, the number of places of natural beauty should be increased because when this is the case, harmful gases produced by factories or people may be decreased and the air may become cleaner.Overall,people should protect nature because the fact that  natural beauty can reduce most types of pollution can be regarded as one of the most important environmental benefits.

Secondly, another positive impact of protecting places of natural beauty is economic benefits.For instance, if a country protects its natural beauty, both its own citizens and people living in other countries can visit it. People come to see it, which provides economic power for the country. In other words, the protection of natural beauty can be one of the most important sources of revenue for countries.In short, the fact that a country protects  the places of natural beauty might make a great contribution to the increase in its economic power.

To conclude, it must not be forgottten that natural beauty should be protected, which can/will provide both people and countries with a lot of opportunities. Environmental and economic benefits can be given as examples.It is a well-known fact that the more the increase in the number of places of natural beauty, the more the decrease in environmental and economic problems. (338 words)