Phil 330.05 F12: Final Exam Prompt

General Directions: Your response to these questions should be typed, double-spaced with 10-12 point legible font. In answering the questions do not spend time introducing the issue, but get straight to the question being asked. This exam is due via email by Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 7:00 PM. The exam should be sent as an attachment, and it must be in .doc, .docx, .rtf, or .pdf format.

Part I: Answer the following questions. Your answer for each question should be no more than two pages. Each question is worth 10 points.
  1. On page 348 of our text Szasz argues, "Our present concept of drug abuse articulates and symbolizes a fundamental policy of scientific medicine..." What does he mean by this? What does he think should be done in response to this situation?
  2. Pick one of the "Facts" presented in the USDEA report that was not discussed in class and examine the assumptions and biases underlying it (following the example I presented in lecture). I am particularly interested in whether or not you find that the reasons presented in the report support the "Fact" in question.
  3. Explain Wilson's attitude toward alcohol as described starting on page 357. Why does Wilson think it would be a bad idea to try and make alcohol illegal?
Part II: Read the following passage and then follow the directions:

Spurred by homeowners tired of the noise, dust and environmental destruction, Riverside County […] approved a crackdown on off-road vehicle use on private property, and neighboring San Bernardino County may soon adopt its own restrictions. The off-roading limits have slowly gained political support in the fast-growing counties, where housing developments are encroaching on once-remote deserts and mountains that are popular destinations for Southern California dirt-bikers and other all-terrain-vehicle enthusiasts.

The restrictions in Riverside County, which the Board of Supervisors approved 4 to 1, follow two years of protracted debate and will limit riding times and the number of vehicles residents can ride on their property. Supervisors also approved strict new noise limits, although they apply as much to garage bands as they do to dune buggies. The supervisors acknowledged that most off-roaders were responsible riders who should be able to enjoy their own property, but "unfortunately it's the bad apples that are causing the problems for those of you that are doing it the right way," said Supervisor John F. Tavaglione. Off-road proponents called the new county rules too severe but agreed that the family-friendly activity was being marred by the recklessness of a few riders.

The clash between property owners seeking rural solitude and those defending their right to ride has smoldered for some time, aggravated by the quickening pace of development in once-vacant desert regions of the counties. Riverside and San Bernardino counties have gained nearly 1.3 million residents since 1990, and surging home prices in coastal counties have pushed families to the once-remote regions that had been open to all-terrain riders. Sometimes new arrivals "want to bring their coastal values to the areas that have been more open," said Fred Wiley, executive director of the 400-member Off-Road Business Assn., headquartered in Bakersfield. "I'm not saying that their values are wrong. They're different." The version approved would allow off-roaders to ride between noon and 5 p.m. on private property in unincorporated Riverside County. It also places a limit of one off-road vehicle in use per 10 acres and requires riders to stay 100 feet from property lines and 250 feet from neighbors' homes. Off-roaders can ride more vehicles on their property with a neighbor's written consent; more than four, however, will also require a conditional use permit that could cost as much as $10,000, officials said. The proposed ordinance would introduce penalties for riders who enter private property, kick up dust, emit smoke and fumes, or whose vehicles are too loud. A rider who committed four or more violations within three years could face a $1,000 fine and 90 days in jail.

Write an essay in which you explain how Mill and Dworkin would respond to this issue? In your answer be sure to articulate Mill’s and Dworkin’s general approach to these issues before explaining how they would respond to the specific issue described above. What do you think of the issues raised by this passage? Your answer should take the form of an articulate, well-written essay of 3-4 pages (typed, double-spaced with 10-12 legible point font). This question is worth 20 points.