Thesis Statement: Graffiti should be banned.
BODY I ( general prohibition)
Counter Argument 2: It is an art which some express themselves with. Refutation 2: There are some other certain ways of expressing feelings and ideas which are not illegal acts. BODY II ( enve )
Counter Argument 1: There are new kinds of graffitis which are harmless to environment. Refutation 1: The percentage of graffiti artists using enviro-friendly graffiti is a tiny little amount when we look at the big picture. Counter Argument 2: It appears beautiful to the eyes in terms of art. Refutation 2: Eventually there are cases which some paintings are appealing and well-matched with the scene, mostly it is an ugly stain among the sidewalks and walls you live. BODY III( vandalism matter)
Counter Argument: Graffiti is indeed an art with the aim of attracting attention without the purpose of damaging property.
Refutation: Even though it is thought as an art, it is not acceptable to be done on other people’s window fences or walls. BODY IV
Pro: It has harmful effects on both environment and human health. 1.Graffiti sprays consist of aerosol paint which are exploited as a inhalant drug and also lethal. 2.Spray paints consist of toxic substances which are deleterious.
There are some other certain ways of expressing feelings and ideas which are not illegal acts.* Such as writing down ideas, painting, making music or any other kind of art which are considered ordinary*.
It has many negative environmental effects. *
It is being used as a drug and it is lethal.*
Has irritative effects*
Painting common places Considered vandalism*
Cleaning cost too much*
Shouldn’t be limited.*
Means of banning freedom of expression*
Counter argument1: It ıs an art which shouldn't be limited. Refutation1: Even if some graffities can be thougt as an art, it shouldn't be on people's windows fences or on a street or train....