Should people in life-or-death situation be held accountable for their actions? Argumentative essay-5 paragraph. WILL GIVE BRAINIEST

no

Explanation:

Everyone wants to do the right thing in life or death situations, but no one really knows how they are going to act when such a challenge comes their way. There are many different things that could happen to someone in a life or death situation. They could become frozen with fear, forces into action, or do something that they never thought they could ever have done before -- whether it be good or bad. Of course everyone wants to be a hero in a life or death situation, but no one can say for sure what they would really do unless they are actually in a situation where your life Is on the line. Someone may do what ever is best for themselves, and that doesn't mean that they are a selfish person it just means that they are reacting according to instinct. Everyone handles stress differently, some people know how to deal with it and can stay calm, while others break down because of it. What we do in situations may also be impacted by events that already happened in our life. If we have a role model who saves people, such as a fire fighter or police officer, we may be more apt to also try and be the hero in a situation. In addition, if we've had traumatic events happen in our life that may haunt us and cause to be frozen with fear. For example, if your house burned down to the ground when you were a kid, and years later you see your neighbors house catch on fire, not matter how much you want to help you may be frozen because of the memories from your past holding you back. I also think age plays a role in how you react to life or death situations because when you are younger you are often fearless and do what ever you want, older people may hold back a little and plans things out more since they've had many more experiences. When all these factors come together, it makes it almost impossible to condemn someone for the way that they've reacted to a life or death situation.

to eliminate ambiguous remote or broad reference it is necessary to focus on anaphoric reference. by definition "anaphoric reference means that a word in a text refers back to other ideas in the text for its meaning." the references should be clear and leave no room for ambiguity.

in the first case the pronoun it probably refers to the car but it has not been mentioned before so we should replace it for the car. in doing so the statement becomes clear.

in sentence number   two   the pronoun he refers to charles dickens the author. yet, the first half of the sentence is about the book a tale of two cities. to repair this it would be better to rephrase the first half : after i read   a tale of two cities by dickens, he so as to remove the remote reference.