Next Mill investigates in what ways a person may try to prevent harm.  He first admits that a person should not wait for injury to happen, but ought try to prevent it. Second, he states that agents must consider whether that which can cause injury can cause injury exclusively.  He gives the example of selling poison. Poison can cause harm. However, he points out that poison can also be used for good. Therefore, selling poison is permissible.  Yet, due to the risk entailed in selling poison or like products (. alcohol), he sees no danger to liberty to require warning labels on the product.   Again, Mill applies his principle. He considers the right course of action when an agent sees a person about to cross a condemned bridge without being aware of the risk. Mill states that because the agent presumably has interest in not crossing a dangerous bridge (. if he knew the facts concerned with crossing the bridge, he would not desire to cross the bridge), it is permissible to forcibly stop the person from crossing the bridge. He qualifies the assertion stating that, if the means are available, it is better to warn the unaware person. 
If your deadline is just around the corner and you have tons of coursework piling up, contact us and we will ease your academic burden. We are ready to develop unique papers according to your requirements, no matter how strict they are. Our experts create writing masterpieces that earn our customers not only high grades but also a solid reputation from demanding professors. Don't waste your time and order our essay writing service today!
15. There are many claims of being an “award winning dojo” , with little or no solid evidence to back this up.