Wyatt Earp was a famous gunfighter in the American West. Born in 1848, Earp held several jobs before becoming an admired, and feared, gunslinger. He was a stagecoach driver, railroad worker, and buffalo hunter. He was also
a bit of a gambler. Earp's reputation as a fearless, righteous sheriff grew when he turned Dodge City, Kansas,
from a lawless town into a peaceful city. From there he moved on to Tombstone, Arizona, joined by his brothers
and his good friend Doc Holliday. There, Earp and his crew fought in the now legendary gunfight at the O. K.
Corral. Many books have been written, and films made, about this famous battle between the law-abiding Earp
brothers and the criminal Clanton family.
Do It!
Earp was famous for
crime.
А
avoiding
B
combating
С
reporting
D
observing

B). Combating

Explanation:

The most appropriate adjective to define Earp's qualities would be 'combating' as he is popularly known as the fearless lawman who was righteous in his conduct. This attitude and his efforts helped in transforming the lawless town of Kansas into a peaceful city. Infact, he died also during a gunfight with O.K.  Corral. Although he got arrested several times due to his association with brothels but he never attempted to jump off the jail and later he became a police officer. Probably, this is why he is known as a lawman and a gunslinger too. Thus, option B is the correct answer.

read this passage from the crisis. what rationale is paine using for going to war with great britain? my own line of reasoning is to myself as straight and clear as a ray of light. not all the treasures of the world, so far as i believe, could have induced me to support an offensive war, for i think it murder; but if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in it, and to "bind me in all cases whatsoever" to his absolute will, am i to suffer it? what signifies it to me, whether he who does it is a king or a common man; my countryman or not my countryman; whether it be done by an individual villain, or an army of them? if we reason to the root of things we shall find no difference; neither can any just cause be assigned why we should punish in the one case and pardon in the other.

it is waged war against an army of countrymen

it would lead to independence from britain

it would be an offensive war

it would be a defensive war

breathe, think and analyze the situation, pull them aside and talk to them about it