Consider the following argument:
Denise states that the sale of cigarettes should be illegal, noting that, by now, we should all know that smoking cigarettes is an unhealthy behavior. Smokers would find it much easier to quit smoking if cigarettes were no longer readily available to them. Furthermore, smoking harms more than just the smoker. Cigarette smoke pollutes the environment and harms nearby nonsmokers who have not consented to breathe smoke into their lungs.
Which statement in Denise’s argument is her conclusion?

a. Smokers would find it much easier to quit smoking if cigarettes were no longer readily available to them.
b. Smoking harms more than just the smoker.
c. The sale of cigarettes should be illegal.
d. By now, we should all know that smoking cigarettes is an unhealthy behavior.

All the other statements in Denise’s arguments only provide the premise for which the sale of cigarettes is illegal. They only give reasons and evidences to corroborate the fact that the sale of cigarettes is illegal. The use of indicators such as “noting that”, “furthermore”, etc. also explains why the other statements in the argument are premises and not conclusion.

The statement, “The sales of cigarettes should be illegal”, is the only one that identifies the crux of Denise’s argument.