Explanation:

- Argument I suggests that a complete ban on firecracker manufacturing could lead to unemployment for thousands of workers. This reason highlights the socioeconomic impact and potential loss of livelihood for many families, making it a strong argument.

- Argument II points out the ethical issue of child labor in the firecracker industry. While addressing child labor is important, banning manufacture completely may not directly solve this issue without targeted actions toward improving labor practices. Thus, the argument lacks the solution-oriented approach necessary for justification.

- Option 1: Argument I is strong. This is because it addresses immediate economic consequences.

- Option 2: Argument II is strong. This is not entirely accurate due to lack of direct solution to the child labor issue.

- Option 3: Both are strong. This is untrue as Argument II lacks direct resolution.

- Option 4: Both are weak. Argument I is definitely strong due to its socioeconomic implications.