The only solution to improve safety on roads is to stricter punishment for driving offences. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some claim that imposing stricter punishments for driving violations is the sole way to enhance road safety. Although this school of thought holds merits, I partly agree with it due to the following explanations.
There are some reasons for the opinion that stricter punishments are the only feasible solution towards improving road safety. In the past, as individuals started driving on roads, there were inadequate traffic regulations that required drivers to abide by. Therefore, the number of accident cases caused by overspeed or not wearing a helmet was drastically high in some Southeast countries, for instance. Nevertheless, with traffic laws against violations becoming more intense, fewer collisions and traffic accidents have been recorded in recent years. For example, Vietnam has witnessed a sharp fall in the number of road collisions in the past decade due to heavy fines for driving offences, including overspeed and crossing red lights. As a result, stricter punishments for driving violations are necessary for the improvement of road safety.
Nevertheless, there are other vital solutions beyond more intense fines to the progress of road safety. One of the plausible initiatives is to encourage residents to divert to subways instead of private vehicles. This means of transport is constructed underground without any intervention of other vehicles, preventing it from road collisions and therefore enhancing safety among commuters. For instance, due to the interconnected and modern network of subways, the number of accidents caused by this means of transport in Japan has been reported to be relatively low throughout history. Therefore, the development of public transport has proved to be another effective way of improving road safety.
In conclusion, although some individuals consider stricter laws against driving offences as the sole solution to enhance road safety, I argue that other schemes are much more essential. Stricter More intense regulations on driving violations can not take effect if the infrastructure is not advanced enough. Only by constructing the advanced public transport network can the government ensure the safety of individuals.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-21 | Tuan Harry | 67 | view |
| 2023-04-17 | tieuquynh | 89 | view |
- Many people have difficulty maintaining a healthy diet What are the causes of this problem How could it be solved has been deleted 84
- It is not necessary to travel to other places to learn the culture of other people We can learn just as much from books films and the internet Do you agree or disagree 84
- University education should be free for all students To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- Many people think modern communication technology is having some negative effects on social relationships Do you agree or disagree 75
- Many people are travelling to other countries Why Is it a positive or negative development 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 156, Rule ID: EN_GB_SIMPLE_REPLACE
Message: I is a common American expression, in British English it is more common to use: I
Suggestion: I
...gh this school of thought holds merits, I partly agree with it due to the followi...
^
Line 5, column 238, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[5]
Message: Possible agreement error. You should probably use: 'are'.
Suggestion: are
...ivate vehicles. This means of transport is constructed underground without any int...
^^
Line 7, column 135, Rule ID: EN_GB_SIMPLE_REPLACE
Message: I is a common American expression, in British English it is more common to use: I
Suggestion: I
...e sole solution to enhance road safety, I argue that other schemes are much more ...
^
Line 7, column 421, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nment ensure the safety of individuals.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, nevertheless, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1864.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 331.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63141993958 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99854992443 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525679758308 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 576.0 506.74238477 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.2077606137 49.4020404114 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.5 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6875 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.375 7.06120827912 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296854636052 0.244688304435 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10416744923 0.084324248473 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100704234232 0.0667982634062 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180824738885 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0549558793469 0.056905535591 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.37 12.4159519038 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.