harsher driving penalties
The only way to improve road safety is to give much stricter punishments on driving offenses. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Over the past decades, the issues about enhancing road safety have never ceased to draw the attentions from public. One of the most common method is stricter punishments on motorists. While I argue that this tendency will deter many traffic participants from many accidents or dangerous situation, I concur that there are alternative ways for this trend.
On the one hand, it is crystal clear that these punishments will be act as a deterrent, so that it may make them think twice before commuting on the street. It could be recognized that the commuters breaking the regulations are seemed to be offenders. Hence, the host of laws should be applied to the participants such as heavy fines, revoking driving licenses... The letter of the law must be used as an optimal way as well as banning perpetrators from the road so they will be no longer danger to road users, including pedestrians. For example, in Singapore, people who drive while intoxicated should be served a prison sentence for the above reasons
Besides some tough penalties for offenders are imposed by government agency, there are other steps to tackle with issues related to road safety. First and foremost, setting speed cameras in the traffic lights location make a contribution to improving the awareness of offenders. Many countries have paid off about applying this method. Secondly, it is necessary to adopt a policy of conducting regular vehicle inspections to avoid accidents caused by mechanical malfunction. Eventually, some campaigns about disadvantages such as overspeed or no use helmet.
In conclusion it is not enough to be tough on traffic crimes by punishing more harshly those who violate the law. A range of road safety measures should accompany harsher driving penalties.
Thanks for reading. I am very pleasurable seeing some comments about my essay.
You could replace - noun phrase "the host of laws" by "lawmaker or legislator"
In your intro, u said "While I argue that this tendency will deter many traffic participants from many accidents or dangerous situation, I concur that there are alternative ways for this trend." what are you concurring about? The question doesn't say anything relating to any alternative ways, so the word "concur" is not appropriate.
Firstly or first, no foremost. "Setting speed cameras in the traffic lights location make a contribution to improving the awareness of offenders. Many countries have paid off about applying this method" and then for what? why is it improving awareness of offenders? Must clarify this idea more!
Others seems good and fine to me.
Hope u do well in the future :).
Hello there! Welcome to the forum. I hope to provide you with writing feedback that would be substantial for your essay in the long-run.
I think that you have quite a strong grasp of the language. Because of this, I heavily suggest that you focus more on the depth and overall content of your essay. Notice how you still lack concrete examples to expound your thoughts and opinions. Incorporating these would enable you to build your essay's information.
Secondly, I also recommend trying to omit unnecessary words in your writing. This would include, for instance, filler words that are unnecessary and inappropriate. Make more concise sentences.
Best of luck as always.