In some countries it is illegal to smoke in public places, it is only fair that people who wish to smoke have to leave the building. Do you agree or disagree?
Some countries introduce a rule banning smoking in the public places and those willing to have some smokes should leave the related spot. This essay would completely agree with this statement because this policy would create a clean environment and people are hindered from being contaminated with the dangerous smoke released by burned cigarette.
It is generally believed that government authority has aim to prohibit smokers to burn cigarette in public zones to get fresh air in these circumstances. The reason for this policy is smoking activities will produce smoke everywhere and will pollute air surrounding the public areas which many people always pass this common zone. For example, in 2005, a recent study carried out by Dubai government found that air condition around public places were polluted around 56% in Airport and 78% in convention hall. It is true that this regulation brings positive impact to make inhabitants respire with fresh air.
On the other hand, this policy will also halt citizens who are passive smoking from contaminated by smokers in public places. The reason for this is that will lessen the number of diseases which is infected by smokers to citizens. For instance, a recent survey, carried out by the Japan public health, showed in 2010 about 68% patients breast cancer decreased to 45% since the government issued rule to not allow smokers burn cigarette in public place. It is needless to say that this regulation will increase life expectancy for passive smokers.
To sum up, it is gone without seeing that people who want to burn cigarette have to find smoking areas based on the government regulation because this rule will make a clean circumstance and give benefit for passive smokers. I totally support that the government has to give punishment to smokers who are not following this authority.
Holt Educational Consultant - / 11,594 3760
Eve, I will refrain from giving you a score for this essay because I want to give you a chance to rewrite the paper. It is apparent that you misunderstood the prompt requirement from the very start of your essay. What you turned in was a paper that supported the ban on public smoking. You actually defended that stand quite well and you should have scored very well if that was the required answer by the prompt, which it wasn't.
The actual discussion that the prompt wished to have you provide is "...it is only fair that people who wish to smoke have to leave the building. Do you agree or disagree?" Instead of taking a stand that either supports or opposes the statement, you started talking about government regulation, rules, and other non-related information. While the facts you presented were good, there was nothing in the essay to indicate that you understood the prompt properly. You failed to discuss the prompt and present a proper conclusion in the essay. So in the end, the score for this essay would not have been beneficial to your chances of studying overseas.
thank you so much for your suggestions rose.,. actually I will rewrite this essay later... please give feedback for my other essays
let me give some correction for your writing..
1.government authority has
aim(the aim) to prohibit smokers ...
2.Dubai government found that air condition around public places
were(was) polluted around
3. ... smoke everywhere and
will pollute air surrounding ...
4. ... around 56% in Airport and 78% in ( put the or a because this is noun "the convention")convention hall
5. For instance, a recent survey
,( do not put comas) carried out by the Japan
may my corrections are use ful for your writing ..