Post bài mới
Thành viên với 100 points trở lên sẽ được hổ trợ discount 40% khóa IELTS PREMIUM 6.5 từ IELTS Planet - Học IELTS Online.
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé.

2.4k Bài viết

3.4k Góp ý

2.1k bình luận

46k thành viên

Hi all, it is appreciated that you provide me some feedbacks ! Thank you

Crimes are always a mutual concern of many countries in the World. The significance of designed punishment categorized to relevant crimes also is a centre of discussion among the Governors in proposing legal actions. It is argued that the Government should issue a uniform punishment for each of various crimes; while the others refute that the authority should consider the aspect of individual motives before deciding punishments. Both points of view will be analyzed before a reasoned conclusion is drawn.

Firstly, the advantage of utilizing a standardized punishment for a certain crime would less complicate the regulatory concept which helps increasing understanding of citizens about crimes and their paybacks. For example, in Japan, people are reminded by public advertisements about regular crimes such as thieves, trash throwers and their potential monetary and public service punishments. By that, the citizens may be more aware of illegal actions; thus, that could lead to decrease in crimes. Therefore, it is essential to apply a fixed punishment for each type of crimes.

On the other hand, others argue that each of crime case should be clarified the initiative motive of the criminal in order to determine the degree of crime. It is obvious, for example, that a person who commits culpable homicide, would have an attentive motive, in comparison to the one unintentionally do so. Thus, the consciousness of initiative motivation differs the degree of crime committed in order to determine fair and adequate punishments. Thus, considering a criminal’s motivation certainly contributes to the authority‘s punishment decisions.

After analyzing both opposing points of view, it is agreed that the Government should be specific on investigating causes of action before deciding on punishments. This is hoped that the legal system provides fair judgments on behalf of the ones who deserve a second chance. 

Rating: 8.25
đã hỏi trong Opinion bởi (14 điểm)
share bài về Wall để xem lại ===>

Xin vui lòng đăng nhập hoặc đăng ký để góp ý bài viết này.

1 góp ý

+3 phiếu
  1. Introduction:
  • “discussion among the Governors in proposing” -> “discussion among the Governors about proposing”
  • “uniform punishment for each of various crimes” -> “uniform punishment for every crimes” (I think when you use the word uniform, you mean they are all the same so “each of various crimes” or “every single crime” is not suitable)
  • “; while the others” -> my suggestion is to split this 1 sentence to 2 individual sentences: Meanwhile, the others…
  1. 1st argument:
  • “would less complicate the regulatory concept” -> “would decrease the complication of regulatory concepts”
  • “which” -> “, which”
  • “By that” -> “By that method”
  1. 2nd argument:
  • “initiative” -> “initial”
  1. Conclusion:
  • “This is hoped” -> “It is hoped”
  • Comments: You have not finished the requirements of the paper. Besides asking you to discuss both sides, it also asks you to give your own opinion. Hence, you should add one more paragraph here stating which option you prefer and why you choose it. Although, the last sentence you wrote about the second chance but it is not enough to show which you’re on.
  • However, this is a good writing. Not many grammatical errors and ideas have been developed well enough.
Rating: 8.45
đã góp ý bởi (27 điểm)
Thanks Alex, I appreciate your time and effort ! ^^

Tips: Thành viên với 10 points trở lên sẽ được sửa bài bởi Team Writing 7.5 :)
Bắt đầu nhận xét ở mục "Bài chưa có góp ý" để bắt đầu kiếm point nhé :)

Tham khảo các bài viết tương tự