There are many extinct animals’ species in the world. Some people think weshould protect animals from dying out, while others believe we should spendmore time on problems of human beings. Discuss both sides and give youropinion. v.2
There are many extinct animals’ species in the world. Some people think weshould protect animals from dying out, while others believe we should spendmore time on problems of human beings. v. 2
Medical studies have shown that smoking not only leads to health problems for the smoker, but also for people close by. As a result of this, many believe that smoking should not be allowed in public places. Although there are arguments on both sides, I strongly agree that a ban is the most appropriate course of action.
Opponents of such a ban argue against it for several reasons. Firstly, they say that passive smokers make the choice to breathe in other people’s smoke by going to places where it is allowed. If they would prefer not to smoke passively, then they do not need to visit places where smoking is permitted. In addition, they believe a ban would possibly drive many bars and pubs out of business as smokers would not go there anymore. They also argue it is a matter of freedom of choice. Smoking is not against the law, so individuals should have the freedom to smoke where they wish.
However, there are more convincing arguments in favour of a ban. First and foremost, it has been proven that tobacco consists of carcinogenic compounds which cause serious harm to a person’s health, not only the smoker. Anyone around them can develop cancers of the lungs, mouth and throat, and other sites in the body. It is simply not fair to impose this upon another person. It is also the case that people’s health is more important than businesses. In any case, pubs and restaurants could adapt to a ban by, for example, allowing smoking areas.
In conclusion, it is clear that it should be made illegal to smoke in public places. This would improve the health of thousands of people, and that is most definitely a positive development.
Medical studies have shown that
smoking
not
only
leads to
health
problems for the smoker,
but
also
for
people
close by.
As a result
of this,
many
believe that
smoking
should not be
allowed
in public
places
. Although there are arguments on both sides, I
strongly
agree
that a
ban
is the most appropriate course of action.
Opponents of such a
ban
argue against it for several reasons.
Firstly
, they say that passive smokers
make
the choice to breathe in other
people’s
smoke
by going to
places
where it is
allowed
. If they
would prefer
not to
smoke
passively
, then they do not need to visit
places
where
smoking
is permitted
.
In addition
, they believe a
ban
would
possibly
drive
many
bars and pubs out of business as smokers would not go there anymore. They
also
argue it is a matter of freedom of choice.
Smoking
is not against the law,
so
individuals should have the freedom to
smoke
where they wish.
However
, there are more convincing arguments in
favour
of a
ban
.
First
and foremost, it has
been proven
that tobacco consists of carcinogenic compounds which cause serious harm to a person’s
health
, not
only
the smoker. Anyone around them can develop cancers of the lungs, mouth and throat, and other sites in the body. It is
simply
not
fair
to impose this upon another person. It is
also
the case that
people’s
health
is more
important
than businesses. In any case, pubs and restaurants could adapt to a
ban
by,
for example
, allowing
smoking
areas.
In conclusion
, it is
clear
that it should
be made
illegal to
smoke
in public
places
. This would
improve
the
health
of thousands of
people
, and
that is
most definitely a
positive
development.
7Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
7Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
7Mistakes