Many office authorities impose a restriction on smoking within the office premises. Some governments have even banned smoking in all public places. This is a good idea but it takes away some of our freedom.
What are your opinions on this?
Use your own knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.
There is no scope of argument that cigarette smoking is harmful both for the smoker and people around him/her. Cigarette smoking has two major effects on non-smokers-injurious passive smoking and smoking display that has an invitational or persuasive effect on non-smokers. I believe banning smoking in public places and offices not only will discourage smoking but will also keep the smoking practice out of sight, though it might apparently look like transgress into smoker’s freedom. But I believe any harmful activity of a particular person or group of people can not be a definition of freedom. If smoking right in any place is a definition of freedom then why not other drugs? In my opinion, every public place including offices must be free of smoking.
There are several reasons that government and private authorities are being strict on smoking in offices and even public places. Firstly, this is an accepted fact that smoking is injurious and deadly to health in several ways. Secondly, smoking causes health hazards to non-smokers who inhale smoke passively from smokers. Thirdly, smoking has a strong psychologically influence on others, particularly on children and young who learn from their elderly. Fourthly, in many countries, the cost of health care and insurance has gone up due to smoking-related illnesses. So health authorities and governments are trying to have seen that due to the restrictions, the habit of smoking is on a decline among office goers.
Though non-smokers think that restricting smoking in offices and public places is a good idea, smokers often view it as an intervention into their right. Smokers argue that cigarette smoking has a direct relation to their workplace performance, though passive smoking can cause objections from colleagues. But considering the harm of smoking, it should be banned.
Though pressure groups such as tobacco companies may discourage restrictions on smoking since the advantages of the ban outweigh the disadvantages, mass public support such bans. Moreover, offices have the right to regulate staff behaviour and activities and governments too can ban smoking in public places for a greater societal benefit.
In conclusion, restricting smoking in workplaces and in public is a good idea. I can also understand the opinion of smokers that banning smoking in such places limits their work speed but I believe with little practice and determination they can overcome it. So I strongly support the idea of prohibiting smoking in any public place including the office premises.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-07 | sat_8808 | 78 | view |
| 2019-08-18 | samgautam007 | 73 | view |
| 2019-08-12 | coolchris2100 | 78 | view |
| 2019-05-19 | saleem110 | 73 | view |
- Do you support that nuclear technology should be used for constructive purposes? Use your own knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence. 73
- Some people say that productivity depends on how a building is constructed. Please provide advantages and disadvantages of the same. 67
- All cars that burn fossil fuels should be banned and electric cars should replace them Do you agree or disagree 82
- Many office authorities impose a restriction on smoking within the office premises. Some governments have even banned smoking in all public places. This is a good idea but it takes away some of our freedom.What are your opinions on this?Use your own knowl 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 766, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...luding offices must be free of smoking. There are several reasons that governmen...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, firstly, if, look, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, as to, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 10.4138276553 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2161.0 1615.20841683 134% => OK
No of words: 405.0 315.596192385 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33580246914 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48604634366 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01618860319 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518518518519 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 657.9 506.74238477 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.3379473945 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.05 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6 7.06120827912 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.301661523251 0.244688304435 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109276572192 0.084324248473 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657013266434 0.0667982634062 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188332295268 0.151304729494 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0339591636311 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.4159519038 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 78.4519038076 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.