A person who knowingly commits a crime has broken the social contract and should not retain any civil rights or the right to benefit from his or her own labor.
Society is a complex system comprising of many ingredients. The people that constitute the society are inter-connected in one way or another. In this social sphere, there are people who hold moral views above anything else and there are people who sometimes get deviated from the path and do things that maybe they didnot want to. The prompt suggests that people who do the later one, should be denied of any kind of civil right and should not be let to enjoy the earnings from his labor. This statement holds a very strong position against the people who commit a crime. However, the situation is a prime concern here. Depending on the situation, the scenario might change.
To begin, social contract dictates that people should share a common place in harmony and no human should be harmed in any way by another human being. Well, sometimes there are exceptions. Somtimes people find themselves caught up in situations very badly. The prompt says, whoever commits crime is a deal-breaker. But, here, the extent of the crime is a cruicial factor. For instance, shoplifting is definitely a crime, so is killing people ruthlessly. If we start judging these two things on the same scale, then this is not correct. In case of shoplifting, yes, the person is not doing a very moral thing. He/she is hurting the shop owner financially. But in case of murderes, they are taking someone's life and letting their family suffer. So, judging them in the same way will be an injustice to the first person. He/she should not be denied of their rights only beacuse they picked up two oranges on their way out.
Further, when someone loses track from moral pathway, it is society's duty to find out what caused it. Becasue humans are the core ingredient of the society, it is the society that needs to deal with the consequences. For instance, in case of the shoplifter, maybe his/her financial condition is very bad. Maybe they would not do such a thing normally but situation forced them to be. Maybe they got a family to support and the economy being bad and the complications with the job, they are running short of money. So, it would not be wise to evaluate the situation based on just "that one incident". Also, for the killer, the society should find out what is the root cause that made him to be like this. Maybe, he had a very troubling childhood, maybe his family had the misfortunate way to die and he did not get justice. The anguish could possibly be responsible for his current condition. This proves that, without knowing the backstory, we can judge a person, but we should not.
Then again, the society's roles also need to be discussed on what measures is being taken to correct the behaviors of these accused people. Sure, people can do bad things on an impulse, but they should be given proper chance to correct themselves. Also, crime needs to be punished, sure, But if we punish different levels of crimes the same way, it is simply not fair. And the earnings that they sought by their own labor, that should absolutely not be denied, because, no matter what they did, this has nothing to do with it. If they need to be punished, be it, but their personal gains should not be seized.
Although people might say, if we let go of small crimes that easily, it might increase in the long run. But, if people who commit crimes are dealt with care and moral righteousness, this will be much more effective than any punishment ever.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-11 | Mithil | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-15 | Anish Sapkota | 66 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | Gnyana | 62 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-16 | Yam Kumar Oli | 50 | view |
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain. 50
- As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. Archaeo 3
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 43
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist."Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire villag 63
- As early as the twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were notable for their "great houses," massive stone buildings that contain hundreds of rooms and often stand three or four stories high. Archaeo 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 29, Rule ID: COMPRISING_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'comprising' or 'consisting of'?
Suggestion: comprising; consisting of
Society is a complex system comprising of many ingredients. The people that const...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 846, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...and he did not get justice. The anguish could possibly be responsible for his current conditio...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, then, well, for instance, kind of, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 43.0 19.5258426966 220% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 64.0 33.0505617978 194% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2851.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 607.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.69686985173 5.05705443957 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96360453597 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48403132921 2.79657885939 89% => OK
Unique words: 301.0 215.323595506 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495881383855 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 869.4 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 6.24550561798 272% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 36.0 20.2370786517 178% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9042340634 60.3974514979 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 79.1944444444 118.986275619 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8611111111 23.4991977007 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.5 5.21951772744 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 18.0 5.13820224719 350% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192713467661 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429961369556 0.0831039109588 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541705617329 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115638779985 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0515099108126 0.0667264976115 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.1 14.1392134831 64% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 48.8420337079 148% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 12.1743820225 59% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 9.68 12.1639044944 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.