It has been recognized that only by tightening controls on careless drivers will road safety be upgraded. While I accept that this may be an efficient resolution, I believe that substantial improvements can also be reaped by other feasible measures.
On the one hand, imposing more rigorous punishments is expected to be an effective road safety measure. Indeed, such policies as higher on-the-spot fines or even imprisonment, which make driving offenders suffer from a severe consequence, will act as a deterrent for them from perpetuating their careless driving. For example, when British government introduced an official ban on driving while intoxicated, there was a significant decline in the number of head-on collisions due to drink-driving. As a result, such announcements contribute to an improved safety level for the entire transport system. In contrast, if the authority remains soft on citizens who violate traffic regulation, they will less likely to entirely grasp the need of abiding by road safety laws and, thus, may continue to put others to dangers.
On the other hand, I concur with the view that there are also several other ways that can be proposed to gain road safety. Firstly, conducting vehicle inspections should be highly recommended for drivers. Indeed, if this project is applied on a regular basis, they will help the authorities eliminate transportations which are not roadworthy and, therefore, diminish accidents caused by their wear-and-tears. Secondly, upgrading and expanding public transport provision is another suitable solution. To be more specific, when state-owned railway and bus systems become ubiquitous and speed up journey times, they are believed to discourage the use of private vehicles, which results in a reduction in self-driving frequency and, thus, the probability of driving offenses.
In brief, while not disavowing positive effects of stricter punishments, I believe that other road safety measures can bring about similar outcomes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 820, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... may continue to put others to dangers. On the other hand, I concur with the vie...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 150, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sures can bring about similar outcomes.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in brief, in contrast, as a result, on the other hand
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 : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1700.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 306.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55555555556 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07025404626 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.643790849673 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 529.2 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.10420841683 333% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.8134078683 49.4020404114 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.769230769 106.682146367 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5384615385 20.7667163134 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3846153846 7.06120827912 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139411193087 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.049721210476 0.084324248473 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0393248471271 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0872129764969 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0156743267167 0.056905535591 28% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.0946893788 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.26 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.61 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 78.4519038076 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.