Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The statement asserts that laws according to certain circumstances, could be bent to accommodate various situations. Although it is hard to argue that laws should consider various cases, it is not sound that the law itself should be flexible. The numerous different situations should be clearly stated by written laws because without written laws there is a chance that it can be misinterpreted by the judges or lawyers.
Laws should be able to consider various cases of incidents because a person's actions may be influenced by the person's milieus, and the weight of crime will be different from case to case. For instance, if one man steals a bread because he is too poor but needs to support his family and another man hijacks an airplane to commit terror, even though the base actions of these two men are equal as stealing, the weight and intentions of the two actions vary. If the law simply stated that stealing will result in a sentence to jail, both men would end up in jail regardless of the degree of their actions. Consequently, laws should be able to anticipate these situations so that people are judged and controlled by enunciated rules that result in fair trials.
Nevertheless, even though the entire law should incorporate different situations, laws itself should not be a target of varying interpretation. If the law was to be interpreted differently from person to person it would likely result in chaos. For instance, in ancient china the rules of the government were less substantial compared to the laws that were spoken out by the king. This enabled the king's overuse of his power and people who lost trust from the king sometimes got killed simply by the king's orders. This example, although stating the history, may be applicated to contemporary society. Judges who are responsible of making judicious decisions inside the court may be misled by varying interpretations of the law, or even interpret the law in favor of his/her emotions. Hence, it would be preposterous to argue that the written laws itself should be pliable to different analysis.
Finally, if laws were to be flexible, courts and judges would have to keep on making exceptions for unlimited cases. Going back to the stealing example, if there is just the law about forbidding to steal and the judges make an exception about stealing because of poverty, the law itself can be put in danger. Since, there has been a proceeding case of making an exception, there will be following examples allowing exceptions. In the end, the judges will be impossible to make a sound judgement because the law itself has become so vague.
In conclusion, even though the laws as a whole should try to cover various situations that occur in the community, the laws itself should not be the subject of various understandings. Also, allowing the laws to be bent will result in a much-complicated judgement of the judges. Therefore, to prevent these situations, the legislation should anticipate various situations and prevent the bending of the law beforehand.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 248, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'numerous'.
Suggestion: numerous
... the law itself should be flexible. The numerous different situations should be clearly stated by ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 146, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... be a target of varying interpretation. If the law was to be interpreted different...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, hence, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, as to, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.5258426966 169% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 26.0 12.4196629213 209% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2540.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 509.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99017681729 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84189412519 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447937131631 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 772.2 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.8081136545 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.952380952 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2380952381 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.38095238095 5.21951772744 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157164955395 0.243740707755 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0633689627665 0.0831039109588 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0387764473824 0.0758088955206 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111653948769 0.150359130593 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0369846255454 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.