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.
The statement suggests that any person who has committed a crime, while he/she was aware that their action is not in accordance with the law, must be punished severely. The ways in which the punishment should be imparted are taking away of their civil rights and the right to benefit from their own work. While it can be agreed that the statement is sound to an extent, the measures suggested are, according to me, a bit too extreme.
Some of the crimes committed by people are done unknowingly, like not knowing, and thus, not following the speed limits. On the other hand, some people commit unlawful actions while being aware that those particular actions are not allowed by law. However, not all crimes done may be done with the intention of causing harm to the society or nation in general. People who commit such crimes may not be harmful for the society and thus, such a strong action of curtailment of civil rights should not be taken against them. For example, a person may choose not to follow traffic lights because he has a co-passenger who needs immediate medical attention. Even though the person is aware that running a red light is an crime, he may choose the life of his co-passenger over following of the traffic laws. In such a case, even though the crime has been done knowingly, giving a stern warning to the concerned person would be more appropriate than depriving him of his rights.
If this particular statement were to be implemented as a policy, it would not be fair to the general public. The government must carefully consider the importance it gives to upholding of the law vs the basic human rights. As this policy would be very stern, it could lead to a spread of terror throughout the country about the government and the law enforcement authorities; making the people fear those in power. Thus, the whole purpose of democracy would be defeated, which wants people to have a strong participation in the working of the country.
On the other hand, if a person is known to commit various heinous crimes, and the person is incorrigible, keeping that person away from the community would be a wise decision for the community. For example, a criminal known to be affiliated with terrorists, who has massacred a lot of people, would be better off in a private facility away from society. In such a case, it is not entirely wrong to deny him his civil rights like the right to vote; such a person can be made to work, under supervision, in a government project where he can positively contribute to the country.
Thus, while the claim comes off as too strict and extreme, there is some truth to it; implementing such a policy, under various restrictions to make it more appropriate and fair, would be beneficial.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 2, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
..., according to me, a bit too extreme. Some of the crimes committed by people are done unk...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 714, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...on is aware that running a red light is an crime, he may choose the life of his co...
^^
Line 3, column 95, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s a policy, it would not be fair to the general public. The government must carefully consider...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'thus', 'while', 'as to', 'for example', 'in general', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.196629213483 0.240241500013 82% => OK
Verbs: 0.166666666667 0.157235817809 106% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0861423220974 0.0880659088768 98% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0580524344569 0.0497285424764 117% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0374531835206 0.0444667217837 84% => OK
Prepositions: 0.11797752809 0.12292977631 96% => OK
Participles: 0.061797752809 0.0406280797675 152% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.61118522949 2.79330140395 93% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0355805243446 0.030933414821 115% => OK
Particles: 0.00374531835206 0.0016655270985 225% => OK
Determiners: 0.12734082397 0.0997080785238 128% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0355805243446 0.0249443105267 143% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0131086142322 0.0148568991511 88% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2742.0 2732.02544248 100% => OK
No of words: 481.0 452.878318584 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70062370062 6.0361032391 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68313059816 4.58838876751 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.320166320166 0.366273622748 87% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.218295218295 0.280924506359 78% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.147609147609 0.200843997647 73% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.106029106029 0.132149295362 80% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61118522949 2.79330140395 93% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 219.290929204 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465696465696 0.48968727796 95% => OK
Word variations: 52.9366689972 55.4138127331 96% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6194690265 87% => OK
Sentence length: 26.7222222222 23.380412469 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.7676538038 59.4972553346 55% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.333333333 141.124799967 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.7222222222 23.380412469 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.611111111111 0.674092028746 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.21349557522 58% => OK
Readability: 48.5517440517 51.4728631049 94% => OK
Elegance: 1.43571428571 1.64882698954 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.360517542039 0.391690518653 92% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.15129193455 0.123202303941 123% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0671579582721 0.077325440228 87% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.608719318841 0.547984918172 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.151862497253 0.149214159877 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.155311208616 0.161403998019 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0581451110151 0.0892212321368 65% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.403846552662 0.385218514788 105% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0761263554824 0.0692045440612 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232139485621 0.275328986314 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0753694447575 0.0653680567796 115% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 3.66592920354 218% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 13.5995575221 125% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.