Road accidents are more frequent these days and claim many lives each year. As a result, some people suggest that drivers should take regular driving tests throughout their lives, rather than one single driving test, to improve the situation.
What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of repeat driving tests?
Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
The statistics of road traffic accidents leading directly to the mortality has increased dramatically in recent years. Taking into consideration the circumstances, some officials have launched an initiative on introducing the law of forcing all driver-licenses’ owners to pass the driving test on permanent basis. Although the plan obtains a plethora of advantages mentioned below, the cons still dominate the pros. This essay will highlight a major benefit and a downfall of enacting of a frequent competence test.
On one hand, the introduction of a constant check on the driver's adequacy is sure to allow protecting the roads from careless and low-skilled drivers, entailing a reduction in accidents. Under the influence of various factors ( such as age) a person is more prone to suffer from impairments increasing their inattention to the road. For example, my grandfather is an experienced chauffeur with declined eyesight, hence, he is incapable of distinguishing the traffic signals as effortless and rapid as before. Thus, periodic driving tests are necessary to improve the safety on roads through reveling the soft spots of long-standing drivers that is to be regarded as a profit.
On the other hand, conducting test for such a wide audience as drivers is likely to be extremely costly for the government and it is sure to cause an increase in tax rate. Moreover, the bureaucratic apparatus in most modern countries is extremely underdeveloped, which entails constant delays revealing incapacity of the testing pattern. For instance, according to RBC, Russian provincial cities will not obtain the resources for reducing theory to practice and the system is certain to work at megalopolises only. Thereby, such governmental technique for arranging the traffic accidents’ problem is impracticable due to funding sources’ scarcity.
To sum up with, the drawbacks overweight the advantages as the above-mentioned scheme is a utopian bureaucratic plan that is never to be implemented.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 58, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'drivers'' or 'driver's'?
Suggestion: drivers'; driver's
...introduction of a constant check on the drivers adequacy is sure to allow protecting th...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 226, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Under the influence of various factors such as age a person is more prone to su...
^^
Line 3, column 370, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...attern. For instance, according to RBC, Russian provincial cities will not obtai...
^^
Line 3, column 431, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cities will not obtain the resources for reducing theory to practice and the syst...
^^
Line 3, column 545, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...olises only. Thereby, such governmental technique for arranging the traffic acci...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, moreover, so, still, thus, for example, for instance, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 24.0651302605 29% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1692.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 309.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47572815534 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30855148347 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63430420712 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 523.8 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
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: 30.254150285 49.4020404114 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.153846154 106.682146367 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7692307692 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.53846153846 7.06120827912 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.01903807615 100% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.154536979103 0.244688304435 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0492865165691 0.084324248473 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0467131915824 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0808312096252 0.151304729494 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0586789643597 0.056905535591 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.65 8.58950901804 124% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 78.4519038076 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.