Law can change human behavior. Do you agree or not?
The substantial influences of law have sparked a controversy among the luminaries around the globe. While specific argument claimed that laws could change individual's behavior, a group of intellectuals debate otherwise and hold opponent's views. I am highly inclined to believe that legalization of human behavior effects social justice in the society. The agenda of this article is to refine both sides of law's natural impacts on social communities and will lead to a legitimate conclusion.
At the outset, there are numerous reasons why law enforcement is supported globally by criminal's scientists. The most remarkable one is rooted in the fact that the law declaration polices criminal interactions. For instance, an outcome of recent longitudinal's study by a group of profound social activist in a prominent university revealed that 15% of lawbreakers had been changed their attitudes after the legalization of a series of restricted acts. Hence, law declaration on human's behavior related to natural behavior, social behavior, political behavior, aggressive behavior, as well as general behavior.
Secondly, there remain drawbacks, which can unquestionably overwhelm the potential influences of legalized individual's interaction, but the most alarming one is rooted in the fact that law's enforcement might lead to an aggressive social reaction. Moreover, recently it is alleged that verbal communication is decreased significantly by activists in a society with higher political laws. Therefore, an importance of policed social interaction and its detriments which have adverse effects on social inequality, law education, lawyer's community, legal processes, social achievements, human needs, law context, as well as human rights is noticeable.
To recapitulate, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, my sentiment is that the benefits of establishing law on a human communication's level far outweigh its drawback.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 479, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
...tricted acts. Hence, law declaration on humans behavior related to natural behavior, s...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 186, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'laws'' or 'law's'?
Suggestion: laws'; law's
...alarming one is rooted in the fact that laws enforcement might lead to an aggressive...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 31.9359605911 116% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1663.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 287.0 242.827586207 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.79442508711 5.00649968141 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27350015664 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 139.433497537 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602787456446 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 532.8 379.143842365 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.6157635468 43% => OK
Article: 6.0 1.56157635468 384% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6031506779 50.4703680194 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.583333333 104.977214359 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9166666667 20.9669160288 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.25397266985 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279406275635 0.242375264174 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0944077576575 0.0925447433944 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0739787264809 0.071462118173 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165573818119 0.151781067708 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0613464289408 0.0609392437508 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.8 12.6369458128 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 22.75 53.1260098522 43% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.6 11.5310837438 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.77 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.94827586207 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.