Some people think that dangerous sports should be banned, while others think people should be free to choose. Discuss the both views and give your own opinion.

Some people believe that extreme sports should be prohibited, while others think they should be independent to choose. This essay will discuss both views and explain why risky sports should be outlaw.
Supporters of dangerous sports consider people should make choices autonomously about their own lives, including participating in extreme sports. This is mainly because, banning these activities influences personal freedoms and individual autonomy on a negative way. For example, rock climbing can be dangerous, however, many enthusiasts take precations, such as using safety equipment and recieving proper training. They stongly believe prohibiting dangerous sports deprives economic benefits. It is clear that extreme sports often generate revenue and boost local economics through tourism, sponsorship, and related industries. Banning these sports could lead to economic losses and unemployment in affected areas. Consider bull riding as an example. Bull riding events draw large crowds, generate tourism, and create job opportunities for event organizers, bull breeders and local businesses. So banning it could lead to economic losses in regions where it is popular.
On the other hand, the haters of these activities think that forbiding dangerous sports would protect imdividuals from serious injuries or even death. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure the safety of citizens, and certain extreme sports pose unnecessary risks. Banning base jumping in urban areas. This sport involves leaping off tall buildings with a parachute, and accidents have led to severe injuries and fatalities. Moreover, they think dangerous activities cause to issue which is related to public helath costs. Dangerous sports can result in costly medical bills and burden the healthcare system. Banning them could potentially reduce the financial strain on healthcare services, freeing up resources for more essential medical needs.
In conculusion, while extreme sports offer us generating revenue, and creating job opportunities in related ares, it is creating some problems like safety concerns,and public health costs. In my opinion, despite of its economic benefits, dangerous sports should be banned.
Give me an IELTS band score with explanning very criteria

6.5

The essay is logically organized and the progression of ideas is clear. However, there are some issues with the use of cohesive devices and the overall cohesion of the essay. The essay is well-structured, with a clear introduction, body paragraphs that discuss each view, and a conclusion that restates the writer’s opinion. However, there are some issues with cohesion and coherence. The use of cohesive devices is generally good, but there are some instances where the flow of ideas could be improved. For example, in the second paragraph, the transition between the general argument for personal choice and the specific example of rock climbing is a bit abrupt. More explicit signposting language could help to make the relationship between these ideas clearer. Additionally, the conclusion could be more effective in summarizing the main points and restating the writer’s opinion.

Suggestions

Try to use a variety of cohesive devices to ensure smooth transitions between ideas.
Make sure that your conclusion effectively summarizes the main points and restates your opinion.

The essay demonstrates a good command of a broad lexical repertoire. However, there are a few instances of awkward or incorrect word choice. The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary, with appropriate use of academic language. However, there are some instances of awkward or incorrect word choice. For example, in the first paragraph, the phrase “on a negative way” should be “negatively.” In the second paragraph, the phrase “precations” should be “precautions.” In the third paragraph, the phrase “public helath costs” should be “public health costs.”

The essay uses a variety of complex structures. However, there are a few grammatical errors and awkward constructions. The essay demonstrates a good command of grammar, with a variety of sentence structures used effectively. However, there are some minor errors that could be addressed. For example, in the first paragraph, the phrase “on a negative way” should be “negatively.” In the second paragraph, the phrase “precations” should be “precautions.” In the third paragraph, the phrase “public helath costs” should be “public health costs.”

The essay addresses the task effectively, presenting a clear position throughout. However, the argument could be more fully developed in places. The essay addresses the task effectively, presenting a clear position throughout. The introduction and conclusion are clear and relevant, and the body paragraphs each focus on a single main idea. However, the argument could be more fully developed in places. For example, in the second paragraph, the argument that personal freedom should not be compromised is well-developed. However, in the third paragraph, the argument that safety and public health should take precedence is not fully developed. A more balanced approach, considering the benefits and drawbacks of both perspectives, could provide a more nuanced argument.