Do you think extreme sports like skiing, water rafting, etc. are dangerous and should be prohibited /banned? Are you in favour of these activities, why?
A.I. Score
Each colour is one skill. Tap a colour to hide it. Tap it again to show it.
Extreme sports such as alpine skiing and white-water rafting are often criticised for their inherent risks. While these activities do involve heightened danger compared with ordinary recreation, I do not believe they should be prohibited. Instead, they should be supported within a framework of regulation, because their benefits to individuals and society outweigh the manageable risks.
The strongest argument against banning extreme sports is that risk can be substantially reduced through training and safety standards. Professional instruction, weather monitoring, and certified equipment lower accident rates significantly. For example, organised ski resorts require helmets, controlled slopes, and rescue services, transforming a hazardous environment into a calculated challenge rather than reckless behaviour. Such supervision also encourages responsibility and informed decision-making among participants.
Opponents claim that governments should prohibit dangerous leisure activities to protect public health and reduce medical costs. However, banning voluntary activities undermines personal freedom and is difficult to enforce. Adults routinely accept risk in occupations or travel, and extreme sports similarly provide physical fitness, resilience, and mental focus, which can offset social costs rather than increase them.
In conclusion, extreme sports are undeniably risky, but prohibition is neither justified nor effective. With regulation, education, and informed consent, these activities can be pursued responsibly. I therefore support extreme sports, as they promote personal development, controlled adventure, and individual choice without imposing unreasonable danger on society.
- Fully addresses the prompt in depth, showing full command of the argument by reformulating the issue in the writer's own words and expanding important points with specificity.
- The argument is supported convincingly with subsidiary points and relevant examples throughout the response.
- Has an effective logical structure, flows smoothly, and can be followed with ease.
- The argument is clear and cohesive and developed systematically at length; a well-developed introduction and conclusion are present, and ideas are organised cohesively into clear, logically sequenced paragraphs.
- Uses a variety of connective devices effectively and consistently to convey relationships between ideas.
- A variety of expressions and vocabulary are used appropriately to formulate ideas with ease and precision throughout the response.
- No signs of limitations restricting what can be communicated.
- Errors in language use, if present, are rare and minor, and meaning is completely clear.
- Shows consistent grammatical control of complex language. Errors are rare and difficult to spot.
- Good command of a broad lexical repertoire, idiomatic expressions and collocations.
- Correct spelling.
- Length is within the required 200 to 300 words.