Capital Punishment and Controlling Violent Crime

Without capital punishment (the death penalty), our lives are less secure, and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Annotated response

17 correction notes

Showing 17 correction notes.

Before talking about the essential , you have to think about the meaning, and the purpose, of any kind of punishment. If you consider that the purpose is to prevent the guilty , you can be in favour of the . But you have to think about another aspect of the problem: a punishment is also useful to , to make them fear the law. In fact, of a young in a violent atmosphere, influenced by older delinquents, He lives , he's got no aim but to survive. This is the kind of person who could possibly kill someone for money, or Why would he fear prison? Life would be easier for him there. In addition, in many cases, when you behave normally, you can benefit from . This young misfit needs to be impressed, he needs to know that the law is a frontier. When you cross it, you can lose your life. That is why capital punishment between robbery and murder. If you abolish it, you suppress the difference between these two types of crime, which are completely different.

But there is also a limit to define: even if death penalty is unavoidable, it would be a crime to apply it to . If there is no premeditation or past facts which can justify such a punishment, it is far too strict to . That is why the lawmakers have to establish precisely the context in which capital punishment . That is the price to pay to limit violence without using excessive violence.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 6.5

The strongest aspect is the response's clear, qualified position supporting capital punishment, developed through an extended deterrent argument and a reasonable boundary about when it should apply. The main limitations are an informal, conversational register with second-person address and occasional errors in cohesion and grammar that slightly obscure meaning.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

Task Response

6.5

The response presents a clear qualified position agreeing with the opinion, develops the deterrence argument with a concrete example, and adds a relevant limitation about premeditated crimes, though the introduction digresses before addressing the task.

Coherence and Cohesion

6.0

Progression is generally clear within each paragraph, but cohesion is somewhat mechanical, with abrupt opening linkers such as 'But there is also a limit' and an informal transition style that weakens logical flow.

Lexical Resource

6.5

The range of vocabulary is adequate for the topic, including items like 'premeditation', 'penalty reductions' and 'delinquents', with generally appropriate word choice, though the register is sometimes too informal and some collocations are imprecise.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

6.0

A mix of simple and complex structures is used with some accuracy, but frequent slips such as 'which has grown', 'helps keeping' and 'car be pronounced' and inconsistent article and tense use show only partial control.