▶ Your Answer : Some governments claim that a few items and behaviors should be
regulated by law in order to maintain communal safety, while the public argue
that this kind of regulation infringes people’s freedom and right to pursue
good quality of lifestyle. Personally, to what extent, I believe that some
proper rules are necessary for the stability of the country.
To begin with, it is true that excessive stipulations by governments
could bring about rather a set of side effects for the people. For example,
Spanish government is limiting closing time of bars and pubs in parallel with
banning selling liquor after sunset time. Even though the Spanish government
intended to diminish crimes committed by drunken persons, resident people are
still making a breach regardless of selling time of liquor. Apart from that, in
case of Korea, the government permitted people to enjoy and drink over the
night. Thus, Korean people are able to be relaxed after finishing their work and
can alleviate a sort of stress and pressure. Moreover, except for a minor
group, many people are capable of controlling their lifestyle themselves with
health and well-being.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that governments should intervene in
civilian’s lifestyle. For instance, most of governments in the world have rules
regulating smoking areas. Certainly though, around a half of population in my
country is smokers, whereas the rest of them are not so. The former people
could advocate their freedom of smoking. Yet the smoking can induce all kinds
of illnesses related with inhalation or fatal cancers. Smoking in elsewhere
would also make harmful effects on cleanliness and sanitary conditions in the
public facility. Accordingly, at least in the public places, it is needed to
regulate for the sake of social well-being whatsoever smokers denounce its
policy.
In conclusion, I believe that governments must make rules and
regulations for social convenience of people to some degree.
|