TASK 2 (Discuss both views): Dangerous Sports

Some people think that governments should ban dangerous sports, while others think people should have freedom to do any  sports or activity. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Sample Answer

In recent decades, freedom to partake in extreme sports has remained a contentious debate, with opponents of this growing phenomenon arguing for a state prohibition of dangerous undertakings. However, there are those who claim otherwise, citing legitimate individual autonomy regarding participation in these risky sporting activities. This essay will therefore discuss both viewpoints before stating my final thoughts on this matter.

Proponents of a blanket ban base their arguments on safety concerns and the far-reaching consequences of extreme sports that may eventually be shouldered by governments. Risky undertakings, they say, can cause permanent physical injuries and mental damages. Granted, these risks can be mitigated, to a certain degree, by meticulous training, consistent practice, and cultivated expertise; however, it is undeniable that a brief moment of carelessness can result in irreversibly catastrophic consequences, as exemplified by lethal accidents in sports such as freefalling, spelunking, and cage-diving. Such individual damages are likely to be covered by the government in the form of public healthcare coverage, thereby potentially placing a substantial burden on the state and consequently reducing funding in other critical areas of the economy.

On the other end of the spectrum, advocates of extreme endeavours argue in favour of personal autonomy. From their perspective, the fundamental governing principle across virtually all democratic societies can be inferred: a person is eligible for any undertakings as long as these do not violate any laws. Under this tenet, risky pursuits fall right into this purview, which in turn means that a state prohibition may infringe upon individual freedom. This personal autonomy infringement, according to this theory, if left unchecked, may engender public resentment and thus social outrage, undermining the fundamental principle of democracy. This can be evidenced across democratic countries, wherein the ban of a certain activity, such as mobile phone usage or fast food consumption, may stir heated public debate and social unrest.

In conclusion, while I acknowledge the valid arguments from both camps, the key lies in a balance and moderate approach that settles somewhere between the two extremes. On the one hand, it is prudent to ban extreme pursuits that fail to adhere to strict safety standards and possess exceedingly high lethal rates. On the other hand, autonomy should still be granted for individuals to take part in endeavours that comply with safety regulations, possess high safety records, and are known to have low lethal rates. Only with a balanced approach would individuals not feel socially oppressed and sports be able to flourish.

Vocabulary