The question of whether the government should prohibit high-risk sports or not due to people’s individual autonomy has been widely debated. While some argue that citizens should be free to choose any sport, which can help them to make decisions independently and this trend may develop their personal lifestyles, I firmly believe that banning such sports might solve some social issues in a country.
On the one hand, allowing individuals to participate in risky sports can be justified for several reasons. The most compelling reason is that participating in extreme sports enables individuals to challenge themselves and develop greater self-confidence. This is mainly because sports celebrities present those kinds of sports as exciting and glamorous, thereby encouraging young people to take part in these activities. As a result, participants may learn to overcome fear, and become more confident in everyday situations. Another justifiable aspect behind this phenomenon is that it can contribute to economic growth. By organizing dangerous sports, the government might raise the country’s profile, as activities like these attract a number of tourists from other countries. Therefore, the government will be able to make money from hotels, public transport, and instructors.
On the other hand, I remain convinced that the government should prohibit citizens from engaging in risky sports. This is mainly because many extreme sports involve risks that cannot be eliminated, even with high-tech equipment. A change in climate may lead to human error or fatal accidents. Consequently, as a participant got a serious injury, he or she might suffer from it for a long period of time. Since governments have a responsibility to protect citizens, some people believe these activities should be prohibited. Furthermore, covering the expenses of injured citizens and damaged equipment might come at a huge cost to the government. That is, when participants are injured, the government often funds operations, medical treatment, and rehabilitation services. These expenses are usually paid through taxes. As a result, taxpayers might lead the government to the financial burden. Therefore, prohibiting high-risk sports is better than facing extremely serious problems.
In conclusion, although organizing dangerous sports has benefits to the community itself from tourists who come to engage in, and such sports may positively influence individuals’ self-confidence, I would contend that the problems behind this trend – loss of life and financial burden – are far more significant. Only by banning risky sports can the government prevent these issues.