andidi

J'ai éssayé de reformuler au mieux mes phrases mais des erreurs percistes... Merci d'avance..


To my mind guns still represented the law. So it’s normal that the only persons able to carry a weapon are the policemen. Then if everybody has one, I think that it could be the mess !! Each would adjust its accounts in his way.It’s not the goal !! Ineed, if each has a gun at home, their children can take it and creat an accident or kill someone. Futhermore for the alcoolics or depressive persons. Nowadays the policy as regards weapon evolves. Ineed given that weapons can kill, they equip the police either arms with bullets but electrical arms. These last paralyse the people who is touch with. But since then it is less dangerous?


(Biensûr) you will say me that to have a weapon at home is pratical to protect your family and your home from the intruders when the police isn’t hier. But if an intruder wants come back he will come back even you dissuade with your gun. I think that if it there are lots of problems in USA, it’s because people fool of his arm. It‘s not the weapon which is dangerous but people who have it.
I don’t mean that I’m agree with weapons as lon as it isn’t to kill a human...


To conclude I wonder why all the country don’t restrict (le port des armes).

banane82

Tout ce qui est en majuscule sont les fautes que j'ai corrigé et les remaniements de phrases: il ne faut pas faire du mot à mot, il faudrait que tu arrive à penser en anglais, ne serait-ce que des phrases simples, car si tu traduit du français vers l'anglais, d'une part c'est pas très utile, et d'autre part tu n'aura pas le temps de la faire le jour du bac. De plus, en français, quand certaines phrases sont passives, elles sont actives en anglais, et inversement. Ainsi, certaines phrases français seront très développés, et en anglais très courtes, et inversment. Mais le truc qui est bien, c'est que je trouve que tu a fait des efforts du coté du vocabulaire, et que tu nous ai donné ta propre version aulieu de nous donné le texte en français à traduire ( d'autant plus que si avait fait ça tu aurait eu sans doute aucune réponse ), continue tu vas y arriver

ON my mind, guns still represented law. So THAT's normal that the only PEOPLE who CAN CARRY weapons are POLICEMEN. Then if everybody HAD one, I think that could be A mess!! Each PERSON WOULD BE ABLE TO SORT OUT THEIR PROBLEMS BY THEIR OWN way. Futhermore IN THE CASE of ALCOHOLIC or depressive persons. Nowadays, policy ABOUT weapons HAS EVOLVED. INDEED that GUNS can kill, PLICE IS SET UP BY ELECTRIC weapons.THOSE paralyse people who are HIT with. But, UNTIL WHAT POINT ELECTRIC ARMS are less dangerous THAN FIREARMS ?

FOR SURE, you'LL SAY that HAVING a weapon at home is PRACTICAL to protect your family from intruders when police isn't HERE.But if an intruder wants to come back , HE'LL DO even if you dissuade him with your gun.I THINK IF there are A LOT of problems in USA, THAT's because people FOOL WITH THEIR WEAPONS. wEAPONS ARE NOT DANGEROUS, but people who WEAR them.
I don't mean I AGREE ABOUT HAVING A WEAPON AS LONG AS IT'S NOT IN THE AIM TO KILL SOMEBODY ...

IN CONCLUSION, I wonder why all countrIES don't restrict WEAPONS POSSESSION

__________________

andidi

merci beaucoup