后天就要考试了，神啊，帮我看看吧。argument18

loisoneUID: 2518031

TOPIC: ARGUMENT18 - The following appeared in an editorial in a Prunty County newspaper.

"In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County recently lowered its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major county roads. But the 55 mph limit should be restored, because this safety effort has failed. Most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly. If we want to improve the safety of our roads, we should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago."
WORDS: 484
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-9-14 22:05:46

In this argument, the speaker concludes that in an effort to imporve the safety of its roads, the Prunty County should adopt the same kind of road improvement project as Butler did five years ago. To support his claim, the speaker points out that Buterler's road improvement project is effective in reducing the traffic accidents. Also, the speake points out that Prunty County's action of lowering its speed limit to 45 mph has failed. At first glance, the argument seems logical. However, a careful examination reveals that it is fallacious in several respects.

First, the speaker falsely assumes that Prunty County's action of lowering its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major roads has failed. The speaker fails to inform us the proportion of drivers exceeding the new speed limit. It is likely that most drivers have lowered its speed. Also, the slight decreased accident rate may be a result of the lowered speed limit. Therefore, we can hardly believe that the action of lowering speed limit was a failure.

Secondly, the speaker falsely assumes that the road improvement project has led to the decreased accident rate of Butler County. However, it is likely that other factors have contributed to the lowered accident rate. Perhaps, the number of drivers has decreased significantly. Or, the drivers have become safety conscious. Therefore, the speaker should rule out these possibilities before he made the assumption.

Thirdly, the speaker falsely believes that the speed limit of 55 mph doesn't affect the traffic accident rate of Butler. Because there is little information about the causes of accidents in Buter, It is entirely likely that the traffic accidents In Butler was mainly caused by over speed. Therefore, the speaker is expected to provide evidence indicating that the speed limit of 55 mph produces little negative effects on accident rate.

Lastly, the adoption of Butler's road improvement project doesn't necessarily ensure the same desirable effects would happen in Prunty County. Here, the speaker has failed to take into consideration the time factor. Five years is such a long time that many factors affecting the traffic accident rate have changes. Moreover, there is little information about the conditions of the roads in Prunty County. It is entirely possible that the roads in Prunty County are in good condition, wide and smooth. Thus, the necessity of implementing Butler's policy is open to question. In addition, in order to improve safety, Prunty County should adopt other effective methods such as enchance driver's safety consciousness.

In conclusion, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the speaker is supposed to provide evidence suggesting that the road improvement project adopted by Butler County five years ago is still effective and applicable to Prunty County. To better support it, the speaker should provide evidence indicating that the speed limit of 55 mph produces limit effects on the traffic accident rate.