Argument 4: Of the 500 serious traffic accidents that have occurred in our state

[Tinamary]

Of the 500 serious traffic accidents that have occurred in our state over the past 10 months, 65 percent have involved 16-year-old drivers. Obviously, 16-year-old do not have the emotional maturity needed to be safe drivers. The best solution is to pass law requiring our citizens to be at least 18 years old before they can obtain a drivers license.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The statistics as mentioned by the author may indicate that most of the accidents in the state were incurred due to the 16 year old. But, the claims that the author has put forward as a solution to the problem seems specious and unsubstantial. The author appears to take a constrictive approach.

Firstly, the author claims that 65 percent of the fatal accidents were due to the 16 year old. Although the author boldly makes the claim, there could be several reasons related to the accidents. For example, drunken driving, lack of proper traffic control systems, road conditions, over speeding and density of traffic could be the reasons for the accidents. Also, the claim seems plausible as the author fails to consider and analyse the reasons behind the accidents. The author might be true to some extent in saying that the accidents involved 16 -year -old. But, the circumstances that led to their involvement in the accident needs to be studied before making the claim.

Emotional maturity can not be highlighted as the main reason for the 16 year old being involved in the accidents. The emotional maturity level cannot be demarcated based on the age, as an elderly person can be emotional immature too.16 – year old could be better drivers than their older age group. Thus, the authors reasoning on why 16 year old cannot be safe drivers can be refuted. Moreover, their involvement in the accidents could be attributed to their lack of driving experience, lack of awareness of traffic rules, higher reaction time due to drinking, over speeding etc...If the remaining 35 percent of the fatal accidents share the same type of issues as the 65 percent caused by the 16 year old, the author's claim would be invalid as it would clearly implicate that the accidents are not age related.

Finally, age restriction to obtain the license is not the only solution to this problem. With a proper hands on, good traffic system, most of the problems could be solved. However, if the problem is restricted to few people or a particular age group, a proper driven test that test all aspects to ensure a safe driving experience should be practiced in the state and a law passed to ensure the same. Rather than restricting people, the motive of the state should be to ensure safe driving practices. Also, state should take actions to curb drinking, smoking, talking over phones while driving. Safe driving practices like use of seat belt, a license holder accompanying the young adult while driving should be legalized .

Despite few flaws in the authors statement, he may be right in saying that the accidents are due to immaturity of the 16 year old. But, he does not augment his premise with sufficient data. If for example he had provided evidences, results from the populace about the roads, on teenage driving, nature of accidents, his argument would have been far more persuasive and substantial.

[Aasthakapoo]

Well documented!! I would award a 5.5 - 6 to that analysis of argument..

[Kitosdad]

Then why don't you take the trouble to edit it Aasthakapoo?
_________________
Keep it simple ... Keep it interesting.

[Aasthakapoo]

Dear Kitosdad,
I have tried my best to edit this analysis of argument. But I am no professional in this field. I liked the opening two paragraphs of the analysis, which pleased me and I gave it an encouraging remark. But that did not mean it was flawless.
I hope I have succeeded in my endeavor. I would be extremely pleased if you could cross check my editing and point out the short-comings.
Thanks
Aastha Kapoor

Of the 500 serious traffic accidents that have occurred in our state over the past 10 months, 65 percent have involved 16-year-old drivers. Obviously, 16-year-old do not have the emotional maturity needed to be safe drivers. The best solution is to pass law requiring our citizens to be at least 18 years old before they can obtain a drivers license.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The statistics as mentioned by the author may indicate that most of the accidents in the state were incurred due to the 16 year old. But, the claims that the author has put forward as a solution to the problem seems specious and unsubstantial. The author appears to take a constrictive approach.

Firstly, the author claims that 65 percent of the fatal accidents were due to the 16 year old. Although the author boldly makes the claim, there could be several reasons related to the accidents. For example, drunken driving, lack of proper traffic control systems, road conditions, over speeding and density of traffic could be the reasons for the accidents. Also, HENCE, the claim seems plausible as the author fails to consider and analyse the reasons behind the accidents. The author might be true to some extent in saying that the accidents involved 16 -year -old. But, the circumstances that led to their involvement in the accident needs to be studied before making the claim.

Emotional maturity cannot be highlighted as the main reason for the 16 year old being involved in the accidents. The emotional maturity level cannot be demarcated based on the age, as an elderly person can be emotional immature too.16 – year old could be better drivers than their older age group. Thus, the authors reasoning on why 16 year old cannot be safe drivers can be refuted. Moreover, their involvement in the accidents could be attributed to their lack of driving experience, lack of awareness of traffic rules, higher reaction time due to drinking, over speeding etc...If the remaining 35 percent of the fatal accidents share the same type of issues as the 65 percent caused by the 16 year old, the author's claim would be invalid as it would clearly implicate that the accidents are not age related.

Finally, As other factors could be equally contributing to the road accidents, the author’s suggestion to impose age restriction to obtain the license may or may not solve the problem. Instead due to over emphasis on this measure, would take their attention off the other causes which might be causing the accidents. The arguer hence fails to give an equitable solution to the problem he mentioned.(This paragraph has beeb striked out because the argument analyst is trying to make his own suggestions here.) {With proper hands on, good traffic system, most of the problems could be solved. However, if the problem is restricted to few people or a particular age group, A proper driven driving test that test all aspects to ensure a safe driving experience should be practiced in the state and a law passed to ensure the same. Rather than restricting people, the motive of the state should be to ensure safe driving practices. Also, state should take actions to curb drinking, smoking, talking over phones while driving. Safe driving practices like use of seat belt, a license holder accompanying the young adult while driving should be legalized .}

Despite few flaws in the authors statement, On the whole the author may have a point in saying that the accidents, due to one reason are attributed to immaturity of the 16 year old. But, he does not augment his premise with sufficient data. If for example he had provided more statistical evidence, results from the populace about the roads, on deaths due to teenage driving and deaths due to other causes, and compared them, his argument would have been far more persuasive and substantial.

[Kitosdad]