please give your feedback for this argument

[Amychin]

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."

The writer's suggests that the Prunty County should restore the speed limits to 55mph. At first glance the writer's argument seems obvious. However a closer scrutiny of the passage reveals that the evidences provided by the author does not support the thesis and are illogical or unreasoned.

First the newly implemented speed limit measure is ineffective because accidents have been reduced only slightly. But writer wrongly claims this evidence as a proof to the failure of the safety effort. In fact this evidence indicates that the measure has indeed resulted in avoiding certain mishaps. Also, the writer disapprove of the newly posed limits because most of the drivers are exceeding the maximum allowable speed. Here I would like to question the writer that what is the main purpose of these safety measures? In my opinion the main motive is to reduce the driving speeds so as to avoid the accidents. To pose speed limits is just a tool used to ensure the same. The passage clearly shows that there was a decrement in the speed of the drivers.

Moreover it would have been more convincing if the writer have provided us statistics comparing the average speeds of the driver before and after the imposition of 45mph barrier. If the average speeds after the enactment is found to be lower than earlier average speeds, which is likely to be because there was a reduction in the speeds, then I think that much of the target has been achieved. Therefore the the 45mph impediment should be continued.

Further the author did not mention that weather the road improvement project of the Butler County was exclusively a safety measure. Perhaps it was meant to improve the wretched conditions of the road or may be to lure the people because of some impending elections. Even if we assume that these was meant for the safety purpose then why it was that only last year the County recorded a decrement in the road accidents? Had the road renovation was so effective step then it would have recorded a decrease in all the subsequent five years and not just the last one year.

Finally the number 25percent e only when the total number of accidents 5 years before were large say 100. However if the total number of accidents in Butler County, is already less, say 5. which may be because of reasons such as lesser population, topographical reasons, responsible drivers etc, then the 25percent does not seem to be an effective number. So this evidence does not contribute to strengthen the writer's point.

So the measures taken by the Butler County does not seem effective or are either not applicable to the Prunty County. Also the lack of data about the relative speeds of the drivers before and after the 45mph limit was put to effect, weakens the writer's position. Thus I remained unconvinced of the argument.