求讨论：一篇argument

树二叉

The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper.
“As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant(机警的) in their effort to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine.”
范文指出以下错误

1.因果关系错误
“In the first place, this argument commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. The arguer assumes that an increase in the supply of cocaine is sufficient to bring about an increase in its use.”
可是原argument的结论是“Thus enforcement efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine.” 并未明确涉及“an increase in its use”。虽然这种假设（这种假设指：作者认为观察的供应的增长意味着使用的增长）符合常理，但文章并没有这样说。这种反驳合理吗？

2、为了更好地评估政府努力的效果，argument应该提供更多的信息
个人感觉，如果原argument的结论是“the effort contributes nothing to prevent the illegal drug use”之类，则指出“argument应该提供更多信息以评估政府努力地效果”是更说得通的。可是，原argument并没有对effort的整体效果作评价，我们仅仅可以从“ironically”一词中窥见作者的一些态度。范文的写法貌似默认原argument认为政府的effort没有效果。
即便这中认为是合理的，反驳这中认为也和原argument结论关系不是很大啊。

求指点：）

树二叉