In this letter to Balmer Island Gazette, the author claims that alimitation about the maximum number of moped rentals should be set and it is very likely to help with the reduction of traffic accidents happened in BalmerIsland. And he gives several facts to support his argument, but from my point of view, the evidence are not convincing enough because the author omits some the ?assumptions on the evidence.
Firstly, the author asserts that a reduction in moped rentals will decrease the accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians. This reason seems good, however, we could topple the assertion by just say ?something about the assumptions it based on. If the reduction really works, it means that most of those accidents are caused by faults made by moped riders rather than pedestrians. And we know that we cannot get such information from this argument. What if most of them are caused by pedestrians? If it does, such reduction will make no sense, and pedestrians will go on causing accidents involving themselves with bikes, skateboards or even vehicles. To avoid this suspicion, the author has to add more information showing that those accidents are always caused by mopeds. In this sense, the letter would be much more convincing.
By almost the same token, the author also doesn't say something about where are those accident-making mopeds from. It is very likely that the mopeds that made most accidents are owned by people living in Balmer Island and not rentedby tourists. It is highly probable that people who rent mopeds are always new to the island so they pay more attention to the traffic rules and cause fewer accidents. In the opposite side, residents who have mopeds don't care too much about the rules and ride them faster which consequently cause more accidents.If these things turn out to be true, the author's suggestion that the town council decrease the maximum number of rentals makes no sense. Only by excluding this kind of probability can we trust this argument more and takenext step effectively. 第二点感觉不太准确,减少 mopeds跟是否是本地人关系不大。In addition, the author also says that Torseau's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals last year and the bill acts well. In my opinion, this fact cannot be a reason for us to do the similar thing. We know nothing about the town Torseau, the social environment can be totally different from that of Balmer Island. This analogy can only be true if the traffic situation and the usage or the preferences of riding a moped are almost the same between the two areas. To make it more persuasive, the author has to compare Torseau with BalmerIsland and gives us the similarity of them, and consequently point out that the same effects about traffic accidents will happen after the new bill is acted on Balmer Island.
To sum up, although evidence in this letter is seemingly convincing, thereare still lots of defects in it. Some assumptions are omitted so the reasoningprocess in this argument is weak. To strengthen it, much more information hasto be added. Only in this way can we achieve the same conclusion and then takehis advice to decrease the maximum number of moped rentals.
感觉有进步,加油坚持写啊,中间断了些天了 |