Saba Shafqat

The argument states that by reducing the number of rental mopeds the town council of
Balmer Island will be able to decrease the number of accidents to half. Stated in this way, the
argument does not take into account several key factors, and on this basis the argument can be
evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumption that the neighbouring Island of Seaville achieve
the same improvement by using the same strategy last year for which there is no sound
evidence. Therefore the logic and reasoning to support the argument needs to be improved.
The first issue to be addressed is to provide 50 percent less mopeds to the rental companies in
the summer daily to avoid the accidents between mopeds and pedestrians.Clearly one could
argue that this may not be an effective way to reduce accidents.Because it is possible that the
accidents could be caused due to the negligence of pedestrians in abiding the traffic rules.As a
large number of tourists visit the Balmer Island during summer so as the demand of mopeds but
their is no sound evidence that they are solely responsible for accidents.I feel that town council
should appoint traffic wardens to observe the behaviour of traffic during summer and make a
decision on the basis of their report.
This argument also relies on the idea that less rental mopeds will be responsible for a significant
fall in the number of accidents like Seaville Island.This is not the case.The Seaville Island may be
a more popular destination for the tourists than Balmer for spending summer holidays.So,its
population could be more than that of Balmer in summer and the usage of mopeds would be
more common.Also we do not know that the situation of Seaville traffic was same as that of
Balmer or not.
A proper research should be conducted to find out that whether the usage and popularity of
mopeds and there role in accidents in Seaville is same as that of Balmer or not.In addition to it,a
survey should be conducted to compare the traffic situation of both Islands to find out if the
strategy will be useful for Balmer Island.

Without convincing answers to the question that by reducing the number of mopeds in Balmer
accidents will decrease, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of wishful thinking
than substantive evidence. The argument is flawed for the reasons discussed. It could have been
considerably strengthened if the author gave clear examples to support the conclusion. To
assess the merits of a certain situation, it is necessary to have knowledge and understanding of
all the contributing factors.