"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the

The argument that reducing mopeds on Balmer Island can reduce the accidents at the island seems tenable at first glance. However, the author failed to provide clear data and evidence to support that argument. Here are several reasons to argue that statement.

First of all, the author assume that the more mopeds available to be rented the more accidents will occur. In fact, the accidents can happen due to many reasons, not only mopeds. It could happen by some other reasons such as private car, motorcycle, or pedestrian. To state that more mopeds imply more accidents, the author must provide the statistical data of accidents and showing that the majority of them are correlated to mopeds. Furthermore, by limiting mopeds, people will tend to use their own vehicle and it implies the more car will available on the roads. It implies the city town will be more crowded and it does not imply the accident can be diminished.

Secondly, the author claimed this plan will be successful by learning the successful of the neighboring island of Seaville which attain 50 percent annual reduction. This statement cannot be accept with certainty because there are some other factor that the author must take into account such as the landscape and traffic management. The author must provide the information about the traffic management at Saeville such as the availability of traffic police at the city. The topography of landscape also play an important role in causing an accident because there are some landscape in which accidents often occur. For example, in Aceh, Indonesia, there is one street with name Selawah street which is not so quite. Even so, almost everyday there is an accident at that street because the landscape is full of bends.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and therefore unconvincing. It could be strengthen if the author some relevant facts such as the percentage of accidents caused by mopeds compared to the percentage of those caused by other vehicles. Without this information, the argument is still debatable.