The following appeared as a letter to the editor from the owner of a skate shop in Central Plaza."Two years ago the city voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for the litter and vandalism tha

In the preceding statement, the author claims that prohibiting skateboarding in Central Plaza is the main reason that responsible for losing Central Plaza to its former glory. He recommends that the city should lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza to restore its glory. Though his clam may have well merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence that the author offers. We cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue with the author’s reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The author didn’t share any information about the numbers of voters who voted for prohibiting the skateboarding in Central Plaza. We don’t know on what evidence that they relied in their voting. Maybe there were many accidents because of skateboarding and maybe there were many injures of using the skateboarding around the plaza. It could be annoying to have this kind of sport while people are going there to make a shopping and have relax time.

Furthermore, the author made a comparison between Central Plaza and Monroe Park and how Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. This comparison is not supporting his argument because we don’t know if these places are having the same features or not. Central Plaza could be place for shopping and have many shops and business and it will be hard to practice this sport there. On the other hand, the Monroe Park it could be a park with open area which could be easier for practicing this sport. We cannot be sure that the things that are worked in Monroe Park could be worked in Central Plaza until we know more details about the two places.

In addition, the author assumed that the restore Central Plaza to its former glory it just will happen by permitting the skateboarding. He didn’t take in his consideration that there are other factors might be the reason for keeping the visitors away from the plaza like bad services, no kids area, or the quality of the stores.

In sum, the author’s illogical argument based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. The author needs to provide more information about the features of the plaza and what kinds of shops are there? So we can identify if the plaza is suitable place for skateboarding or not. If the author truly hopes to change his readers’ minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix his flaws in his logic, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people