The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette."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 involv

In this argument, the author is of the opinion that the town council of Balmer Island, during summer season, should limit the number of mopeds rented by different moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day. The author believes that such a measure would drastically reduce the annual percentage of moped accidents on Balmer Island. At first glance, this argument appears convincing. However, closer examination indicates that the argument is severely flawed and hence illogical.

Firstly, the author merely assumes that the rise in population during summer months would directly result in increased number of moped accidents. Although an increased population may indirectly increase the probability of accidents, it may not necessarily be true. In short, the author’s assumption lacks cogency.

Secondly, the author states that Balmer Island moped rental companies should limit the number of moped rentals to 25 per day, rather than the present number of 50 per day. This statement does not provide any logical reasoning as to why the number should be 25 per day. Why can’t it be 20 or 10? Also, this statement does not explain how reducing the number to 25 per day would bring down the percentage of annual moped accidents to 50 percent.

Thirdly, the author makes his statement based on observations about neighbouring island of Seaville. Although reducing moped rentals to 25 per day may have worked for Seaville Island, it does not necessarily indicate that such a measure would work for Balmer Island. This is merely a bold assumption.

Lastly, the author does not provide other relevant details about Balmer Island with respect to traffic sense. It is quite likely that residents of Balmer Island have excellent road sense and adhere to necessary traffic safety regulations. In short, the author’s claim is vague and far-fetched.

To conclude, this argument is unconvincing because of poor reasoning. To strengthen it, the author should provide well-reasoned, detailed explanation about his assumptions, taking into account facts and figures.