Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been we

The argument cites that the hospital statistics reveal that people who play roller-skating need more protection. Three quarters of them did not apply protection and then had accidents in streets and parking lots. The author assumes that purchasing superb quality protections and reflect implement could lower the injury rate. However, there are some issues rendering the assumptions a little unconvincing.

First of all, the writer mentions that roller-skating players who go to the emergency room regarded as the hospital accounts reveals that they need protective equipment. Nevertheless, there could be other reasons which also cause severe trauma, such as poor skills. It is possible that those players are novices and do not have excellent abilities to perform intricate movements. Thus, they might need to practice basic movements before they do the advanced and difficult movements. Even if they adopt great protection suit, they might still be hurt when they are doing highly dangerous movements if they do not have sufficient practice and abilities.

Moreover, the argument points out that there are 75 percent patients are harmed in streets and parking places without protection implements. Nonetheless, they could be hurt since they were not in the suitable play areas. There is no obvious causation between the injuries and protections. The hazards might stem from that some player chose the wrong roller-skating places. Those places could contain highly harmful factors for the plays. In this way, if they adopt robust protection and play in the street, they might still have the risk of falling on the streets and be hit by cars.

Finally, the author indicates assumes that if they apply robust protection, the injury rate would decrease a lot. Notwithstanding, the statistics reveal that the injured player did not wear any protections, which might also mean that they do not want to wear them even they have the abilities to possess the protections. There is no direct relation between wearing no protections and they want to wear those protections. Hence, investing in protective equipment might not work to the people who do not like to wear them, and they could still get harmed.

To sum up, the above conditions might cause the assumptions not valid, and then not reach the conclusion claimed by the author. To bolster the argument, the writer needs to provide further information to clear the ambivalence.