▶ Your Answer :
In the recommendation, the author argues that Amburg install high-intensity light since it is effective to combat crimes. At first glance, the argument seems persuasive; however, the lack of solid evidence leads me to question its validity.
First, the author needs to provide more solid evidence whether the installation of high-intensity lighting in its central business district yielded the decrease in vandalism in Bellwville. It is possible that an increase in policemen or surveillane cameras were prevalent at the same time the lights were installed. Thus, vandalism decreased because of stronger regulation and enforcement, not because of the lighting. Also, without concrete information on exactly how much vandalism actually decreased, we can assume that the decrease was marginal and thus not significant.
Next, the author needs to supplement the argument with more concrete information whether the police patrols on bicycles engendered the constant rate of vandalism in Amburg. The author adamantly believes that bicycle police patrols are ineffective since there was no effect on vandalism. However, people may not have been aware of the police patrols since they were implemented recently. Thus, the effect of police patrol may prove effective in the long run. Also, in all likelihood, vandalism increased due to other factors, such as adverse economy or use of drugs. In such a case, although the police patrols reaped benefits, it seems like it had no effect since other factors took a toll on vandalism.
Lastly, more significant evidence is needed on the soundness of conclusion that installing high-intensity lighting throughout Amburg is a more effective way to combat crime. The installation costs of high intensity might be exorbitant. If installation is costly, it may be better to save such costs. Also, lighting may cause vandalism to decrease, but the total number of crimes may not reduce. In other words, a reduction in vandalism cannot be generalized as a decrease in crimes because stealing and other types of crimes need to be decreased for crime rates in general to decrease.
In brief, the author's argument is unpersuasive in may respects. In order to bolster the argument, the author should provide more concrete information on the innate conditions of both cities, rule out other factors for the decrease in vandalism, and supplement the recommendation with a sound conclusion.
|