Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.
- drivers
- region population number vs percent
- approvals of driver's licences for callow young
- business
- logistics efficiency and benefits
- period
- accidents caused by external traffic from Elmsford
- place
- traffic routes become more dangerous
- potential problem
- lowering the limit may cause more accidents
Response scored 5 by ScoreItNow:
The proposed argument in an attempt to link the increased rate of automobile accidents in Forestville and the speed limit seems convincing if several critical factors, supplemental material and alternative possibilities are not concerned. From the viewpoints of car drivers' characteristics, business, period and regions, there are many uncertainties to clarify for fear of fallacious conclusion and decision.
If the numbers of automobile accidents in both regions are the same, the region with fewer automobiles should reach a higher accident rate in terms of percentage. Hence, the report should have included essential regional data for reference to make its statistics more sound. Further, what if there was a more significant increase of new approved driver's licences over the past six months in Forestville? The number of automobile accidents may accumulate sharply due to those callow drivers. It is unfair to compare two regions without regard to their population, not to mention the characteristics of the samples are also omitted.
Besides the drivers, the cause of the accidents is dubious, too. Since the speed limit in Forestville was increased, isn't it possible that the traffic from external regions like Elmsford also increased? And chances are that the increase of the number of accidents was caused by the external automobiles in reality. If not, why over the same period the number of automobile accidents in Elmsford also slightly decreased? As a result, the relation between the statistics in the two neighboring regions weakens the presented argument in fact.
Even if the argument is reasonable, conclusions to reduce the speed limit require more concern. First off more accidents may occur because the drivers fail to get used to the lowered speed limit immediately so that the change leads to more tragedies. In addition, to make a decision, one should take more perspectives into consideration. For example, the efficiency and benefits of the logistics business accrue due to the increased speed limit while people feel more satisfied with the shipment deliveries than before. The authorities can actually take other measures to decrease the automobile accidents under the same speed limit such as to set up more warning signs, deploy extra police officers in appropriate positions and improve potentially dangerous routes. Reducing the speed limit to the original is not the only choice.
To sum up, there are several critical points not concerned weakening this argument while the concluding remark also lacks alternative solutions to reach a win-win life. Therefore, based on the above discussion, without the characteristics of the drivers, causes of the accidents, business benefits from the increased speed limit, etc. fully clarified, how can an ordinary resident in Forestville accept such an argument which potentially manipulates his future life?
Response scored 6 by ETS
It is probably correct that lowering the Forestville speed limit would reduce the number of accidents in the region, given the information presented; however, the argument fails to refute or even consider alternate explanations of the increase in the number of accidents. No data are given to suggest these other explanations, but the people of Forestville would be well advised to look into them before changing their laws again.
There is no comparison of the data from the 6-month study to the previous year. In fact, we are not even told which six months are in question. If accidents were tracked beginning in the summer and ending in the winter in a snowy, icy region, we should expect an increase - perhaps of 15% - to be caused by the poorer driving conditions. Since neighboring Elmsford did not experience a "seasonal" increase in accidents, this explanation seems unlikely, but hardly impossible.
The decrease in accidents in Elmsford is intriguing, even though we are unfortunately not told quantitatively how significant it is. Could Elmsford drivers be changing their driving routes to take advantage of higher Forestville speed limits, thus driving less on their own highways and more on those of Forestville? To test this hypothesis it would help to know whether there had been a change in overall traffic volume in either community. It seems plausible that an increase in the number of cars traveling a highway would lead to an increase in the number of accidents, even if speed limits were not a factor. We must take into account, however, that people do not have unlimited choice of what highways to use (as they would if they were choosing between two products in a store, for example) since they must take roads that go to their destination. Thus, people are less likely to go to another community to take advantage of its speed limit laws than they are to take advantage of, for instance, its more permissive drinking laws.
How significant is six months in a study of accident patterns? A broad comparison to other traffic data might tell us that random fluctuations of 15% or even more are common, and that only a longer or more acute trend can be taken as meaningful. Likewise, how many accidents are actually involved? If Forestville is a small region that saw its number of accidents rise from 6 to 7, we would be inclined to dismiss the "trend" out of hand; if the increase were from 600 to 690, we would not.
Perhaps most useful would be a comparison of the last six months in Forestville to the first six months after raising a speed limit in another community, one that kept its higher speed limit despite the accidents. If the data were comparable, we could attempt to use the later accident statistics of the other community as a projection of what would happen in Forestville. Perhaps it would turn out that this other community experienced a short-term increase in automobile accidents as local drivers became accustomed to the new speed limit but soon saw its accident rate return to normal. If this were the case, it would be a strong argument against re-lowering the Forestville speed limit.
Finally, the conclusion of the argument is rather naively worded. We can assume that just about any region's citizens would want to reduce the number of automobile accidents, but many regions raise speed limits despite believing their actions will lead to more deaths and injuries on the highway. The macabre fact is that setting a speed limit is a balancing act between convenience and safety; everyone wants both, and both factors must be considered in any policy-making decision on speed limits.
There is no comparison of the data from the 6-month study to the previous year. In fact, we are not even told which six months are in question. If accidents were tracked beginning in the summer and ending in the winter in a snowy, icy region, we should expect an increase - perhaps of 15% - to be caused by the poorer driving conditions. Since neighboring Elmsford did not experience a "seasonal" increase in accidents, this explanation seems unlikely, but hardly impossible.
The decrease in accidents in Elmsford is intriguing, even though we are unfortunately not told quantitatively how significant it is. Could Elmsford drivers be changing their driving routes to take advantage of higher Forestville speed limits, thus driving less on their own highways and more on those of Forestville? To test this hypothesis it would help to know whether there had been a change in overall traffic volume in either community. It seems plausible that an increase in the number of cars traveling a highway would lead to an increase in the number of accidents, even if speed limits were not a factor. We must take into account, however, that people do not have unlimited choice of what highways to use (as they would if they were choosing between two products in a store, for example) since they must take roads that go to their destination. Thus, people are less likely to go to another community to take advantage of its speed limit laws than they are to take advantage of, for instance, its more permissive drinking laws.
How significant is six months in a study of accident patterns? A broad comparison to other traffic data might tell us that random fluctuations of 15% or even more are common, and that only a longer or more acute trend can be taken as meaningful. Likewise, how many accidents are actually involved? If Forestville is a small region that saw its number of accidents rise from 6 to 7, we would be inclined to dismiss the "trend" out of hand; if the increase were from 600 to 690, we would not.
Perhaps most useful would be a comparison of the last six months in Forestville to the first six months after raising a speed limit in another community, one that kept its higher speed limit despite the accidents. If the data were comparable, we could attempt to use the later accident statistics of the other community as a projection of what would happen in Forestville. Perhaps it would turn out that this other community experienced a short-term increase in automobile accidents as local drivers became accustomed to the new speed limit but soon saw its accident rate return to normal. If this were the case, it would be a strong argument against re-lowering the Forestville speed limit.
Finally, the conclusion of the argument is rather naively worded. We can assume that just about any region's citizens would want to reduce the number of automobile accidents, but many regions raise speed limits despite believing their actions will lead to more deaths and injuries on the highway. The macabre fact is that setting a speed limit is a balancing act between convenience and safety; everyone wants both, and both factors must be considered in any policy-making decision on speed limits.
Response scored 5 by ETS
The argument above presents a sound case for arguing that if the region of Forestville wants to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should consider reducing the speed limit to what it was before the increase in speed limit took place 6 months previously. However, there are some intermediate steps that one could take before jumping to the conclusion that reducing the speed limit is the only way in which traffic accidents can be reduced.
First of all, I would examine the actual number of traffic accidents that occurred before and after the speed limit increase and compare this to the size of the region and its driving population. For example, if the Forestville region's driving population is 1 million people, and the traffic accidents for a 6-month period before the speed increase totaled 100, then the 15% increase would amount to an additional 16 traffic accidents, or 116 total. For a population of 1 million, there may be other solutions to this increase besides reducing the speed limit to what it was. (The comparison to the region of Elmsford would only be helpful if the regions driving demography is comparable in terms of size and scope.) A public education campaign emphasizing driver safety and safe driving techniques may suffice to reduce the number of traffic accidents. Especially considering that if the number of accidents relative to the population is somewhat small, it is a fairly safe driving population anyway.
In addition, I would consider lengthening the time of the study. Six months may be a relatively short period of time for which to study the rate of traffic accidents. Upon a closer examination of when the accidents occurred, one might ascertain that most of the driving accidents occurred within a month of raising the speed limit, but that there have been relatively few additional accidents since that first phase-in period. Lengthening the study to a one-year period would help adjust for any untypical statistics and paint a more accurate picture of the long-term affects of the speed limit increase.
I would also examine what else was occurring in the region during the period of the study. For example, was there a major highway construction project happening during this time which would have added to the unsafe nature of raod travel? Are there any alternative explanations for why the increase in traffic accidents could have occurred, or is the increase in speed limit the sole variable? Looking at the type of accidents that occurred, I would examine whether these are the types of car accidents one would expect from traveling at a faster speed to corroborate the cause and effect relationship.
First of all, I would examine the actual number of traffic accidents that occurred before and after the speed limit increase and compare this to the size of the region and its driving population. For example, if the Forestville region's driving population is 1 million people, and the traffic accidents for a 6-month period before the speed increase totaled 100, then the 15% increase would amount to an additional 16 traffic accidents, or 116 total. For a population of 1 million, there may be other solutions to this increase besides reducing the speed limit to what it was. (The comparison to the region of Elmsford would only be helpful if the regions driving demography is comparable in terms of size and scope.) A public education campaign emphasizing driver safety and safe driving techniques may suffice to reduce the number of traffic accidents. Especially considering that if the number of accidents relative to the population is somewhat small, it is a fairly safe driving population anyway.
In addition, I would consider lengthening the time of the study. Six months may be a relatively short period of time for which to study the rate of traffic accidents. Upon a closer examination of when the accidents occurred, one might ascertain that most of the driving accidents occurred within a month of raising the speed limit, but that there have been relatively few additional accidents since that first phase-in period. Lengthening the study to a one-year period would help adjust for any untypical statistics and paint a more accurate picture of the long-term affects of the speed limit increase.
I would also examine what else was occurring in the region during the period of the study. For example, was there a major highway construction project happening during this time which would have added to the unsafe nature of raod travel? Are there any alternative explanations for why the increase in traffic accidents could have occurred, or is the increase in speed limit the sole variable? Looking at the type of accidents that occurred, I would examine whether these are the types of car accidents one would expect from traveling at a faster speed to corroborate the cause and effect relationship.
No comments:
Post a Comment