The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner."Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central

The author argues that dramatic increase in the number of skateboarders in Central Plaza is responsible for decrease in business for the shops located there, and thus advocates a ban on skateboarding so that business in Central Plaza can recover. Stated in this way, the argument suffers from a number of unfounded assumptions and reflects several instances of poor reasoning, the main flaw being that, in order to argue his position, the author tries to relate the increase in number of skateboarders to the decrease in business levels. However since no substantial proof is given to support this statement, hence it may be noted that the author’s argument remains unpersuasive.

By critical examination, one can interpret that the author stands alongside the Central Plaza store owners who believe that number of skateboard users in the Plaza has led to slump in business. However one might also anticipate that increase in number of skateboard users lead to an increase in shopping at the Plaza. Thus, a very pertinent question arises to discuss exactly what percentage of skateboarders are also shoppers. The answer would conclusively help in determining whether skateboarders truly decreased the shopping levels at the Plaza.

Secondly, based on the first line of the argument which states that the number of shoppers at the Plaza is decreasing, one might ask how skateboarders might prevent other shoppers from visiting Central Plaza. The author, perhaps in anticipation of this question, raises the point of influx of vandalism and litter at the Plaza, a fact which may very well dissuade the hoi polloi from purchasing commodities at the mall. But here the author makes an unfounded assumption, by relating it to the number of skateboarders. It may so happen that the fault lies entirely with the garbage handlers. The Plaza might have been facing a shortage of them, owing to some reason or the other; else it may also happen that some of the equipment have gone out of commission and need extensive repair. Thus an exhaustive review of the state of the cleaners and their equipment, as well as an analysis of recent security footage might shed some light into the proper cause behind such an impoverished state of the Plaza.

Furthermore, the statement in the final paragraph of the argument which assumes that a ban on skateboarding will bring back business to thriving levels is rather unsubstantiated. If a majority of skateboarders were also shoppers, thus such a ban would lead to further decline in profits for the shop-owners at the Plaza. Thus without further proof, no further assertions can be drawn from the argument.

In conclusion, it may be inferred that the argument in its current form lacks the necessary supporting evidence, on the basis of which a definitive course of action might be proposed. If some of the points raised above are answered, then one might determine truly whether skateboarders should be deemed culpable for the plight of the shop-owners of Central Plaza, and if not, what the true reason behind their declining sales is.