The argument proposes a solution to increase road safety for sidewalk walkers while noble, fails to provide a well thought solution that is backed up by science or data.
First, the argument suggests that there has been increase in a phenomenon called 'sidewalk rage' which is described as road rage but for those who walk the sidewalks and point the effects caused by this phenomenon towards assaults, property damage, and disruptions of normal pedestrian traffic. It also states that use of cell phone is the cause and thus proposes a ban of using cell phones while walking. However, there is no evidence or studies suggesting that cell phones were the primary instigator to assaults and other phenomenon. The use of cell phone by can also be attributed to either relax by listening to music, audiobooks etc. or converse their family or loved ones, neither of which cause 'sidewalk rage' as they indicate the opposite effect - peacefulness or calmness.
Sidewalkers may be causing an obstruction to normal traffic, this could only occur if the sidewalk facilities are not accessible or poorly constructed such that they become unusable. Causes leading to assault and property damage can be related to individual and whatever occupies their mind and cell phone may only play a minor factor in such scenarios as it might be the ingredient that set the individual's mindset into a downward spiral. However, such cases are very rare and all events of sidewalk rage cannot be the same. Roadrage occurs primarily due to the mind being preoccupied with handling multiple things at once such as driving the car, understanding the patterns of the car ahead and behind - thus any small incident that causes momentary distraction may overload the brain capacity and thus resulting in a vehement outcry.
The argument also states that children are especially vulnerable, which this is true as they become preoccupied with the mobile easily and lose sight of their surroundings. However, children given a mobile are usually accompanied by the parents or an adult and any obstructions caused by the children is in majority of the cases due to negligence of the adult.
Thirdly, the argument states that middletown passed a ban for the same and received no complaints and sidewalk crime has reduced. However, there is no existing studies or data provided that backs up the fact that all three events are interlinked. The complaints may not have been recorded because people were lethargic and disinterested in the ban passed. There also is no indication that the ban was enforced or publicised by the authorities. Sidwalk crime rates may have gone down drastically due to better sidewalk facilities in place or any other number of factors.
In conclusion, the argument fails to provide a justified reasoning to propose and enforce the ban of cellphone in a number of ways. All reasonings provided are circumstantial and arbitrary, thus failing to provide a convincing argument.
- The following appeared as part of the Dean s newsletter quot The University of Wabash is considering a community service requirement for all undergraduate and graduate students We believe that the objective of any university is to produce well rounded 58
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs 50
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree wi 58
- The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville Over the past three years there has been a marked increase in cases of sidewalk rage similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road but instead among sidewalk walkers The resul 72
- The following is an excerpt from a speech given to the School Board about a change to the curriculum quot Because the future will be dominated by technology we must make four years of computer programming mandatory for all high school students If our s 73
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 486 350
No. of Characters: 2432 1500
No. of Different Words: 241 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.695 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.004 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.721 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 180 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 140 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.842 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 1 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.3 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.59 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.046 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 397, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...it might be the ingredient that set the individuals mindset into a downward spiral. However...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, third, thirdly, thus, well, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 11.1786427146 250% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2487.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 486.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11728395062 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69525374022 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78517229782 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506172839506 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.4371324961 57.8364921388 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.894736842 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5789473684 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.10526315789 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121691876495 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0393617212527 0.0743258471296 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.049901656884 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.060806677504 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0423133587278 0.0628817314937 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 140.0 98.500998004 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.