In an attempt to improve highway safety Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways But this effort has failed the number of accidents has not decreased and based on reports by the highway patrol man

In the abovementioned argument, the author advised Prunty County to take some initiatives e.g. widening the lane, renovating uneven highways, improving the risky intersections in order to improve highway safety. The author has come to this conclusion based on the evidence Butler County which took the same initiatives mentioned above five years back. However, the author supports his conclusion based on three assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument.
First, the author presumes that Prunty County and Butler County are roughly comparable that circumstances from one action can be used to make generalizations and predictions about the other. However, it is possible that the two counties may not be similar. It is possible that the infrastructures of Butler County were poor which they made significant improvement over the last five years whereas Prunty County may already have a sound infrastructure. It may also be possible that uneven highways were the main problem for Butler County which may not be true for Prunty County. Further, there is a possibility that authority is very strict in Butler County to maintain road safety which forces the people of that County to follow the rules and regulations imposed by the authority which may be completely opposite in Prunty County. If either of the scenarios has merit then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
Second of all, the author assumes that by improving the highways in Prunty County, drivers will minimize the speeding limit. However, this may not be true at all. It may be possible that as the highways get improved the drivers become more reckless and therefore the number of accidents in the highways may be increased further. There is also a possibility that the government may find it very difficult to tackle the situation to control the speeding limit of the drivers who drive at highways. As the author mentioned that previously drivers were not limiting their driving speed then it may be possible that after the improvement drivers may continue doing the same. If the above id true then the argument doesn’t hold water.
Finally, the author mentioned about significant road improvement in Prunty County in order to reduce the number of accidents as Butler County did five years ago. Here, the author assumes that in Prunty County uneven roads are the only cause of the increasing number of accidents. However, this may not be true at all. It is possible that roads in Prunty County are in absolutely good condition for highway driving and it may be far better than Butler County. Further, there is a potential that laws and orders are not maintained strictly in Prunty County which may cause increasing accidents. If either of these scenarios proves true then the author’s assertion is invalid and will do little to improve highway safety in Prunty County.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is significantly flawed due to its reliance on three unwarranted assumptions. The author needs to provide additional evidence perhaps in the forms of systematic research study to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation to improve the highway safety of Prunty County.