Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment Within this group of people 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots were not wearing

The author of the statement above predicts that with the investing in high quality protective and reflective gears, the instances of severe injuries of roller-skaters would greatly dwindle. Undoubtedly, the ultimate aim of any of safety tools is to provide a safe ride for the roller-skaters. However, the inconclusive evidences incorporated into the author’s argument, does not lead us to give credence to what the author assumes.

To begin with, the mere fact that emergency rooms are more visited by those who did not wear protective gears and reflective materials, does not portray a conclusive image attesting the different gravity of the injuries. It is possible that the fewer number of those who put on the given gears, is chiefly in mirror injuries, while in the severe ones skaters are all the same. For instance, serious injuries that lead to death and do not reach to the hospitals should be enumerated to see whether there is any difference between those who wear the gears or not. Hence, the argument is undeveloped unless it shows the direct reduction of severe injuries by wearing the gears.

Even if these safety tools can reduce the number of "severe" injuries, the author assumes that in any condition these tools will work and nothing can overshadow the efficiency of investing in these items. Reflective gear can only be effective when the accidents happen at night and where the visionary of the other drivers is the culprit. During the daylight, it may be no need of a reflective gear. Furthermore, not seeing the potholes and obstructions at night may cause them to fall and damage themselves severely. Likewise, protective gears, either from being heavy or being uncomfortable, may limit the freedom of their movements or decrease their concentration that the accidents happen.

Finally, the author believes that merely by encouraging roller-skaters to invest in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, the risk of being injured will greatly decrease. Here the author missed the point that even with buying these gears the people may still be at risk without any education. Wearing high quality gears may lull the skate rollers into a false sense of safety; they may overestimate the effects of the gears and they do dangerous things like acrobatic movements. Furthermore, it is possible that people just buy these things and after a while do not use them. Thus, At least a combination of the strategies involving wearing a protective gear and education is needed, and the mere investing in these stuffs is not likely to reduce the risk of severe injuries.

In short, despite that the nature of the protective gears and reflective instruments are to reduce the risk of physical damages of the roller-skaters, they are not effective enough solely.Hence, the author’s reductionist argument basing on his/her assumptions, does not allow for a tenable conclusion.