“As violence in movies increases, so do crime rates in our cities. To combat this problem we must establish a board
to censor certain movies, or we must limit admission to persons over 21 years of age. Apparently our legislators are
not concerned about this issue since a bill calling for such actions recently failed to receive a majority vote.”
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The author of the argument states that "Legislators are not concered about increasing crime rates in the city" to support the reasoning
"increase in crime rates in movies is the primary cause for increase in crime rates in the cities".
This argument is unjustified because there other factorts to be examined and taken into acccount before making such an assumption such as
city law enforcing agencies credibility , current economic status in the city , employment status .
Firstly, increase in crime rates cannot be solely attributed to the violence in movies. Law enforcing agencies play an important role
in having the city free from crimes. Argument does not provide the complete insight of the law firms and leaders.
The city could have poor leaders which would set the population free for any illegal acitivities.
Secondly , There is no substantiate evidence to prove the economic status of the city is healthy. There has been a downfall in the economy
which has lead to huge loss of jobs. Unemployment crisis could have led people to switch to crimes in city.
Thirdly , The author suggests to establish a censor board to censor all movies that contain crime scenes.
increased crime rates
in movies may have caused crimes in city. There are no statistics provided to prove the city population largely ask and watch violent movies.
These reasons makes argument weak and hence implementing a censor board would only be a waste of tax payers money.
Foruth , Restricting movie entry to only people who are above 21 yrs makes the arugment weak.
Government laws considers anyone above 18 years as an adult. Hence, the authors arugment is seemless because as per goverment rules
anyone above 18years cannot be curtailed from doing anything that is leagally permissible.
Finally, The authors blames the legislators for not acting on the issue as the bill passed by legislators was not well received.
The bill could be rejected to various reasons : The committe would have found no correlation between crime in movies and crime in cities.
Due to the lack of statistics related to crimes rates in the city committe does not have a strong reasons to consider the legislators bill.
In conclusion, Author's claim that increase violence is the sole cause of violence in movies is flawed .
. There no are statists provided to prove the city population call for violent movies only.
There is no mention of economic status , employment status in the arugment. Are there any other factors instigating crime.
Author makes a poor correlation of crime in movies and crime in cities. Establishing a censor board would only be useful if its proved
that violence in movies is the only cause for crime in cities. There are no strong evidence to substantiate this.
Author needs to re-evaluate the reasoning made.![]()
to censor certain movies, or we must limit admission to persons over 21 years of age. Apparently our legislators are
not concerned about this issue since a bill calling for such actions recently failed to receive a majority vote.”
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The author of the argument states that "Legislators are not concered about increasing crime rates in the city" to support the reasoning
"increase in crime rates in movies is the primary cause for increase in crime rates in the cities".
This argument is unjustified because there other factorts to be examined and taken into acccount before making such an assumption such as
city law enforcing agencies credibility , current economic status in the city , employment status .
Firstly, increase in crime rates cannot be solely attributed to the violence in movies. Law enforcing agencies play an important role
in having the city free from crimes. Argument does not provide the complete insight of the law firms and leaders.
The city could have poor leaders which would set the population free for any illegal acitivities.
Secondly , There is no substantiate evidence to prove the economic status of the city is healthy. There has been a downfall in the economy
which has lead to huge loss of jobs. Unemployment crisis could have led people to switch to crimes in city.
Thirdly , The author suggests to establish a censor board to censor all movies that contain crime scenes.
increased crime rates
in movies may have caused crimes in city. There are no statistics provided to prove the city population largely ask and watch violent movies.
These reasons makes argument weak and hence implementing a censor board would only be a waste of tax payers money.
Foruth , Restricting movie entry to only people who are above 21 yrs makes the arugment weak.
Government laws considers anyone above 18 years as an adult. Hence, the authors arugment is seemless because as per goverment rules
anyone above 18years cannot be curtailed from doing anything that is leagally permissible.
Finally, The authors blames the legislators for not acting on the issue as the bill passed by legislators was not well received.
The bill could be rejected to various reasons : The committe would have found no correlation between crime in movies and crime in cities.
Due to the lack of statistics related to crimes rates in the city committe does not have a strong reasons to consider the legislators bill.
In conclusion, Author's claim that increase violence is the sole cause of violence in movies is flawed .
. There no are statists provided to prove the city population call for violent movies only.
There is no mention of economic status , employment status in the arugment. Are there any other factors instigating crime.
Author makes a poor correlation of crime in movies and crime in cities. Establishing a censor board would only be useful if its proved
that violence in movies is the only cause for crime in cities. There are no strong evidence to substantiate this.
Author needs to re-evaluate the reasoning made.