These two facts were compelling to me because I would have completely disagreed with the validity of them had I not read the facts myself. People think guns, they immediately think high crime, which obviously not the case. The least convincing fact to me is “the average sixty-five-year-old is about one-fiftieth as likely to be arrested as the average teenager” (136). Basically because older people know more about how lenient the law is a capable of being, as opposed to a teenager, perhaps never arrested and fearful to possibly break the law at a young age.
4. In order to prove their theory, Levitt and Dubner include counter arguments in their writing. The first counter claim they included in their writing was the effect that the strong economy had on the crime drop. They wrote, “Homicide fell at a greater rate during the 1990s than any other sort of crime, and a number of reliable studies have shown virtually no link between the economy and violent crime” (120). …show more content…
At the end of chapter 4, the authors close the argument by summarizing the impact of the legalization of abortion has had on the crime drop since the 1990s. The legalization of abortion was proven to have the strongest impact, over any other reason previously stated in the chapter, for the decline in criminal activity. I think the argument’s conclusion was affected because they used facts and told the audience how they obtained their information. For example, prior to the end of the chapter, authors’ wrote: “There are roughly 1.5 million abortions in the United States every year. For a person who believes that 1 newborn is worth 100 fetuses, those 1.5 million abortions would translate- dividing 1.5 million by 100- into the equivalent of a loss of 15,000 human lives. Fifteen thousand lives: that happens to be about the same number of people who die in homicides in the United States each year. And it is far more than the number of homicides eliminated in each year due to legalized abortion”
4. In order to prove their theory, Levitt and Dubner include counter arguments in their writing. The first counter claim they included in their writing was the effect that the strong economy had on the crime drop. They wrote, “Homicide fell at a greater rate during the 1990s than any other sort of crime, and a number of reliable studies have shown virtually no link between the economy and violent crime” (120). …show more content…
At the end of chapter 4, the authors close the argument by summarizing the impact of the legalization of abortion has had on the crime drop since the 1990s. The legalization of abortion was proven to have the strongest impact, over any other reason previously stated in the chapter, for the decline in criminal activity. I think the argument’s conclusion was affected because they used facts and told the audience how they obtained their information. For example, prior to the end of the chapter, authors’ wrote: “There are roughly 1.5 million abortions in the United States every year. For a person who believes that 1 newborn is worth 100 fetuses, those 1.5 million abortions would translate- dividing 1.5 million by 100- into the equivalent of a loss of 15,000 human lives. Fifteen thousand lives: that happens to be about the same number of people who die in homicides in the United States each year. And it is far more than the number of homicides eliminated in each year due to legalized abortion”