Intern
Joined: 03 Jul 2014
Posts: 4
Given Kudos: 1
WE:Programming (Computer Software)
Please rate my AWA
[#permalink]
22 Aug 2014, 02:18
Question :“As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent
illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is
bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement
efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine.”
Analysis:
The argument claims that illegal use of cocaine has increased and this ironical increment on the illegal consumption of cocaine is due to more vigilant Authorities in their efforts to prevent
illegal drugs from entering the country. Stated in this way the argument reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning and fails to consider several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidences. Therefore, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that traffickers have switched from marijuana or heroin to cocaine because of the risk of severe punishment. Does it mean that there is less punishment for trafficking cocaine? Does it mean that cocaine is not illegal? Does it mean that cocaine trafficking is a less risky task than other mentioned drugs? We can’t answer such crucial question on the basis of given argument. Probably, trafficking either cocaine or marijuana both would have the same punishment so switching among the drugs would not prevent or lessen the punishment, if caught.If the argument had provided evidence that it is less risky to traffic cocaine than other drugs, then the argument might have been a lot more convincing.
Second, it is not at all clear that the increase in the illegal use of cocaine is because of no trafficking of marijuana and heroin by traffickers. There might be lots of other possibilities of observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine. For example, the price of cocaine might be cheaper than other drug, or there might be easy availability of cocaine in the country. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine is because of drug trafficker stopped trafficking marijuana and heroin in the country.
Finally, the argument claims that Authorities are more vigilant and preventing illegal drugs from entering the country. It might be possible that there is already enough stock of marijuana
and heroin with Traffickers to distribute illegally in the country so Traffickers have switched to cocaine now, and more trafficking of cocaine might have reduced its price. Reduced price could have then leads to observed increase in the illegal use. Therefore, the reason of switch to cocaine is not convincing and still required more data and information.
In summary, the argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentions all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.