Question

read the sample student paragraph that addresses a counterclaim and rebuttal on increasing the legal age of driving to eighteen.
with car crashes being the leading cause of death among teenagers, many are in favor of raising the legal driving age to eighteen. however, those who cite these statistics are overlooking other important facts. for instance, men are seventy - seven percent more likely to be involved in an accident than women. does this mean that we should ban men from driving? other statistics show that one is more likely to be involved in an accident in newark, new jersey, than anywhere else in the nation. does this mean that we should ban people in newark from driving? is it fair to simply look at crash statistics and apply them to an entire group of people without considering all of the factors involved? there are many factors other than age involved in causing an accident, and these factors are the ones
what makes this rebuttal effective?
it proves that age has nothing to do with causing accidents.
it lists the biggest factors involved in causing accidents.
it suggests that gender is the issue as opposed to age.
it provides strong reasons to weaken the counterclaim.

Explanation:

The paragraph presents counter - examples (men being more accident - prone than women, Newark having more accidents) and questions the logic of using age - based crash statistics alone. This provides strong reasoning against the counterclaim (raising the driving age to 18 based solely on teen crash statistics). It doesn't prove age has nothing to do with accidents (just that other factors exist), doesn't list the "biggest" factors (only some examples), and gender is just one example (not suggesting gender is the main issue).

Answer:

It provides strong reasons to weaken the counterclaim.