"Two years ago the city voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for the litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has

The author of the argument purportedly highlights that in order to make economic situation of central plaza prosperous like as past, skateboarders should be banned in the Central Plaza because they caused vandalism and create some problems that people avoid to visit the Plaza. However, the premises upon which he puts his claim are fallacious. For the support of which more well-established evidence needs to be given. The first assumption that lacks some semblance of truth and can overtly be impugned is the fact that skateboarders were responsible for litter and vandalism in the Central Plaza. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since there is no sufficient evidence to support if the only cause of litter and vandalism were skateboarders. One point that should be considered is that the author does not show any information or evidence to the extent skateboarders were responsible. In fact, vast majorities of people visited the Plaza so, they might have been the main cause of vandalism, who knows? It is also important to say that skateboarders rarely have time to put for vandalism and litter. Indeed, they spend most of their time for recreation and skateboarding. The author also asserts that during the past two years the number of visitors to Plaza diminishes drastically because of problems created by skateboarders. Although it might seem tenable at a face, it has some defects due to the paucity of evidence that would consolidate the premise the otherwise. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that myriads of people are interested in skateboarding. So, what if they visited the plaza because of skateboarders alongside with purchasing? There is a possibility that prohibition of skateboarders reduced the number of people in the plaza. As a matter of fact, skateboarders can be a great advertising and appeal a plethora of people. Putting the two previous assumptions aside, there is still room for doubt. As set forth by the author, people working in the plaza face a decline in their revenue and income. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to an unsettled evidence to support if skateboarders could decline incomes and create the recession. One point that should not go unnoticed is that maybe they confront a reduction in their revenue because of economic recession and inflation. What if their revenue increase dramatically after recovering from the economic recession? Having scrutinized all the premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there are some shreds of evidence, having been ignored by the author while the presence of which could add to the logic of each premise.