Question

still, the national highway traffic safety administration (nhtsa) says that the best ways for drivers to increase safety are by obeying the speed limit, wearing a seat belt, and paying attention. the nhtsa makes no mention of teen curfews making driving safer, so keeping drivers under eighteen off the road late at night would not impact their own safety or the safety of other drivers. besides, enforcing a curfew on teens to promote road safety would unfairly hurt urban teens, who are more likely to get around on foot or by public transportation. in cities - where curfews are often intended to curb teen crime - curfew enforcement has been ineffective or even had a negative impact on communities. most crimes committed by juveniles actually happen around the fourth paragraph is meant to support the authors main claim that legal curfews for teens are an unnecessary violation of individual liberties and should be abolished. whats wrong with the authors argument in the fourth paragraph? even though the nhtsa doesnt call for curfews, the roads could still be safer at night without teen drivers. the nhtsa is not a relevant source of information about road and traffic safety. the claim focuses on teens who drive and fails to address teens who do not, such as teens in cities. the author claims without evidence that teens are less likely to obey speed limits or wear seat belts when curfews are in place.

Explanation:

The author uses NHTSA not mentioning teen - curfews for safety as evidence. But it ignores the possibility that roads could be safer without teen drivers at night, which is a flaw in the argument.

Answer:

Even though the NHTSA doesn't call for curfews, the roads could still be safer at night without teen drivers.