Discussion Forum

The following question consist of a statement followed by three or four arguments I,II,III & IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.

Statement : Should the rule of wearing a helmet for both driver and pillion rider while driving a motorbike be enforced strictly?

Arguments: I. Yes. It is a rule and rules should be followed strictly by all.

II. No. Each individual knows how to protect his own life and it should be left to his discretion.

III. No. It does not ensure safety as only the head is protected and the rest of the body is not.

IV. Yes. It is a necessity as the head, being the most sensitive organ, is protected by the helmet.

Answer:

Explanation:

Clearly, the rule has been devised for the safety of two-wheeler riders, as the majority of two-wheeler accidents result in direct fall of the rider, leading to head injury and finally death. And the objective of a rule cannot be fulfilled until it is followed by all and this requires strict enforcement. Thus, both I and IV hold strong, while III does not. Besides, it is the basic duty of the Government to look after the safety of the citizens and it ought not leave it to the discretion of the individuals. So, argument II does not hold strong.