Persuasive Paper Part 2: Solution and Advantages

Assignment 4: Persuasive Paper Part 2: Solution and Advantages
Due Week 7 and worth 150 points
Using feedback from your professor and classmates, revise Part 1 and develop the solution and identify the advantages of the solution. Note: The disadvantages or

challenges with your answers will be in Part 3.
Write a six to eight (6-8) page paper in which you:
Provide Part I: Revision of A Problem Exists (3-4 pages)
1. Revise, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part I: A Problem Exists.
Develop Part 2: Solution to Problem and Advantages (3-4 pages for 6-8 pages total)
2. Include a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph. (The thesis statement may need to be modified to reflect added information and

purpose of this part.)
3. Explain a detailed, viable solution that supports your thesis. This should be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
4. State, explain, and support the first advantage (economic, social, political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution. This should

be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
5. State, explain, and support the second advantage (economic, social, political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution. This should

be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
6. State, explain, and support the third (and fourth if desired) advantage (economic, social, political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your

solution. This should be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
7. Use effective transitional words, phrases, and sentences.
8. Provide a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed solution and its advantages.
9. Develop a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body, and conclusion.
10. Use one (1) or more rhetorical strategies (ethos, logos, pathos) to explain advantages.
11. Support advantage claims with at least three (3) additional quality relevant references. Use at.

Please use the same writer who wrote the ( A problem exist) to continue the next paper. Assignment 4 is the continue of assignment 3. Use assignment 3 then add 4 more

pages of assignment 4 to complete the work. You can contact me so I can explain exactly how I want it

Need to change the DUI law
There are two types of drunken driving laws in Maryland. These are DWI and DUI. Under these laws, Maryland authority determines drunken driving charges based on blood

alcohol level test (BAC). Drivers with blood alcohol level of 0.07 percent or high are charged with driving when impaired (DWI) and those who have BAC of 0.08 percent

and above are charged with driving under influence (DUI). This essay will consider penalties that are charged under DUI laws. These include a fine of up to $ 1000; 12

points on the driving license of the convicted driver; suspension of driver’s license, and a jail time that can go up to a year. However, there are other conditions

that are associated with these penalties that limits the freedom of the drivers. Scholars have argued that these laws lack proper legal formula that did not consider

the long- term effects to both the society and authority. This comes from various social, economic and political problems that application of these sets of law has

caused (Fell and Lacey, 2011). Therefore, this essay will persuasively discuss some of the problems associated with DUI laws.
Law once institutionalized has to be applied (Miro, 2010). However, it is necessary to have or conduct adequate research to determine its effects to the target groups.

For the DUI law, it appears that it lacked adequate background information. This policy has extreme economic impacts that once convicted, one encounters a lot of cost.

I wonder if this was the goal of the DUI law. Initially, it had been mentioned that the convicted person will be fined up to $ 1000, but from there are other effects

that are accompanied by its application (Fell and Lacey, 2011). For instance, most drivers who are targeted by the law depend on driving as the source of income.

Detaining such a person for a period up to one year with other penalties lives him economically unstable.
These costs include obtaining insurance where one may be required to have a cover up to five years. This is quite expensive especially when the person has already been

fined. In addition, the costs of all trainings that the person is supposed to go through are too expensive given that his source of livelihood has been removed (Yao,

Johnson and Beck, 2013). Other scholars have argued that these penalties may even be great in case one is involved in a crash that cause serious bodily harm, or if one

was carrying a person below the age of eighteen years. It is believed that in case a minor is involved in the accident, the fine may be raised to $ 4,000 and longer

prison time. This implies that the penalty is not standardized. This is not a law, before it becomes a law, it has to provide standardized procedures and framework of

actions through which the course of justice is administered (Miro, 2010).
This essay does not dispute the fact that these laws are meant to lower cases of accidents, but it points to the fact that, they have been so partial in execution.

Many people have questioned its applicability to private drivers. Furthermore, ruling out that someone is drunk simply based on the BAC is not evidence adequate enough

to limit someone’s freedom. There are cases where individual’s blood has a lot of alcohol content even without adding alcohol. Such are people are alcohol addicted.

Will it be fair to rule out that they are under the influence? Definitely, no! There are other ways that this can be done, especially limiting the alcohol consumption.

The idea of prohibiting the drivers from driving while under the influence of alcohol is not the solution. In addition, post-conviction trainings that they are

expected to go through defeats logic. This assignment should be done to enhance behavior change rather than letting them commit the crime fast to be taken through the

trainings and committees (Beck, 2009).
You can imagine how it would be a burden to have diverse opinion in the legal group about certain legislative; this is the case of DUI law. This law cannot achieve it

impact efficiently. It lacks adequate backing required to be carried out. For instance, Beck (2009), notes that many attorneys have come up to oppose the law and are

willing to help the victim. Arguably, this can be due to placing lots of authorities to Maryland Vehicle Administration rather than the official legislative branch of

the government. This law has experienced a lot of opposition from both judicial team and political organs of the government. Viability of any legislatives depends on

its ability to be accepted as legitimate by all sectors of the government. However, this opposition is a big challenge to the application of any legal statute.
In conclusion, this of law is not legitimately accepted by all people within the state. It has high costs of application that replicates as it is applied. It has also

been argued that it lacks a standardized procedure through which it can be applied. The rising internal opposition by the judicial team pits this law a failure.

Therefore, changing this law should incorporate all its aspects.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂