Premium Essay

Sarah Doody's Argumentative Analysis

Submitted By
Words 226
Pages 1
Texting and driving has been an issue on the streets and threatens the safety of both the driver and other civilians on the road. In the New York Times’ “Rooms for Debate”, two different people stated their alternatives on how to stop this epidemic: one was an app and the other was with changes in car systems. Sarah Doody brings up fascinating points and various solutions to stop people from texting and driving. Her main argument is the “textalyzer,” a tool used by cops to detect if someone had been texting during a collision. Collisions are always a risk while texting and driving, this would deter people from texting and driving, coming with the shame that they were texting while driving. Doody’s other alternative is “Lifesaver,” an app

Similar Documents