I absolutely love this post and agree with the argument. It immediately caught my attention both in the book and on the blog because I am in a town that has absolutely no desire to promote the safety or fair treatment of cyclists. The sidewalks are narrow, destroyed, or in most cases, imaginary. It seems every day in the news a rider or skateboarder is hit by a car or truck and is sent to an area hospital with life-threatening injuries. I ride in a town that is the same size as Norman but lacks the Oklahoma City metropolitan feel. I visit Norman and Broken Arrow just outside of Tulsa regularly to cycle. I do this only to suffer bent wheels, broken pedals, and several scrapes and bruises as I enjoy a ride with my family and friends. I haven’t been hit by a car yet but I have had some scary moments.
I support the fair treatment of anyone or any group who, in these economic times, promotes and practices safe fitness and family recreation. Langley’s argument for fair treatment of skateboarders works here at home, in Broken Arrow, and in Norman the same. It is a shame that with all the recent focus on obesity, diabetes, and heart disease an argument hasn’t surfaced and gained traction in suburban America to mandate that the infrastructure be changed to support a healthy lifestyle through cycling, skateboarding, or roller-blading. My hat is tipped to Juli for highlighting of the need for change in her community and associating that need with an argument from the course book (Ramage 141-43).
Work Cited
Ramage, John D., John C. Bean and June Johnson. Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings. 8th Edition. New York: Longman, 2010. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment