This is an essay about the article called Rambo's of the road, could you please read it and see if I am getting there?
It is supposed to be a critique.
Note: This is not a spellcheck or proofread, I just want someone to read it and tell me if it is alright and makes sense.
The title vaguely describes how people tend to become "Rambo's of the road" by defying the laws and making their own set of rules while driving (Similar to the concept of the character Rambo). Then again times have changed and people have lost their manners and cannot control something that can be very dangerous such as driving. A person in a vehicle compared to walking or even a bicycle feels more powerful, but are we sure this machine is not the one empowering our minds instead? Making us do things we normally would not dare do face to face? Hence the author describes cars used “as fortresses” to vent road rage.
Gottfried aims at how ignorance in our society to road rage is causing it to only increase day by day giving America the image of reckless and indecent drivers. His simple facts are valid about "Auto-macho" and speeding, because we all know depression in the society because of unemployment, divorces, family problems and etc have increased hence making drivers bring their personal problems to the road. But when he says that "it has increased in the city too" I do not see why a person would need to need to fight for parking space in a town or speed through a toll booth since traffic is meant to be controlled by these booths by having minimum blockage as possible.
Moreover knowing that he has spent his whole life in New York City his remarks about road rages anywhere instead the city are very non-credible to me. There are many other cities such as Plano who have traffic light radars and security cameras installed on roads to prevent scenes like "a man ramming his car into a bus". Back to the valid facts, taxi drivers are a great source of expert opinions and can give you accurate advice. It may be true knowing that most taxi drivers only rely on their cars to bring business and thus for them to be ignorant to horns and the other cars as a whole can be a benefit to getting them to one place to another at ease, which increases their time to give rides to more passengers. However this proposal does not apply to any regular person who probably spends less than ten minutes on the road unless a traffic jam.
To my opinion reading this article, I cannot seem to know if the author is talking as a third person by pointing out the road bullies or is he addressing to the whole of the nation to be aware of our own road rage. There are barely any statistics about the road rash and he is despicably accusing the whole of the new generation of flawing the road system. Furthermore his exaggerated stories about “vehicles ramming into each other” only depict emotional appeal making the stories sound more illegitimate since we all know the consequences of accidents.
Lastly his point about the "Bullies are loners, and they have ed our liberty of the open road into drivers' license". It is true that these people on the road have made it difficult for other calm and patient people to get access to the drivers license by creating strict laws and longer processes. However there is no solution provided to eliminate this, and all I can see is appeals and examples of what he has only seen and heard in New York city. So why is he calling out to the “whole nation” to acknowledge this?
Nonetheless I see this “difficulty in obtaining drivers license” an opportunity for every driver to patiently learn his way through driving etiquette to avoid this road rage. Also I do not quite comprehend who Gottfried is referring to as the criminals of stealing “our liberty”. The old generation whose drivers education has already been made very feasible and quick by lesser classes and tests, or the new generation who still has not reached the age of getting drivers license? Thus if he is speaking of the new generation then that would create a contradiction to his perception of the "new America and their mentality of hoodlums". Irrespective I understand his point is clearly towards road rage and I hope it is not directed towards a specific group of people whether it may be the new generation or angry businesspeople.
Hence acknowledging his disappointment and my understanding I propose a solution within the complaint. The resolution is to encourage appreciation of these road bullies to make the system harder because it incorporates more patience within the community to earn drivers license. So far by reading this article may make you more aware of road rages along with a few examples and even questions to ask yourself, but giving the cause and solution a thought will be a step towards the real improvement.
I don't need anyone to proof read it.. !
I just want someone to read it and tell me if it makes any sense.
Overall, your essay provides a critique of the article "Rambo's of the road" and discusses the issue of road rage. Here are some suggestions to improve your essay:
1. Introduce the article: Begin your essay by briefly summarizing the main points of the article "Rambo's of the road."
2. Clear organization: Structure your essay with clear paragraphs, each focusing on a specific point or critique. This will make your essay more coherent and easier to follow.
3. Clarify your stance: In the first paragraph, state your own position clearly. Are you in agreement with the article's view on road rage, or do you have a different perspective?
4. Provide evidence: Use specific examples, statistics, or anecdotes to support your critiques. For example, if you mention that the author's claims about road rage outside of New York City are not credible, provide evidence to support this statement.
5. Counterarguments: Address potential counterarguments to strengthen your critique. For instance, if the article points out the increase in road rage in cities, present evidence or explanations as to why this might be the case.
6. Consistency and accuracy: Ensure that your statements are consistent throughout the essay. For example, if you mention that the article lacks statistics on road rage, do not then criticize the author for providing exaggerated stories. Stick to one critique and develop it effectively.
7. Recognize the target audience: Consider the intended audience of the article and the author's purpose. Is the author targeting a specific group, or addressing the issue of road rage on a broader scale? This will help you better understand the author's perspective and make a more accurate critique.
8. Offer solutions: While you briefly mention a solution in your last paragraph, expand on this by providing specific ideas or actions that can be taken to address the issue of road rage. This will enhance your essay's persuasiveness and provide a clear way forward.
9. Proofread: Finally, proofread your essay for grammar, punctuation, and clarity. Ensure that each sentence flows smoothly and that your ideas are presented coherently.
By addressing these suggestions, you will enhance the clarity and effectiveness of your critique of the article "Rambo's of the road."
Overall, your essay makes sense and your arguments are clear. However, there are a few areas that could benefit from some clarification.
1. In the first paragraph, you mention that the title vaguely describes how people become "Rambo's of the road," but it would be helpful to provide more context or examples to support this interpretation.
2. In the second paragraph, it seems that you question the relevance of fighting for parking space in a town or speeding through a toll booth in relation to road rage. To strengthen your argument, consider explaining how these actions might contribute to road rage or how they are connected to the concept of "auto-macho" and personal problems.
3. You mention the author's remarks about road rage occurring outside of the city and express doubt about their credibility. Instead of simply dismissing them, try to provide evidence or counterexamples to support your viewpoint.
4. In the paragraph following the discussion of taxi drivers, it might be helpful to clarify your point about their role in relation to road rage and how it differs from regular drivers.
5. You highlight the lack of statistics about road rage and suggest that the author is accusing the entire new generation, but it would be beneficial to explain why this is problematic or how it weakens the argument.
6. Further down, you mention the point about "bullies" ing the liberty of the open road into a driver's license, but it is not entirely clear what you mean by this. Consider providing more context or explanation to clarify your thoughts.
7. Towards the end, you propose a solution to encourage appreciation of road bullies to make the system harder and promote patience. While this idea has potential, it would be helpful to expand on how exactly this would work and why it would be effective.
8. Lastly, there is a sentence in the conclusion that mentions the improvement of road rage awareness, but it seems disconnected from the previous points. Consider revising this sentence to make it more aligned with your proposed solution.
By addressing these points, you can provide a clear and cohesive critique of the article while maintaining a logical flow to your essay.
WAAAYYYY too long to be checked. Here's what to do.
1. You proofread it yourself, however many times it takes. Once through is usually not nearly enough. Follow the instructions/ideas below the ~~~~ line.
2. Post only the sections you are not sure about and/or have specific questions about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please proofread your paper with the following in mind. Thanks to PsyDAG for his ideas and wording:
In the future, if nobody is available to proofread your work, you can do this yourself. After writing your material, put it aside for a day — at least several hours. (This breaks mental sets you might have that keep you from noticing problems.) Then read it aloud as if you were reading someone else's work. (Reading aloud slows down your reading, so you are less likely to skip over problems.)
(You can also either read it aloud to someone else or have someone else read it aloud to you! The latter works really well!)
If your reading goes smoothly, that is fine. However, wherever you "stumble" in your reading, other people are likely to have a problem in reading your material. Those "stumbles" indicate areas that need revising.
Once you have made your revisions, repeat the process above. Good papers often require many drafts.