This is the one that I use as example of planning the paper. The key to this slide is acknowledging the opposing side & addressing their concerns. That is what I want you to do in your papers.

1. PLANNING AN ARGUMENT PAPER
Drunk Driving

2. TOPICS ALREADY COVERED THROUGH PAST
TWO PAPERS
 Drunk Driving: The
Extent
 Effects of Drunk
Driving: Beyond
the Accident

3. POSSIBLE THESIS
 Drunk driving is
wrong, irresponsible, and
wastes many lives.
 In order to reduce drunk
driving in the United
States, we need tougher
legislation, better
enforcement, and a
higher rate of conviction
and incarceration.
 Drunk driving rates will
not decrease until there
is cooperation between
legislators, law
enforcement, and judges.

4. MY THESIS WINNER
 In order to reduce the
rate of drunk driving in
the United States, we
need tougher
legislation, better
enforcement, and a
higher rate of
conviction and
incarceration.

5. OUTLINE – THE THREE MAIN POINTS
Tougher legislation will
act as a deterrent to
people considering
driving after drinking.
Better enforcement
such as giving
arresting officers the
ability to confiscate
licenses on the spot
will discourage people
from driving drunk.
Forcing the judicial
system to incarcerate
instead of offering
probation for drunk
driving will send a
clear message to not
drink and drive.

6. OUTLINE – THE SUPPORTING POINTS (1)
• Fewer people drive
drunk in countries
where drunk driving
laws are strict –
Sweden and Norway
are examples.
• There are more drunk
driving accidents in
those countries where
there are few or less
harsh drunk driving laws
– Some African
countries are examples.
Tougher
legislation
will act as
a deterrent
to people
considering
driving
after
drinking.

7. OUTLINE – THE SUPPORTING POINTS (2)
• States where officers
can confiscate
licenses on the spot
until the hearing have
reduced drunk driving.
• Sobriety check points
near places that cater
to drinkers should be
allowed without prior
notification through
the media.
Better
enforcement
such as giving
arresting
officers the
ability to
confiscate
licenses on the
spot will
discourage
people from
driving drunk.

8. OUTLINE – THE SUPPORTING POINTS (3)
• Second time
offenders should
not be offered
probation before
judgment.
• A system of
penalties should
be created and
universally
enforced.
Forcing the
judicial system
to incarcerate
instead of
offering
probation to
drunk driving
will send a
clear message
to not drink
and drive.

9. GOOD ARGUMENTS ARE BALANCED
 What are possible
objections to each of
these main points of
the outline?
1. Tougher legislation
2. Better enforcement
3. Judicial conviction

10. GOOD ARGUMENTS ARE BALANCED
Possible objection:
One person wrote about the inability
of people to measure their own
intoxication levels and that the
strict law in California is too
harsh because judging one’s
level of intoxication is complex
and difficult.
(http://www.cockeyed.com/scienc
e/breathalyzer/breathalyser01.sht
ml)
How I would refute:
Regardless of how complex measuring
intoxication levels are, people should
practice reasonable drinking and
adhere to the guidelines given out for
time, amount, weight, and height. And
when in doubt, just don’t drink and
drive.
Tougher
legislation

11. GOOD ARGUMENTS ARE BALANCED
Objection:
Some people claim that the
breathalyzer is not accurate
enough in judging one’s level
of intoxication – blood samples
are more reliable.
(http://www2.potsdam.edu/han
sondj/Drivingissues/110428486
9.html ).
How I would refute:
Law enforcement uses more than
just the results of a
breathalyzer test in
determining whether someone
is too intoxicated to drive. A
person will not be convicted
simply on a breathalyzer test
result.
Better
enforcement

12. GOOD ARGUMENTS ARE BALANCED
Objection:
Some people claim that harsh
penalties like incarceration
for the first offense is too
harsh – it disrupts families
and can result in people
losing their sources of
income.
(http://www.blog.duiattorney
.com/)
Refutation:
Tougher penalties are necessary.
One time of driving drunk can
result in the death of an
innocent driver.
Judicial
conviction

13. BUILD YOUR ARGUMENT WITH DETAILS
Thesis
Main Point 1
Supporting Detail 1.1
Supporting Detail 1.2
Likely Objection & Refutation
Main Point 2
Supporting Detail 2.1
Supporting Detail 2.2
Likely Objection & Refutation
Main Point 3
Supporting Detail 3.1
Supporting Detail 3.2
Likely Objection & Refutation