Question

An author claims that "Athletes caught using performance-enhancing drugs should be sentenced to prison." The author provides the following reason as support:
Last year, 709 citizens were caught using steroids. 403 were put in jail. In the same period of time, 120 professional athletes were caught using steroids. None of them was sent to prison. There is no reason why athletes should not be punished just like everyone else.

Which choice best describes the reason the author provides?

It is effective. It supports the claim clearly and logically.
It is emotional. It expresses personal feelings that cannot be backed with research.
It is irrelevant. It discusses a fact that is off topic and does not support the claim.
It is unverified. It does not cite a source to show where the information was located.

Answer 1

I think the correct answer would be the third option. The reason that the author provides is very irrelevant. Although it discusses a fact, the facts stated are very far off the  topic and does not support the claim. The author was just stating numbers and statistics of how many were put into jail due to the use of performance-enhancing drugs. It does not say anything on why they should be sentenced to prison. It would be best if the author would write support regarding on the effects of the use of these drugs and how it would affect the athletes and the particular game. It would instead say something and convince the readers why using of these drug is punishable.