For the proposal essay I peer
reviewed Chelsea Goossens paper. She wrote her proposal on finding a solution
to end hate crimes. I thought she did a great job with the introduction, it was
engaging and clearly stated the problem. When she provided a fact on how hate
crimes are a “symbolic law,” it was a perfect way to lead into her solution. The
thesis gave a direct solution; “To break the barrier between consequential
meaning and true enforcement the United States should develop a task force with
the focus of identification and prosecution of hate crimes.”
Chelsea’s first reason to support
her proposal in solving the problem of hate crimes is to get stronger support
from law enforcements. I agree with her reason and believe she did a good job directing
the readers towards her belief. There was great information on how hate crimes
fall through the law and how she gave a resolution to help improve law
enforcements focuses on the crimes. The only thing I would fix is to present a
clearer reason.
I thought it was a smart idea to
show the difference between America and England hate crime laws. Although, she
did not present a reason to try and solve hate crimes. Comparing the two could
be a perfect way to lead into a strong reason. She could go into something
about America not being as effective as England.
Next, Chelsea provided another
reason to fund money to the biased-based crimes task force. She explained why
the Government should fund, yet I think she should go in a little more depth of
what the task force is and how it would help.
She had an overall strong proposal
in trying to solve hate crime laws. Her paper had great facts from a few
different sources, so all you need is a peer-reviewed source and one other
source. Also, she need to look over some grammar. Other then that I think
everything was good! GOODLUCK with the rest!
