Argument 1: Undocumented immigrants represent large communities in many major U.S. cities. In cities where they fear being interrogated due to their immigration status, they are 70 percent less likely to cooperate with police when a crime occurs. Thus, cities with sanctuary policies are safer for their residents, whether they are legal U.S. citizens or undocumented people.

Question

Argument 2: Imagine living in fear of being returned to a dangerous situation simply for communicating with law enforcement. How likely would you be to report a crime if you witnessed it? Now imagine yourself as a resident of a city where a large number of people are afraid to report crimes. Would you feel safe? Does this show you how sanctuary policies make cities safer?

Question
Use the passage to answer the question.

Compare the two arguments above. How does the first argument establish a journalistic style when compared to the second argument? Select two correct answers.

(2 points)
Responses

It has a clearly stated claim.
It has a clearly stated claim.

It uses strictly academic language.
It uses strictly academic language.

It gives clear and relatable examples.
It gives clear and relatable examples.

It uses a third-person perspective.
It uses a third-person perspective.

It provides facts and statistics as evidence.

Answer 1

The two correct answers that highlight how the first argument establishes a journalistic style compared to the second argument are:

1. It has a clearly stated claim. - The first argument clearly presents its main point about the safety benefits of sanctuary policies.

2. It provides facts and statistics as evidence. - The first argument includes specific statistics about the likelihood of undocumented immigrants cooperating with police, which is a hallmark of journalistic writing.

The second argument is more anecdotal and emotional, focusing on hypothetical feelings and scenarios rather than providing concrete evidence or data.