"We plan to meet at the Hunter Pavilion on the north side of the park. We expect about 200 attendees. Although we do plan to celebrate our message in words and song, we will be mindful of others who are sharing the park on that day. We have found that in the past, when our group meets in a public space, we run the risk of harassment by those who do not agree with our message. Therefore, we would like to hire five security officers to protest our congregants from religious intolerance. We would like to post one guard at the entrance to the park and others who will dress in plain clothes, at the perimeter of our gathering. We hope you understand and will endorse the request."
Write a response in which you describe what specific examples or evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and how those examples or evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The analyses has to be carry out if the city of Gustav should issue a permission for a congregation by a religious group. Specific cases ought to be taken into consideration to either support or oppose the arguments. Then the application will be assessed in a thoroughgoing way and justly.
First, it should be verified if the group has a right to gather in this public place. We can learn from the application that the group indeed gathered in the past. Thus, historical and legal precedents should be examined which could assure that the group can organize the gathering. On the other hand, it can be discovered that the group is not allowed to meet in public places. For example, the reason for this prohibition would be that the group meeting was too loud or violent previously.
Second, the main purpose of the group's application is to obtain a permission to be protected by a private security guards. If the group had really experienced serious perilous harassments in the past, then this request is legitimate. On the contrary, maybe the group has never had reason to worry about security and safety, therefore private security officers are not required.
Third, the usage of the private security service should be considered. It can be the case that the police force is not sufficient in terms of number of officers or not equipped enough to patrol the park in the way the group demands and so additional help is necessary. However, it should be checked and probably consulted with the local police as it may occur that the police is capable of maintaining the peace without additional support. Moreover, it should be inspected if using private security in the park is legal. If there are rules or laws that allow private security, then this request can be accepted, but if the issue is unprecedented then perhaps it has to be investigated by a lawyer. Besides, maybe the local police are better trained and this would weaken the argument that the private security guards have to be hired. Nonetheless, it might be that the group has plentiful funds to employ top-notch security specialists.
In conclusion, there are three main issues that have to be scrutinized to assess the argument. Hence, it has to be verified if the group has a right to gather in public places. Next, the previous meetings of the group should be checked to assure that there were cases of harassment. Finally, it should be decided if either the police force or private security guards shall be appointed. After these steps, the decision about the permission should be made.