Argumentative Essay

Ahmad dhani’s son called Abdul Qodir Jaelani (known as Dul), was driving a Mitsubishi Lancer from Bogor to Jakarta with his friend, Noval Samudra. He hit the road separator and drove opposite direction and hit a Gran Max minivan, which then turn to hit a Toyota Avanza. Dul’s father is the person that should be responsible for his son’s action.

First, Dhani is the one to blame and should be responsible of Dul’s action because he is the father of him. Parents should be taking the consequences and supervise their children because they need someone to lead them. The reason why Dul’s parent should be punished  is that Dul is still 13 and that’s really young. In fact, he may not be mature yet. At that young age, kids need good advice and a leader from adults. Kids in that age probably didn't know what’s good or bad for them, and as a father, he should be a good role model in front of his children.

Second, in that age, kids tend to have a deeper curiosity on what they haven’t tried yet and they will do anything to do those new things like: taking drugs, drinking alcohol, using tobacco and even driving cars. However, it is illegal to drive under 19. Dhani should follow the rule that his son won't be able to drive without s driving license. However,  he still allowed his children to? The parents should have told their children about things that aren’t allowed yet and the best thing to do.

Third, people say that Ahmad Dhani wasn't to blame because he had no intention of hurting these people and could not have predicted the events of follow. However, this should not allow him to be any less to blame. As stated earlier, he allowed his son to drive underage, and this was the outcome. His bad parenting had led to Dul's action, and for that, he should be blamed as much as Dul.

At the end of the problem, his father is the one who should be paying for the damage of the car accident because Dul would not have that much money because he is still a student.