Final answer:
The counterargument discusses the complexities of teenage driving behavior and inconsistencies in policies. It highlights the need for incorporating evidence, such as statistics, to support one's argument.
Step-by-step explanation:
The author's counterargument seems to be addressing the complexities of teenage behavior in relation to driving responsibilities. The author acknowledges that some teenagers can indeed drive responsibly, despite late hours, the presence of peers, or their developing brain chemistry. Moreover, the author hints at the inconsistency in policies that allow teens to work but not drive at night, which seems contradictory.
This points towards a nuanced understanding that not all teens fit the same profile and that there is an inconsistency in how society views their responsibilities and rights. When formulating arguments, it is essential to present evidence to support one's point. This evidence can take various forms, such as statistics or logical reasoning, and its effective use is crucial for a persuasive argument. For example, using statistics on teen drivers to counter the perception of them as high-risk can be a powerful tool in an argument.