Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The passage is a short opinion piece asking for a speed-breaker at the Bistupur-Sakchi corner. We need to name the type of argument the writer uses to make the case.
Step 2: Key Idea:
An argument can be built in different ways: by analogy (comparing two situations), by statistics (using numbers), by personalization (telling one specific person's story), or by an emotive appeal (playing on feelings people already care about). Check the passage against each of these.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The writer gives no count of accidents or injured children, only "regular reports," so there is no statistical analysis, ruling out option (CC).
No single child's incident is described with a name or specific detail, so it is not personalization, ruling out option (DD).
The writer never compares the intersection to some other dangerous thing, like a cliff or a warzone, so it is not an analogy, ruling out option (AA).
What remains is that the writer keeps returning to the safety of "school children," a subject that reliably worries most readers on its own, without needing data or a specific story. This is an emotive argument, it works by appealing to feeling rather than by proof or comparison.
Step 4: Final Answer:
The argument used is emotive, matching option (BB).