Editorial: An arrest made by a Midville police officer is provisional until the officer has taken the suspect to the
police station and the watch commander has officially approved the arrest. Such approval is denied if the
commander judges that the evidence onwhich the provisional arrest is based is insufficient. A government
efficiency expert has observed that almost all provisional arrests meet the standards for adequacy of
evidence that the watch commanders enforce. The expert has therefore recommended that, because the
officers' time spent obtaining approval is largely wasted, the watch commander's approval nolonger be
required. This recommendation should be rejected as dangerous, however, since there is no assurance that the
watch commanders' standards will continue to be observed once approval is no longer required.

In the editorial, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is a claim, the accuracy of which is disputed bythe editorial; the second is a conclusion drawn in
orderto support the main conclusion of the editorial.

(B) The first is an observation that the editorial disputes; the second is a conclusion that was drawn from that
observation.

(C) The first is a finding that was used in support of a proposal that the editorial opposes; the second is a
judgment that was based on that finding and in turn was used to supportthe proposal.

(D) The first is a fin ding introduced to supportthe main conclusion of the editorial; the second is that main
conclusion.

(E) The first is a conclusion, the evidence for which the editorial evaluates; the second is part of the evidence
cited in favor of that conclusion.
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Waiting other responses.



This was difficult, I would like to see more post from novices than from experts
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

ya right :D novice.............

OA added
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

There was a recommendation to remove watch commanders approval when a provisional arrest is made. The editorial rejects the said recommendation stating it as dangerous.

First Bold face statement: almost all provisional arrests meet the standards for adequacy of evidence that the watch commanders enforce
It is supporting the proposal made ie it is supporting the proposal of removing the watch commanders approval process.
But this proposal is being opposed by the editorial.

Second bold face statement : the officers' time spent obtaining approval is largely wasted
The proposal to remove the wathc commanders approval process when a provisional arrest is made actually judges that the officers time is wasted in the process of getting an approval from watch commander. Hence, this is a judgement passed by the proposal but the same proposal is being opposed by the editorial.

Choice C fits the bill perfectly.

Hope this helps

Not sure how 1st BF is a finding, as the passage clearly states that

So 1st BF must be an Observation as Findings are more rigorous and must be appropriately tested using tightly controlled variables.
Although I must admit that the 2nd BF is not really a conclusion but Choice B is the best.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------