Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free
society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks.
As a result, they conclude that it should be each person’s decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?
A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.

The answer should be B.
Since this is the only option which says that because of the non-helmet wearing class, the helmet wearing class is affected as they have to pay higher premium.

D - higher rate could be because of higher traffic or not good road conditions --- and also there is no guarantee that the accidents are caused by drivers without seat belts.

B - makes a points that because of non-seat belt guys insurance rates go up and therby they are causing harm to others and weakens the conclusion.

B

B shows that because of some people not wearing seat belts all automobile owners insurance will go up......which means financially harm others.

I went with (E) because statistics show that greater number of passengers who do not wear seat-belts are injured. So safety is a concern.
(B), however, talks about financial loss. Since OA is (B), financial loss perhaps is a greater concern than safety compromise.
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
GM.

...." as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks".

(E) never said that the greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured are actually injured by themselves or by some one else?
(B) " Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

+1 for (B)
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

[quote="gmatpill"]Conclusion: Each person makes his/her decision regarding wearing the seat belt.

Support: Free society, as long as ppl don't harm others in their risk-taking actions

How do we weaken this?
Think about the following:
1) Opposite of the conclusion: Each person does NOT make his/her own decision
2) Opposite the support: Show that ppl DO harm others in their actions

(B) is an example of the second option. As a result of the risks taken of people NOT wearing seatbelts, others are harmed. The insurance rates are higher.

(D) says that when there is a seat belt law, the rate of fatalities is lower. This is a correlational observation.
Answer choice (D) is about the effectiveness of a seatbelt law. If this question were about finding information to support legislation for seatbelt law in order to reduce fatalities, then this would be a great choice. However, we are looking to weaken the conclusion that each person can make his/her decision regarding seat belts.

(D) does not do either option 1 or option 2. It doesn't really weaken the conclusion. It comments about the effectiveness of a seatbelt law, but that is not relevant to the argument of interest in this passage.[/quote

Thank you experts,
Can you detail what you do before you go to answer choices for this question. we want to learn what do you do after you read and realize the conclusion of argument and before you look at the answer choices so that we can imitate the proces of doing a weaken question.