Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 Jan 2017, 07:44

# STARTING SOON:

How to Get Off the MBA Waitlist: YouTube Live with Personal MBA Coach  |  Click Here to Join the Session

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 83
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2005, 00:56
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. This is because the more slowly a car is driven, the more time it spends on the road spewing exhaust into the air and running the risk of colliding with other vehicles.

The argumentâ€™s reasoning is flawed because the argument

(A) neglects the fact that some motorists completely ignore speed limits.
(B) Ignore the possibility of benefits from lowering speed limits other than environmental and safety benefits.
(C) Fails to consider that if speed limits are reduced, increased driving times will increase the number of cars on the road at any given time.
(D) Presumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes
(E) Presumes, without providing justification, that drivers run a significant risk of collision only if they spend a lot of time on the road.
_________________

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

only if i could choose....

If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Manager
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 102
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2005, 01:38
I would go for D..... In E "only if" makes it little extreme.
Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5238
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2005, 01:51
For the exact same reasons, I too will choose D. E is worded deceptively using "only."
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 83
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2005, 02:44
OA is D..

u people have eyes or microscopes....i just missed that "only if" and hence chose the more general B.
_________________

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

only if i could choose....

28 Sep 2005, 02:44
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
7 Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the 18 16 Feb 2010, 07:31
1 Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the 2 30 Jun 2009, 21:06
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the 15 21 Oct 2008, 10:37
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the 4 17 Oct 2007, 17:17
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the 9 02 Mar 2007, 12:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.