Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 07:20 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 07:20
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
batliwala
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Last visit: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 283
Own Kudos:
Location: Lungi
Posts: 283
Kudos: 1,128
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
monarc
Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Last visit: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 123
Own Kudos:
Location: illinois
Posts: 123
Kudos: 428
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Paul
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Last visit: 10 Nov 2012
Posts: 2,708
Own Kudos:
Posts: 2,708
Kudos: 1,630
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
batliwala
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Last visit: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 283
Own Kudos:
Location: Lungi
Posts: 283
Kudos: 1,128
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
yes B again.

The correct response is B . The councilman's objection is based on
the fact that very few of the drivers in the city drive while
intoxicated. However, if the majority of the auto accidents inthe
city are caused by drunk drivers, as described in choice B, then the
city's most effective strategy for reducing auto accidents is to
combat drunk driving. Choices A and E would not weaken the council
member's argument. Choice C would be an argument in favor of the task
force, but does not establish, as choice B does, that getting drunk
drivers off the streets would actually produce a measurable benefit.
Choice D is irrelevant.


rgds,
bolti as Kpadma calls me
User avatar
anandnk
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Last visit: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 895
Own Kudos:
Location: NewJersey USA
Posts: 895
Kudos: 411
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is debatable. There are two weak points in the statement given by the objecting council.

How do we refute the city council's claim. Either show that the data it is providing as evidence is false or the consequence of the truthfullness of that data is pretty serious.

B says majority of the accidents caused are by drunk drivers. What if there were only 10 accidents in a year.

C says the numbers provided by the city council about no of drunk drivers is wrong.

One can always come out and say even if those 10 accidents can be stopped then it is worth the try.

I liked C better.

I have seen a similar Q in Kaplan about diceases caused pollution and the answer is similar to one provided by C where the data provided as evidence is invalidated



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
188 posts