A City police department plans to set up a special task : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 23 Feb 2017, 20:36

### 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

# A City police department plans to set up a special task

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 414
Location: Lungi
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 0

A City police department plans to set up a special task [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2004, 05:59
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (01:45) correct 50% (00:00) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A City police department plans to set up a special task force to
identify and prosecute drunk drivers. A City council member objects,
claiming that the expense of putting together the task force is not
justified because less than one out of ten thousand drivers on the
street on a given night are driving while intoxicated.

Which of the following , if true , most weakens the argument made by
the objecting council member?

increases in convictions for drunken driving.
b. More than half of the auto accidents in the city are caused by
drunken drivers.
c. Most drunken drivers are identified as such only after they have
d. Strong penalties for drunken driving are already written into
state laws.
e. Putting together the special task force will require a 10%
increase in the police department's budget.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Posts: 185
Location: illinois
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2004, 11:53
was debating between B and C.

B says that more than half of the accident are done by drunk drivers.

C says that We know that they are drunk ONLY after they have already caused the accident.

C Sounds better doesn't it??? anybody explain??
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 438 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Apr 2004, 12:18
monarc wrote:
was debating between B and C.

B says that more than half of the accident are done by drunk drivers.

C says that We know that they are drunk ONLY after they have already caused the accident.

C Sounds better doesn't it??? anybody explain??

C is the opposite of what we are looking for and actually strengthen the argument of the objecting council member. If we know only after the accident that drivers are drunk, then what is the use of setting up a task force to identify them (after the accident is perpetrated)?
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 414
Location: Lungi
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2004, 00:06
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,
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2004, 18:34
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
02 Apr 2004, 18:34
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
15 CR ASSUMPTION SERIES: 3) Several Police Departments 10 09 Jun 2015, 21:03
According to ComStat, the Bay City department of 3 04 Jun 2014, 06:49
3 Parent: The city education department is unable to 2 28 Apr 2012, 19:37
1 Police officers in Smith County who receive Special Weapons 5 07 Jul 2011, 16:03
More than a year ago, the city announced that police would 8 22 May 2007, 09:00
Display posts from previous: Sort by