GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 20 Mar 2019, 22:47

### 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

# A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinkl

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 12 Jan 2018
Posts: 6
A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Feb 2019, 20:45
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:31) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 6 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a homebuilder argued that because more than ninety percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, residential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the homebuilder's argument ?

A. Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires
B. Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope
C. The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers
D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed , the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average
E. The largest proportion of property damage that results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 53738
Re: A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Feb 2019, 21:51
Riri0 wrote:
A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a homebuilder argued that because more than ninety percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, residential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the homebuilder's argument ?

A. Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires
B. Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope
C. The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers
D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed , the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average
E. The largest proportion of property damage that results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present

Please search before posting: https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-proposed-o ... fl=similar

Please provide the OA when posting.
_________________
Re: A proposed ordinance required the installation in new homes of sprinkl   [#permalink] 27 Feb 2019, 21:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by