It is currently 21 Sep 2017, 16:23

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A proposed ordinance requires the installation

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

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 572

Kudos [?]: 667 [1], given: 80

Location: India
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2013, 07:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

90% (01:12) correct 10% (01:13) wrong based on 1045 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 31
Page: 127
Difficulty:


A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a home builder argued that because more than 90 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 home builder’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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Regards,

S

Consider +1 KUDOS if you find this post useful

Kudos [?]: 667 [1], given: 80

Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3348

Kudos [?]: 8743 [0], given: 1138

Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2013, 14:15

Kudos [?]: 8743 [0], given: 1138

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 595

Kudos [?]: 432 [1], given: 200

Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Feb 2015, 13:52
1
This post received
KUDOS
01:09 straight E... B,C,D are either irrelevant or strengthen the argument. Only A could be a contender here
Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires - However, 90 percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, that means they just don't need any training......
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

Share some Kudos, if my posts help you. Thank you !

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Kudos [?]: 432 [1], given: 200

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jul 2013
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 51

Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Feb 2015, 08:15
A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a home builder argued that because more than 90 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 home builder’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.



While considering weakening questions focus on the conclusion of the stimulus, here the homebuilder talks about how fires are extinguished by household members 90% of the time and gives additional reasoning saying that the sprinklers would marginally help stopping the fires and decrease the property damage. One way of weakening would be to show or give stats saying that the absence of household members would cause the fire to propagate and perpetuate. Hence we go through the answer options to check if anything matches this consideration.

A> out of scope -- no mention of training so it isnt even tangential so not essential to the stimulus
B>though it would be narrow in scope this option does not address the conclusion and should be eliminated
C>while this does talk about the merit of a smoke detector over a sprinkler it does not talk about damage control so is definitely out of context
D>again out of scope-- we're considering sprinkler installation over household member presence so cannot be considered
E> this is the correct answer, it correctly points out the weakness in the housebuilder's argument and the key here is matching the phrase property damage.

hope this helps!

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 51

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 47

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Apr 2016, 07:49
The homebuilder assumes that ~10% of residential fires would not cause significant damage. Answer choice which undermines this assumption will weaken the argument.

Another way to look at this argument is to negate the conclusion and look for an answer choice that supports this conclusion:
~Conclusion: Res Sprinklers would significantly decrease property damage caused by residential fires.
Now look for an answer choice that supports this conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 20 Jun 2017
Posts: 51

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 10

Schools: ISB '20
Reviews Badge
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2017, 17:58
A) Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires.- not relevant here. We have to look for an answer that talks about property damage.
(B) Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope. - not a great pick.
(C) The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers.- there is no mention of cost in the argument.
(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.- so? It doesn't matter.
(E) The largest proportion of property damage that
results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present.- correct. Even though 90%of the times, fire is caused by household member and can be extinguished, the damage to property can be huge in these cases.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 10

Mannheim Thread Master
User avatar
S
Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 233

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 49

Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Aug 2017, 06:35
E is correct - Identifies a weakness in the home builder's argument by showing that most damage occurs when no household member is present to put out the fire.
_________________

2017-2018 MBA Deadlines

Threadmaster for B-school Discussions
Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 49

Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation   [#permalink] 16 Aug 2017, 06:35
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
8 The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's reply2spg 20 27 Apr 2017, 19:36
3 EXPERTS_POSTS_IN_THIS_TOPIC The proposal to install French-manufactured public toilet fmik7894 17 25 Jul 2017, 07:34
9 A law is being proposed that would require the installation sajini 21 26 Jul 2017, 08:06
3 A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet Gnpth 4 06 May 2016, 18:34
3 EXPERTS_POSTS_IN_THIS_TOPIC A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet Gnpth 1 09 Jun 2014, 22:03
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A proposed ordinance requires the installation

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.