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

 It is currently 20 Oct 2019, 12:12

### 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

# Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: 2 months to go
Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Posts: 105
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 14 Jun 2016, 00:32
1
12
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (01:52) correct 55% (02:03) wrong based on 450 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Quote:
Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts have been shown to cause higher rates of serious injury than accidents involving drivers who do wear seatbelts. Because drivers who do not wear seatbelts can end up costing taxpayers money in medical bills, Thoracic County should make it illegal to drive without a seatbelt.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most support for the argument above?

A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving.
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelts.
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County.
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County.
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common.

Kudos if you like!

Originally posted by DensetsuNo on 13 Jun 2016, 09:11.
Last edited by DensetsuNo on 14 Jun 2016, 00:32, edited 2 times in total.
Intern
Joined: 04 May 2015
Posts: 11
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2016, 09:51
1
1
Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts have been shown to cause higher rates of serious injury than accidents involving drivers who do wear seatbelts. Because drivers who do not wear seatbelts can end up costing taxpayers money in medical bills, Thoracic County should make it illegal to drive without a seatbelt.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most support for the argument above? Conclusion is driving without seatbelts shold be made illegal in the thoracic county

A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving.- does not support
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelts. - does not support since the driving if made illegal will not produce any additional benefit regards the expenditure of money by the taxpayers on medical bills
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County.- out of context
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County-out of context
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common- correct option. supports the statement that driving without seatbelt should be made illegal since vehicular accidents are common in particularly the dangerous roads of Thoracic County
Current Student
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Posts: 801
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2016, 10:24
1
DensetsuNo wrote:
Quote:
Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts have been shown to cause higher rates of serious injury than accidents involving drivers who do wear seatbelts. Because drivers who do not wear seatbelts can end up costing taxpayers money in medical bills, Thoracic County should make it illegal to drive without a seatbelt.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most support for the argument above?

A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving.
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelts.
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County.
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County.
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common.

OA will be posted tonight.

Kudos if you like!

Conclusion- TC should make it illegal to drive without seatbelt.
Reason- Because drivers not wearing seatbelts could be a financial burden on taxpayers.

There is an evidence given to support wearing of seatbelt.

To support the conclusion, we have to show how wearing seatbelt is beneficial for TC.

A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving. Causing doubt instead of supporting the new proposal
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelt. Causing doubt- if citizens already wear seatbelt then there would not be any major change by passage of this law.
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County. We are concerned about car accidents.
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County. We are concerned about the financial burden due to not wearing seatbelt.
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common. This supports the conclusion. If all kinds of accidents are common then wearing seatbelt reduces the chances of serious injuries and hence could save money.

_________________
I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+
Intern
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 35
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2016, 11:03
Conclusion : Thoracic County should make it illegal to drive without a seatbelt. Our goal is to strengthen this conclusion by offering additional insights/premises.

A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving. - Not relevant to argument as argument is about with/without seatbelt
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelts. - That is good. Then it is kind of weakening the conclusion by telling that there is no need to make driving without seatbelt illegal.
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County. - This is irrelevant to the argument.
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County. - This is weakening the conclusion, as driver safety will have no significant effect.
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common. - Correct answer
Looks like an assumption to me and hence a correct support. If the accidents on dangerous roads are common, then drivers will need seatbelts.
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 122
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Copenhagen, ESMT"19
GPA: 3.75
WE: Consulting (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2017, 23:05
A) In Thoracic County, the number of severe injuries and deaths caused by driving without a seatbelt is less than the number caused by drunk driving. .. drunk driving out of scope
B) Within Thoracic County, the majority of citizens already wear their seatbelts. it weakens the argument
C) Motorcycle accidents are statistically more significant in terms of the money they cost taxpayers in Thoracic County. no seat belt required for motorcycle .no corelation
D) No significant effect on public health would result if driver safety were prioritized in Thoracic County. weakens the assumption
E) On particularly dangerous roads in Thoracic County, vehicular accidents of all kinds are common.
VP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1492
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2017, 10:01
D is quite general, so D shows little connection with the seatbelt and the accidents
In E, the key word is "accidents of all kind are common"
VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1009
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jun 2017, 10:30
Imo E
If all types of accidents are equally likely then wearing a seatbelt will decrease the likelihood of an accident or prevent injury thus saving in medical bills
_________________
SC Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1716
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2018, 06:15
1

Official Explanation

Driving without a seatbelt is expensive for taxpayers, as these drivers often get seriously injured. We can strengthen the evidence for this argument by making the “often” or “serious” parts of the evidence more explicit. In this case, (E) works as a strengthener, as the frequency (“often”) of accidents on such roads (“particularly dangerous”) is notable.

Providing information about another problem with drivers on the road doesn’t do anything to highlight the frequency or seriousness of injuries caused by drivers not wearing seatbelts (A). We want to strengthen the seatbelt argument, not create an entirely new one.

If most citizens already wear seatbelts (B), it would not be necessary to implement a law to get them to do so. It is not necessary to address a non-existent problem.

Similar to (A), (C) addresses a different problem from the issue of drivers failing to wear seatbelts. Even if these motorcycle accidents are more serious, they are not linked to this argument in a direct way.

Finally, if public health did not improve with this measure (D), that would provide evidence against, not in favor of, this argument; the passage is arguing that public health is affected enough by this issue that it should be addressed by law. If public health isn’t affected, there would be less need for the law.
_________________
Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51 | Time management

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood
Intern
Joined: 14 Jul 2018
Posts: 13
Location: India
Schools: ISB '20
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V41
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2018, 10:40
Is this really an 85% difficulty question? At what level would this question be asked?

Posted from my mobile device
Re: Accidents involving drivers who do not wear seatbelts...   [#permalink] 13 Aug 2018, 10:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by