Enforcement of local speed limits through police monitoring has proven unsuccessful in the town of Ardane. In many nearby towns, speed humps (raised areas of pavement placed across residential streets, about 300 feet apart) have reduced traffic speeds on residential streets by 20 to 25 percent. In order to reduce traffic speed and thereby enhance safety in residential neighborhoods, Ardane's transportation commission plans to install multiple speed humps in those neighborhoods.

Which of the following, if true, identifies a potentially serious drawback to the plan for installing speed humps in Ardane?

Boil it down - In order to reduce traffic speed and thereby enhance safety in residential neighborhoods, Ardane's transportation commission plans to install multiple speed humps in those neighborhoods.

C'-- In order to reduce traffic speed/bring traffic speed within the speed limit and thereby enhance safety in residential neighborhoods, Ardane's transportation commission plans to install multiple speed humps in those neighborhoods.
If the conclusion was C' as specified above, will A be valid weakener ? -- Since even with speed humps, the traffic speed will not be within the speed limits .


A. On residential streets without speed humps, many vehicles travel at speeds more than 25 percent above the posted speed limit.

B. Because of their high weight, emergency vehicles such as fire trucks and ambulances must slow almost to a stop at speed humps. -- Correct

mcelroytutoring , AjiteshArun , GMATNinja , mikemcgarry , egmat , sayantanc2k, RonPurewal , DmitryFarber , MagooshExpert , ccooley , ChiranjeevSingh, GMATGuruNY , KarishmaB , other experts-- please enlighten
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

generis nightblade354 KarishmaB pikolo2510 GMATNinja GMATninja2

I wonder as to why so many students including me faltered at (C) and if same could be avoided by
more precise reading.

Start with Q:


Plan: installing speed bumps in A -> reduction in traffic speed -> enhancement of safety in residential neighbourhoods of A

I need to prove that in spite of installing speed bumps in A, there might be a decrease in safety index in residential neighbourhoods of A

Let us see the author's reasoning as to why he thinks that installing speed bumps in A shall lead to better safety index in residential neighbourhoods of A



The brute force of limiting vehicle speed to fixed value has been unsuccessful in the town of Ardane.
E.g. a car can only drive to a maximum speed limit of 40 mph so very less chance of accidents.

In nearby towns to A, speed humps (def as provided) have reduced traffic speed by almost a quarter.

So in A too, if we install speed humps then traffic speed will be limited, increasing safety by causing reduction in traffic


I am interested in what happens after installing speed humps. DO NOT CHALLENGE PREMISE in an argument.
Premise is: speed humps are installed.
To doubt: plan of more safe neighbourhood and less traffic will be successful. OUT


How do I link emergency vehicles with the aspect of safety in an argument?


Is this an opposite answer? If residential speed limit in Ardane is higher then after installing speed humps, the speed of
vehicle will decrease. Wait .. what am I supposed to do in this Q?
I am supposed to DOUBT that after installing speed humps safety will decrease, NOT INCREASE as
this choice does.





I rejected (D) and (E) since they cater to very small sub-section of all people mentioned in argument.
_________________

It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.