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

 It is currently 20 Aug 2018, 21:12

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

finding tough time to even understand the argument ... Pls

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
Posts: 258
finding tough time to even understand the argument ... Pls  [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 00:10
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

finding tough time to even understand the argument ...
Pls help ..
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.
5. The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:
(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.
(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.
(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.
(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

--== Message from GMAT Club Team ==--

This is not a quality discussion. It has been retired.

If you would like to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum. Thank you!

To review the GMAT Club's Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow these links: Quantitative | Verbal Please note - we may remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines. Thank you.

_________________

"CEO in making"

Manager
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 108

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 07:25
Quote:
Although its purpose is laudable, the exclusionary rule, which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights, has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts. Even when the rights violation was a minor or purely technical one, turning on a detail of procedure rather than on the abrogation of some fundamental liberty, and even when it has been clear that the police officers were acting in good faith, the evidence obtained has been considered tainted under this rule and may not even by introduced. In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again.
5. The author of the passage above assumes all of the following EXCEPT:
(A) The constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected.
(B) Most cases in which the exclusionary rule has been invoked have involved purely technical violations of constitutional principles.
(C) The number of cases whose outcome has been affected by the exclusionary rule is significant.
(D) Some of the defendants set free under the exclusionary rule have been guilty of serious criminal offenses.
(E) Merely technical violations of the rules concerning evidence should be treated differently from deliberate assaults upon human rights.

I'd go with B, because 'most cases' is too extreme and is not mentioned in the argument.

A.
Quote:
which forbids a court to consider evidence seized in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights
+ overall info, it can be inferred that the constitutional rights of criminal defendants should be protected
C.
Quote:
the exclusionary rule...has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts
- if the number was not significant this rule wouldn't have hampered these efforts.
D.
Quote:
In consequence, defendants who were undoubtedly guilty have been set free, perhaps to steal, rape, or murder again
- this is the main point of the argument
E.
Quote:
has unduly hampered law-enforcement efforts
- author in the argument criticizes the treatment and it can be inferred that different appoaches to this problem are preferable for the author
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1474

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 11:13
Another B.
Manager
Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Posts: 76

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 13:36
B as well - the passage does not indicate this is true for 'most' cases
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3280
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 16:51
agreed with B..
Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 105

Show Tags

29 Nov 2008, 19:50
Good work; the answer should be B. The conclusion is the overall claim that the exclusionary rule has UNDULY hampered law enforcement efforts. This conclusion does depend (at least!) on the assumptions in C and E. The author clearly assumes A, because otherwise he would not say that the purpose of the rule was "laudable". He assumes D, because he could not logically state the two "even when" clauses if he did not consider the distinction in D to be viable.

The author does NOT assume B, however: "Unduly" hampering law enforcement efforts would only require a SIGNIFICANT number of cases (whatever that may be), not necessarily a MAJORITY.

Interestingly enough, about 90% of the participants in the North American justice system appear to have accepted this nonsense argument. The exclusionary rule is far more necessary, and far more often ignored, than most people realize.

--== Message from GMAT Club Team ==--

This is not a quality discussion. It has been retired.

If you would like to discuss this question please re-post it in the respective forum. Thank you!

To review the GMAT Club's Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow these links: Quantitative | Verbal Please note - we may remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines. Thank you.

_________________

Grumpy

Kaplan Canada LSAT/GMAT/GRE teacher and tutor

Re: Cruel CR &nbs [#permalink] 29 Nov 2008, 19:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by

finding tough time to even understand the argument ... Pls

Moderators: GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo

Events & Promotions

 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®.