Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 0410:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What does test anxiety really look like on the GMAT? For many test takers, it does not look like a panic attack. Instead, it shows up as brain fog, rereading, negative comparisons, mental noise....
Sep 0201:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code COURSEWORK - Expires on Monday 9/7
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sundays Sept. 6, 2026.- Sep 07
12:01 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
On the 7th, GMAT Club Tests will be Free! Including all the Quizzes, Questions, and Tests. 12 AM - 11:59 PM PDT - Sep 07
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
A complete walkthrough of GMAT Club’s free 12-week GMAT study plan: what you study each week, how progress and goals are tracked, how the error log works, and how your practice unlocks paid tools at no cost. - Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway - Sep 09
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Three MBA applications. Three rejections. No interview invites. A year later, Aman was admitted to Cambridge Judge, SMU, and IMD. In this episode of MBA Admit Stories, Aman shares how he rebuilt his MBA application... 
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
29 May 2026, 07:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
67% (02:03) correct
33%
(01:58)
wrong
based on 156
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Huang: Most people who commit violent crimes do not carefully consider whether or how they will be punished for these crimes. And those who don’t commit violent crimes have no inclination to do so. Rather than impose harsh mandatory sentences, we should attend to the root causes of violence to reduce the rate of violent crime.
Suarez: Would you say the same about nonviolent crimes, such as tax evasion? Surely mandatory penalties are a useful deterrent in these cases. At any rate, I am confident that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others from doing so.
The dialogue between Huang and Suarez most strongly supports the claim that they disagree about whether
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
Suarez: Would you say the same about nonviolent crimes, such as tax evasion? Surely mandatory penalties are a useful deterrent in these cases. At any rate, I am confident that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others from doing so.
The dialogue between Huang and Suarez most strongly supports the claim that they disagree about whether
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
29 May 2026, 16:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Huang: Most people who commit violent crimes do not carefully consider whether or how they will be punished for these crimes. And those who don’t commit violent crimes have no inclination to do so. Rather than impose harsh mandatory sentences, we should attend to the root causes of violence to reduce the rate of violent crime.
Suarez: Would you say the same about nonviolent crimes, such as tax evasion? Surely mandatory penalties are a useful deterrent in these cases. At any rate, I am confident that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others from doing so.
The dialogue between Huang and Suarez most strongly supports the claim that they disagree about whether
Huang argues that mandatory sentences are not the right way to reduce violent crime because violent criminals generally do not think carefully about punishment, while noncriminals are not inclined to commit violent crimes anyway. Suarez directly says mandatory sentences do prevent most people who would otherwise harm others. So the disagreement is about deterrence, specifically whether mandatory sentences stop would-be violent criminals.
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
This is close, but not the clearest disagreement. Huang says this is what should be done, but Suarez does not directly say that addressing root causes is not the best way.
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
Neither speaker discusses what violent criminals deserve. The issue is deterrence, not desert.
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
Huang clearly denies this for most violent criminals, but Suarez does not directly say that violent criminals carefully consider punishment. He says mandatory sentences deter many people who would otherwise harm others.
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
This is correct. Huang’s reasoning suggests mandatory sentences will not be effective deterrents for violent crime, while Suarez explicitly says they prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others.
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
Suarez says mandatory penalties are useful for tax evasion, but Huang does not state a view about tax evasion.
Answer: (D)
Suarez: Would you say the same about nonviolent crimes, such as tax evasion? Surely mandatory penalties are a useful deterrent in these cases. At any rate, I am confident that mandatory sentences prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others from doing so.
The dialogue between Huang and Suarez most strongly supports the claim that they disagree about whether
Huang argues that mandatory sentences are not the right way to reduce violent crime because violent criminals generally do not think carefully about punishment, while noncriminals are not inclined to commit violent crimes anyway. Suarez directly says mandatory sentences do prevent most people who would otherwise harm others. So the disagreement is about deterrence, specifically whether mandatory sentences stop would-be violent criminals.
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
This is close, but not the clearest disagreement. Huang says this is what should be done, but Suarez does not directly say that addressing root causes is not the best way.
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
Neither speaker discusses what violent criminals deserve. The issue is deterrence, not desert.
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
Huang clearly denies this for most violent criminals, but Suarez does not directly say that violent criminals carefully consider punishment. He says mandatory sentences deter many people who would otherwise harm others.
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
This is correct. Huang’s reasoning suggests mandatory sentences will not be effective deterrents for violent crime, while Suarez explicitly says they prevent most people who would otherwise physically harm others.
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
Suarez says mandatory penalties are useful for tax evasion, but Huang does not state a view about tax evasion.
Answer: (D)
28 Jun 2026, 04:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
D is correct
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
Huang makes the argument to address the crime by working on root cause, While suarez, disagrees with that and cast the same logic for non-violent crimes by making judgement to reduce the non violent crimes by giving mandatory penalties. Thus, Disagreement between the two is on whether the mandatory sentences are the way out to arrest the crimes.
Clearly not A
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
Not about harsh, but mandatory sentences
Thus not B
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
Saurez, did not talked about it. Not C
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
Saurez agrees with this but Haung doesn't, cause he thinks finding the root cause will help more than mandatory sentences.
Clearly D
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
Irrelevant.
(A) the best way to reduce violent crime is to address the root causes of violence
Huang makes the argument to address the crime by working on root cause, While suarez, disagrees with that and cast the same logic for non-violent crimes by making judgement to reduce the non violent crimes by giving mandatory penalties. Thus, Disagreement between the two is on whether the mandatory sentences are the way out to arrest the crimes.
Clearly not A
(B) people who commit violent crimes deserve harsh punishment
Not about harsh, but mandatory sentences
Thus not B
(C) people who commit violent crimes carefully consider how they will be punished for their crimes
Saurez, did not talked about it. Not C
(D) mandatory sentences will deter most people who might otherwise commit violent crimes
Saurez agrees with this but Haung doesn't, cause he thinks finding the root cause will help more than mandatory sentences.
Clearly D
(E) severe penalties reduce the incidence of tax evasion
Irrelevant.
