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

 It is currently 24 Aug 2019, 13:19

### 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

# Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
Posts: 107
Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 03 Aug 2019, 23:36
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

44% (02:32) correct 56% (02:29) wrong based on 43 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a general air of lawlessness that fosters more serious crime. In addition, when people who commit these crimes are arrested, they are often found to have outstanding warrants for more serious offenses. Over the last 5 years, the Macropolis police department prosecuted these minor crimes that were previously ignored in order to reduce serious crime. For each of those 5 years, serious crime has declined in the city, a clear indication that the policy is working.

Which of the following, if true, would be LEAST likely to be used to dispute the Chief of Police's claims?

A. Some other cities have implemented an identical program without a corresponding drop in serious crime.
B. Illegal drug use — which is associated with high levels of serious crime — has fallen dramatically in Macropolis.
C. Most serious criminals are young men, and the proportion of young men in the population has risen.
D. A general upturn in Macropolis's economy has led to large decreases in unemployment, which in the past has led to reductions in serious crime.
E. Harsher sentencing policies introduced into the state 10 years ago mean that many career criminals are currently serving long jail sentences.

Originally posted by Chetangupta on 11 Jul 2011, 13:28.
Last edited by Bunuel on 03 Aug 2019, 23:36, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2009
Posts: 361
Location: United States (MA)
Re: Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2011, 13:08
1

Read the question carefully, Which of the following, if true, would be LEAST likely to be used to dispute.

A : Evidence that same theory was successful in different cities : supports the claim
B : Supports the claim
C : Least likely to be used to dispute
D : more employment less crime. Supports the claim.
E : Supports the claim
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 171
Schools: MBA, Thunderbird School of Global Management / BA, Wesleyan University
Re: Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2011, 17:48
1
Chetangupta,

The first step with Critical Reasoning questions is always to read the question and determine what the question is really asking. In this case, the question is written in a purposefully confusing way:

"Which of the following, if true, would be LEAST likely to be used to dispute the Chief of Police's claims?"

As you read this and think about the major types of CR questions (strengthen, weaken, ID the underlying assumption, and draw a conclusion), you should notice this question is about weakening the argument. It's really asking you which answer choice weakens the conclusion the least. The conclusion is that prosecuting people for small crimes leads to decreased crime overall).

Once you rephrase this into an easier to comprehend question type, take a look at the answers:

A would weaken or be irrelevant to the Chief's claim...it says that this hasn't worked in other cities.
B would weaken the conclusion by providing an alternate explanation for decreased crime.
C - If this were true, the crime rate should have actually gone up, which would actually strengthen the argument.
D would weaken the conclusion by providing an alternate explanation for decreased crime.
E would weaken the conclusion by providing an alternate explanation for decreased crime.

The one that weakens the arguments the least is C, as C actually strengthens the argument.

Tough question!

Brett
_________________

Brett Beach-Kimball | Manhattan GMAT Instructor

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 5233
Re: Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2019, 23:36
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Re: Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism promotes a gener   [#permalink] 03 Aug 2019, 23:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by