It is currently 13 Dec 2017, 12:48

# Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Ross R1 | Kellogg R1 | Darden R1 | Tepper R1

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# More than a year ago, the city announced that police would

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 27 May 2011
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

More than a year ago, the city announced that police would [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 08:55
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

63% (01:14) correct 37% (01:21) wrong based on 57 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

More than a year ago, the city announced that police would crack down on illegally parked cars and that resources would be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars. But no crackdown has taken place. The police chief claims that resources have had to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to combating the city‟s staggering drug problem. Yet the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever. Therefore, the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true.
The conclusion in the passage depends on the assumption that
(A) every member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city‟s drug problem
(B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is
(C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime
(D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets
(E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime

Guyzz... please help me in this question. According to me the answer is B. After negating all the options i found answer to be B. is it right\?

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Math Forum Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 1949

Kudos [?]: 2137 [0], given: 376

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 09:12
Amit1408 wrote:
More than a year ago, the city announced that police would crack down on illegally parked cars and that resources would be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars. But no crackdown has taken place. The police chief claims that resources have had to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to combating the city‟s staggering drug problem. Yet the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever. Therefore, the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true.
The conclusion in the passage depends on the assumption that
(A) every member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city‟s drug problem
(B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is
(C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime
(D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets
(E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime

Guyzz... please help me in this question. According to me the answer is B. After negating all the options i found answer to be B. is it right\?

Assumption is valid only for the conclusion:

Conclusion: Excuse about the resources tied up is not true.

Rewording of conclusion: If the resources were busy tracking drug-related crime, then the count of speeding tickets should reduce because the police are busy with the drug-related crime. However, the evidence showed that the count of speeding tickets didn't decrease. What does it imply; you are lying to me. The police were not tied elsewhere, but they were writing speeding tickets as before.

Assumption: If the resources were tied up chasing drug-related crime, they can't write as many speeding tickets.

Ans: "E"

Well "B" is not correct because the chief didn't make any such claim. Chief claimed that the resources had to be diverted to perform a different task, that's all.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 2137 [0], given: 376

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2011
Posts: 428

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 20

Location: Texas
Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 09:27
yes i agree it is E.

Q is asking for the assumption in the conclusion (& NOT in the argument).

Kudos [?]: 223 [0], given: 20

Manager
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 331 [0], given: 21

Location: India
WE 1: 6 Year, Telecom(GSM)
Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 09:31
Assumption question can be solved by logically negating the answer choice ,and the negated answer choice that attacks the argument will be the correct answer.
If we logically negate (E),the police can continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime,it will weaken the conclusion the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true,as it depends on the logic that the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever and hence they wont be dealing with drug related crime.
_________________

Consider KUDOS if You find it good

Kudos [?]: 331 [0], given: 21

Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1626

Kudos [?]: 1138 [0], given: 109

Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 11:46
+1 E

The passage doens't mention how serious or important are those problems (speed, parking, drugs). The argument is about the resources and how they are used. In the GMAT, you don't have to make many assumptions; you shouldn't go too far in your inferences.

IMO, the "negation technique" must be used only with it is necessary. When you are stuck between two options. Otherwise, it is a waste of time. What do you think, buddies?
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1138 [0], given: 109

Intern
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 22

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 16:55
Let's phrase out a statement based on the information provided to better analyze this question:

IF the police is to be able to crack down on illegally parked cars THEN resources would have to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars.

However, no crackdown on illegally parked cars has taken place because, as per the police chief's argument, resources have been diverted towards combating the city's staggering drug problem.

However, the author points out that 'the number of speeding tickets being issued continues to be the same even after resources have been dedicated towards cracking down on the drug problem' and thus concludes that 'it is not true that resources to have been dedicated towards cracking down on the drug problem'.

At this point, you want to ask yourself - Why does the author believe that resources have not been dedicated towards cracking down on the drug problem solely on the basis of the evidence that 'the number of speeding tickets continue to be the same'? i.e. On what assumption is the author basing this conclusion on?

Now lets look at the answer choices:

(A) every member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city‟s drug problem

(B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is

This can be a tricky answer as , if this were a weaken question, this would be a strong contender for correct answer. However, assumption questions do not use the phrase ,'if true' so we have to make do with believing exactly what we are told and the information provided tells us that the city faced a 'staggering' drug problem.

(C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime

Irrelevant!

(D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets

Just because the police is 'supposedly' cracking down on the drug problem while issuing the same number of speeding tickets, does not in any way imply that they could also crack down on illegally parked cars without compromising on the results of either of the other 2 problems.

(E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related cr

Bingo! The only way the author can conclude that 'resources could not have been dedicated to combating the city's drug problem if the number of speeding tickets issued remains the same' is on the basis of the assumption that it is simply not possible for the police to be able to issue the same number of speeding tickets while cracking down on drugs.

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 1

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2011, 17:02
+1 E... negate the answer and it will sink the conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 1

Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 620

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 51

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2011, 00:10
this is straight . you dont even have to negate anything,just prephrase the assumption after reading the stimulus and you get E.

use prephrasing as a technique. it is the best technique for CR.
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Kudos [?]: 286 [0], given: 51

Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 159

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 12

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2011, 00:07

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 12

Intern
Joined: 27 May 2011
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2011, 01:11
Thank you guyzzzz i got the question.......

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: Tricky Assumption question experts kindly help   [#permalink] 04 Jun 2011, 01:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# More than a year ago, the city announced that police would

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.