Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 18:55

### 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

# Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1352
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 678 [0], given: 10

Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 18:49
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:25) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts
argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not
harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each
persons decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C not weaken the conclusion?

(In case you want to know the other choices ,below is the list of answer choices.

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need topay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws isgreater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.

E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts areinjured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.
)

Last edited by goalsnr on 15 Jul 2008, 07:27, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 19:20
goalsnr wrote:
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts
argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not
harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each
persons decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C weaken the conclusion?

(In case you want to know the other choices ,below is the list of answer choices.

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need topay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws isgreater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.

E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts areinjured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.
)

Not too sure about A, but my money is on C

Reason :Consider this exampler

X and Y travel together in a car, X does not wear a seat belt but is driving the car, Y(per her choice) does not wear the seatbelt as well. The car is involved in an accident due to X's careless driving. The conclusion supports the fact that if X gets hurt, it's his funeral. But if Y gets hurt because of X's action, then we have an issue. Thus the conclusion is weak cause it now inadvertently requires Y to forcefully put on a seat belt(which it tries to argue against , saying that it must be left to people to decide whether they want to wear a seat belt) as Y is at the mercy of X's driving skills.
Draw the same analogy to passengers in an aircraft at the mercy of the captain's flying skills. Hence C emerges as a winner here.
Director
Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 787
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 20:01
this is B
Director
Joined: 27 May 2008
Posts: 544
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 336 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 20:50
I agree wth B

the aregument is that a person should have the freedom to take risk if he hurt himself only....

B says by doing that, the person is hurting society also as others are paying more as insurance premium.
Director
Joined: 12 Jul 2008
Posts: 518
Schools: Wharton
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 155 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 20:52
goalsnr wrote:
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts
argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not
harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each
persons decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C weaken the conclusion?

(In case you want to know the other choices ,below is the list of answer choices.

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need topay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws isgreater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.

E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts areinjured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.
)

I'm not sure I understand your question, because A and C aren't the correct answer.

B is correct because if B is true, then not wearing seat belts affects everyone, including those who wear seat belts.
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

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

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 04:46
zoinnk wrote:
goalsnr wrote:
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts
argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not
harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each
persons decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C weaken the conclusion?

(In case you want to know the other choices ,below is the list of answer choices.

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in thefront seat.

B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need topay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.

C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.

D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws isgreater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.

E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts areinjured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.
)

I'm not sure I understand your question, because A and C aren't the correct answer.

B is correct because if B is true, then not wearing seat belts affects everyone, including those who wear seat belts.

I thought we had to pick between A and C???
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 219
Location: Pune
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 3

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 06:52
Answer is B is as it is affecting insurance companies besides the people
_________________

Every Problem Has a Sloution So keep working
AB

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1352
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 678 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 07:28
Sorry I made a typo in question. I have corrected my question.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C not weaken the conclusion?
Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 219
Location: Pune
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 3

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2008, 07:48
The point is conclusion is only going to be weakend if because of the accidents some other person is affected so in point A and C no where talk about the hindrance to the other people

goalsnr wrote:
Sorry I made a typo in question. I have corrected my question.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C not weaken the conclusion?

_________________

Every Problem Has a Sloution So keep working
AB

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1352
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 678 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2008, 15:47
apurva1985 wrote:
The point is conclusion is only going to be weakend if because of the accidents some other person is affected so in point A and C no where talk about the hindrance to the other people

goalsnr wrote:
Sorry I made a typo in question. I have corrected my question.

In A and C , the passenger is denied the right to make a choice. So how come choices A and C not weaken the conclusion?

Ok I get it. Sometimes I hust skip words while reading.
The argument means people have the right to take risks as long as no other person is hurt.
Manager
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 79
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 2

Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2014, 00:42
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free
society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each person’s decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the
increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate
of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are
passengers who do wear seat belts.
Moderator
Status: It always seems impossible until it's done!!
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 738
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Followers: 68

Kudos [?]: 1173 [0], given: 236

Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2014, 01:06
aimkp wrote:
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free
society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each person’s decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the
increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate
of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are
passengers who do wear seat belts.

Merging similar topic.

_________________
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and   [#permalink] 26 Jun 2014, 01:06
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers 0 26 Jun 2014, 00:42
22 For similar cars and comparable drivers, automobile 7 17 Apr 2017, 01:14
1 City Council Member: The new law requiring all new drivers 6 22 Apr 2017, 04:12
11 Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and 14 04 Sep 2015, 05:11
3 Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and 6 14 Jun 2012, 21:15
Display posts from previous: Sort by