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

 It is currently 23 May 2017, 15:16

### 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

Intern
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 47
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 1

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

### Show Tags

12 May 2009, 00:00
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

83% (02:02) correct 17% (00:05) wrong based on 23 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 others 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 dealths of people not wearing seat belts

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

(D) The rate of automobile fatalities in state that do not have mandatory seat-belt 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 pasengers who do not wear seat belts
If you have any questions
New!
SVP
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1806
Location: New York
Followers: 37

Kudos [?]: 930 [1] , given: 5

Re: CR: wear seat belt [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2009, 00:33
1
KUDOS
vnbui 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 others 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 dealths of people not wearing seat belts

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

(D) The rate of automobile fatalities in state that do not have mandatory seat-belt 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 pasengers who do not wear seat belts

A --> Not weakening
C --> Out of scope.
D -->even rate of fatalities more in state<no seat belt law> .. it is not mentioned that.. not wearing seat belt harming other people who wear the seat belts.
Not weakening the conclusion
E --> i belive you type "not" accidentally.
In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are pasengers who do wear seat belts
One way this is supporting the arugment/conclusion drawn.

B --> Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or dealths of people not wearing seat belts
here it is clear the all automobile drivers need to pay more price. Risk is Hurting financially to others (people who wearing seat belts).
Weaken the conclusion.
_________________

Smiling wins more friends than frowning

Intern
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 47
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 1

Re: CR: wear seat belt [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2009, 00:58
thanks x2suresh for detail explanation

at first, i chose E, now i realize how it support the argument
Director
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 818
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 73 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: wear seat belt [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 May 2009, 17:47
B looks like the best answer here, but finance seemed a bit out of scope, but then again "harm" wasnt defined
Manager
Joined: 14 May 2009
Posts: 193
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 39 [1] , given: 1

Re: CR: wear seat belt [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2009, 23:54
1
KUDOS
Argument is

X:(Not wearing Seatbelts doesn't hurt others) ==> Y:(Don't have to wear them).

Classic Cause & Effect.

Show that X isn't true, show that something else causes Y, show that Y isn't true, show that Y causes X, show that something elses causes X, and so forth...

In this case the answer is a clear B as it gets rid of X, that not wearing seatbelts actually
DOES hurt others (financially).

_________________

Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 157
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 8

Re: CR: wear seat belt [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2009, 02:20
Agree with B
Manager
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 209
Location: New Delhi, India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 74 [1] , given: 12

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

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2012, 21:15
1
KUDOS
vnbui 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 others 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 dealths of people not wearing seat belts

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

(D) The rate of automobile fatalities in state that do not have mandatory seat-belt 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 pasengers who do not wear seat belts

The principle that people are entitled to risk injury provided they do not thereby harm others fails to justify the
individual’s right to decide not to wear seat belts if it can be shown, as B shows, that that decision does harm
others. Therefore, B is the best answer. A suggests that the law may be irrelevant in some cases, but it does not
address the issue of the law’s legitimacy. C cites a requirement analogous to the one at issue, but its existence
alone does not bear on the legitimacy of the one at issue. The argument implicitly concedes that individuals take
risks by not wearing seat belts; therefore, D and E, which simply confirm this concession, do not weaken the
conclusion.
_________________

Best
Vaibhav

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks

Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and   [#permalink] 14 Jun 2012, 21:15
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
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and 11 26 Jun 2014, 01:06
Display posts from previous: Sort by