Our legislature is considering passing legislation to ban

Question

Our legislature is considering passing legislation to ban skateboarding on city streets, citing safety concerns. However, a review of public health records reveals that the legislature’s concern is misplaced. Each year, many more people are injured while jogging than are injured while skateboarding. So in fact, skateboarding is safer than jogging.

Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. It fails to distinguish professional skateboarders who attempt very dangerous maneuvers from amateurs who are comparatively cautious.

B. It assumes without warrant that no one who skateboards also jogs.

C. It fails to consider the number of people who skateboard as compared with the number of people who jog.

D. It ignores the possibility that other activities cause even more injuries than either skateboarding or jogging.

E. It fails to address the issue and instead attacks the character of the legislature.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

paragw · Answer

The argument's flaw is that it compares the total number of injuries from skateboarding with jogging without considering how many people participate in each activity. If far fewer people skateboard than jog, a lower number of injuries does not necessarily mean skateboarding is safer per participant.

This corresponds to option C: "It fails to consider the number of people who skateboard as compared with the number of people who jog."

The argument assumes the total injuries reflect safety without adjusting for exposure or participation rates, which is a common flaw in such reasoning.

Hence, the correct answer is  C .

Dereno · Answer

A legislation is being proposed to ban Skateboard (SB) , by citing injury concerns.

But, a new public health review record reveals the legislative concern is misplaced - citing, number of injuries by Jogging > Injury by Skateboard.

So, they conclude that SB is more safer than Jogging.

The flaw in the reasoning is :

A. It fails to distinguish professional skateboarders who attempt very dangerous maneuvers from amateurs who are comparatively cautious.

Option A is wrong because, the comparison between professional and amateur skateboarders are not in the context of the question.

B. It assumes without warrant that no one who skateboards also jogs.

Option B is wrong, as the number of participants in both the games can be either same or different.

C. It fails to consider the number of people who skateboard as compared with the number of people who jog.

Option C is the correct answer, because the question mentions the number of injuries on jogging is greater than the number of injuries of skateboard. Hence, skateboard is safer. The number of participants for both the cases if same can be a reason to validate the above argument. An increased number of participants might lead eventually to an increased number of injuries, but that may not be the case always.

D. It ignores the possibility that other activities cause even more injuries than either skateboarding or jogging.

The comparisons is between the two sports and not any other sport, hence, the comparison made in this option is irrelevant. Hence, wrong.

E. It fails to address the issue and instead attacks the character of the legislature.

Option E is wrong, because there is no attack on the character of the legislature, it’s not questioning the motives or character.

Option C

CareerLauncherCL · Answer

Let's analyze the argument step by step in a better way:-

Argument:

Legislature wants to ban skateboarding due to safety concerns.

Public health data shows more people are injured while jogging than skateboarding.

Conclusion: Skateboarding is safer than jogging.

Step 1: Identify the flaw

The argument compares the  number of injuries , but it doesn’t account for the  number of participants  in each activity.

If 1,000,000 people jog and 10,000 skateboard, it’s expected that more joggers get injured even if skateboarding is riskier per person. 
 So the argument  ignores the relative risk  (injuries per participant).

Step 2: Match to the answer choices

A:  Talks about professional vs. amateur skateboarders → irrelevant.

B:  Assumes skateboarders don’t jog → not relevant to the comparison.

C:  Mentions number of people who skateboard vs. jog →  this is exactly the flaw .

D:  Mentions other activities → irrelevant.

E:  Attacks legislature → not what the argument does.

So, the Final Correct answer would be:- Option (C): It fails to consider the number of people who skateboard as compared with the number of people who jog.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation:

C

Step 1: Identify the Question Type

The word “flaw” in the question stem indicates that this is a Flaw question. We’ll be looking for the argument’s faulty assumption.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus

In Flaw questions, just as in Assumption questions, we need to identify the argument’s conclusion and evidence. In this argument, the conclusion is the final sentence: skateboarding is safer than jogging. The evidence is that more people are injured while jogging than while skateboarding.

Step 3: Predict the Answer

In Flaw questions, we expect that the conclusion will not follow logically from the evidence because the author makes an inappropriate assumption. Here, the author incorrectly assumes that a higher number of people injured means a higher percentage of people injured, which is not necessarily the case. Picking Numbers clarifies the issue. Let’s say that 100 people skateboard in a given city, while 10,000 people jog. In that case, if 200 people are injured by jogging while only 10 are injured by skateboarding, jogging would actually be the far safer sport because 2 percent of joggers but 10 percent of skateboarders have sustained injuries. The flaw in the argument, then, is that it fails to provide us with the relative numbers of joggers versus skateboarders.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices

(C) matches our prediction and is correct. (A) is an irrelevant comparison between professional and amateur skateboarders. (B) is incorrect because the evidence explicitly states that more people are hurt while jogging than while skateboarding. Even if some people do engage in both activities, the conclusion is based on evidence about which activity they were doing when they were injured, so it makes no difference whether there is any overlap between joggers and skateboarders. (D) is incorrect because activities other than jogging and skateboarding are outside the scope of the stimulus. (E) is incorrect because there is no attack on anybody’s character in the argument. Choice (C) is correct.

Our legislature is considering passing legislation to ban

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Our legislature is considering passing legislation to ban

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards