abansal1805 wrote:
Outlawing the possession of handguns will never reduce the number of deaths and injuries that are the result of such weapons. People know that guns are effective and will find new, although illegal, ways to get them. No laws restricting the sale and ownership of handguns will prevent those who want them from having them.
Which of the following would best strengthen the above argument?
A. A recent ban on the possession of concealed weapons other than handguns has resulted in significantly lower rates of death and injury related to these weapons.
B. In light of certain rights guaranteed by the Constitution, legislation legal bans on the possession of handguns will not be easy.
C. Often, outlawing a product or commodity tends to increase the desire to possess that product and demand actually rises.
D. Many advocates of gun control believe that it is the weapon and not the possessor of the weapon that is responsible for the violence associated with handguns.
E. Legislating a ban on only those handguns that are statistically more often involved in injury and death should be sufficient to temper the demand.
The answer is C. This is a strengthen-type question therefore, we need to find a statement that further reinforces the strength of the conclusion.
In this case, the conclusion is: "No laws restricting the sale and ownership of handguns will prevent those who want them from having them". Rephrased, it means that folks will circumvent the law, by any means necessary, to get their hands on guns.
Let's go over the answers:
A/ This actually weakens the argument by providing an example of a legislation that succeeded in lowering the instances of deaths and injuries caused by handguns
B/ Same as A, this answer weakens the argument
C/ Correct answer
D/ Irrelevant
E/ Irrelevant
Hope that helps.
close
88% (01:40) correct 
