There is extraordinary exposure in the United States to the risks of

Hope it helps

1.B 2.C 3. E 4. D 5. B 6.D..

please let me know if any of them are correct so that . I can post my point off reasoningg soon.

1) The answer can be arrived at by use of POE.
A) No surveys have been cited in the passage for interpretation. Incorrect.
B) This answer largely covers the entire scope of the passage compared to the other answers. Correct.
The first paragraph presents the link between high levels of BAC in drivers and the high number of accidents of the road. The second and third paragraphs lay out measures that have been attempted at curbing the level of intoxication among drivers to reduce road accidents; the first line of these paragraphs lays this out. The last paragraph conducts an analysis on the effectiveness of these measures.
C) The author has not outlined any reason for why drivers drink and drive. Incorrect.
D) Only one cause has been analyzed: intoxication. Not ‘causes’. Incorrect.
E) Partial out of scope. This has only been covered in the 3rd paragraph. Incorrect.

2) The 2nd paragraph begins by stating that laws against drinking and driving are directed at intoxicated drivers. It then goes ahead to give examples of laws in states in the US and Britain. Therefore, it can be inferred that the 1967 Road Safety Act made it illegal to drink while driving which coincides with choice B.

3) E is the correct answer. This is proven in paragraph 1, line 6: “For the average adult….”

4) The author would most likely agree with B). The answer is derived from the 2nd paragraph. Taxes would impact everyone who consumes alcohol. This would reduce excessive consumption and total consumption thus reducing the number of injuries caused by intoxication. The author is generally concerned with reducing the number of accidents and fatalities caused by intoxication.

5) The main point of the 2nd paragraph is that enactment of laws does not deter drink driving. He does this by referring to the effect laws have had in the Us and Britain. This is line 7: “At this level….” And line 10: “As Britishers increasingly…, the effectiveness declined,…”

6) The statement can be weakened if a driver can actually be shown to control his intake thus proving the proposals to be ineffective or there are other factors other than a driver’s consumption of alcohol that contribute to accidents thus, once again, proving the proposals to be ineffective. The answer that conveys this is C)

1. The author is primarily concerned with

(A) interpreting the results of surveys on traffic fatalities
The author does interpret the results of surveys in his analysis, but this is not his primary concern. He uses his analysis to make a point.
(B) reviewing the effectiveness of attempts to curb drunk driving
This is the author's primary focus. Both economic and criminal approaches are evaluated in the body of the passage and their effectiveness is summarized in the final paragraph.
(C) suggesting reasons for the prevalence of drunk driving in the United States
Preventing the outcomes of drunk driving is the author's concern, not explaining the current trends. Nothing about causation is mentioned.
(D) analyzing the causes of the large number of annual traffic fatalities
As in answer choice (C), causes are not the author's primary concern. Regardless of the causes, the author seeks the reduce drunk driving fatalities.
(E) making an international comparison of experience with drunk driving
The author cites evidence from the U.K., but only to prove the inefficacy of criminal penalties for drunk driving.

2. It can be inferred that the 1967 Road Safety Act in Britain

(A) changed an existing law to lower the BAC level that defined driving while intoxicated
A prior law could have existed, but it is also possible that the 1967 law was the first.
(B) made it illegal to drive while intoxicated
This is really tricky. I don't see any reason to infer that the law was the first to make driving while intoxicated illegal. You could make that inference, but you would ignore the possibility that the law only tightened existing restrictions. There is a better answer.
(C) increased the number of drunk driving arrests
While answer choice (B) is possible, answer choice (C) is definite. The paragraph concerns the implementation of criminal law regarding drunk driving. Stricter laws, even if loosely enforced, would surely increase the number of arrests, even if only by a tiny amount. 1 > 0.
(D) placed a tax on the sale of alcoholic drinks
Nothing is mentioned about a tax.
(E) required drivers convicted under the law to undergo rehabilitation therapy
Nothing is mentioned about rehab.

3. The author implies that a BAC of 0.1 percent

(A) is unreasonably high as a definition of intoxication for purposes of driving
The author never makes a case for lowering BAC limits.
(B) penalizes the moderate drinker while allowing the heavy drinker to consume without limit
The heavy drinker is just as limited by BAC laws as the moderate drinker, as the law is binary (over or under the limit). Also, "moderate" and "heavy" are not defined.
(C) will operate as an effective deterrent to over 90 percent of the people who might drink and drive
All people might drink and drive. Fewer than 4% of all drivers have a BAC > 0.1. Therefore, more than 96% of all drivers do not exceed the 0.1 BAC limit.
(D) is well below the BAC of most drivers who are involved in fatal collisions
Only 1/3 of inebriated drivers are over a 0.1 BAC, but such drivers are 27 times more likely to be involved in fatal accidents. It’s tricky, but there are no other numbers to reference to determine whether drivers with higher BACs than 0.1 are more likely to be in fatal accidents.
(E) proves that a driver has consumed five ounces of 80 proof spirits over a short time
This rate of consumption is given as the average, so it is not proof.

4. With which of the following statements about making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense versus increasing taxes on alcohol consumption would the author most likely agree?

(A) Making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense is preferable to increased taxes on alcohol because the former is aimed only at those who abuse alcohol by driving while intoxicated.
As shown in the concluding paragraph, the author's sole concern is the prevention of fatal accidents. Whether or not non-offenders are impacted by a law is not his concern.
(B) Increased taxation on alcohol consumption is likely to be more effective in reducing traffic fatalities because taxation covers all consumers and not just those who drive.
The author makes a point to show that criminal penalties are ineffective and suggests that taxation could be effective (paragraph 2). He sees criminal penalties as ineffective and he is open to a new approach.
(C) Increased taxation on alcohol will constitute less of an interference with personal liberty because of the necessity of blood alcohol tests to determine BAC’s in drivers suspected of intoxication.
As with answer choice (A), any impacts other than a reduction in fatal accidents is not relevant to the author.
(D) Since neither increased taxation nor enforcement of criminal laws against drunk drivers is likely to have any significant impact, neither measure is warranted.
The author never says that taxation is unlikely to have an impact.
(E) Because arrests of intoxicated drivers have proved to be expensive and administratively cumbersome, increased taxation on alcohol is the most promising means of reducing traffic fatalities.
The cost of enforcement is never mentioned in the passage.

5. The author cites the British example in order to

(A) show that the problem of drunk driving is worse in Britain than in the U.S.
Statistics on drunk driving in Britain are not provided, so there is no way to conclude, or even infer, this from the passage.
(B) prove that stricter enforcement of laws against intoxicated drivers would reduce traffic deaths
It was the passage of the law, not its enforcement, that drove down fatalities. While stricter enforcement may reduce deaths, the passage does not prove that.
(C) prove that a slight increase in the number of arrests of intoxicated drivers will not deter drunk driving
British drivers were not deterred by the new law. After they realized that they were not likely to be arrested, they resumed their prior habits. This is the point the author is trying to make.
(D) suggest that taxation of alcohol consumption may be more effective than criminal laws
Irrelevant, as the paragraph on Britain does not mention economic penalties.
(E) demonstrate the need to lower BAC levels in states that have laws against drunk driving
While the author contends that current laws and limits are not effective enough, that cannot be taken to mean that he believes removing these restrictions would be more effective.

6. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the author’s statement that the effectiveness of proposals to stop the intoxicated driver depends, in part, on the extent to which the high-BAC driver can control his intake?

(A) Even if the heavy drinker cannot control his intake, criminal laws against driving while intoxicated can deter him from driving while intoxicated.
The given statement implies that high-BAC drivers are not able to control their decision making after consuming too much alcohol. If answer choice (A) is true, then the author's claim is defeated. The highly intoxicated driver will still eschew driving in order to avoid criminal penalties.
(B) Rehabilitation programs aimed at drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated have not significantly reduced traffic fatalities.
This only speaks to the effectiveness of one method of prevention, whereas the author's statement encompasses all proposals.
(C) Many traffic fatalities are caused by factors unrelated to excessive alcohol consumption on the part of the driver.
This is a non sequitur. Any point of discussion should only involve alcohol-related crashes.
(D) Even though severe penalties may not deter intoxicated drivers, these laws will punish them for the harm they cause if they drive while intoxicated.
The author's point is that, no matter the method, laws must be written such that they prevent drinkers from getting behind the wheel. Answer choice (D), even if true, could never weaken the author's claim.
(E) Some sort of therapy may be effective in helping problem drinkers to control their intake of alcohol, thereby keeping them off the road.
This answer choice would actually provide limited support for the author's stance.

In my opinion , here are the right answers .

1 : Option D
2 : Option B
3 : Option E
4 : Option D
5 : Option C
6 : Option E(it being the judgemental by ruling out rest of the unwanted options)

So My Answers are:
1. D
2. B
3. A
4. B
5. B
6. C

I am pretty sure of the answers, but I am not that good with RC's Right now and I am not in the position to give the reasoning( Don't know whether it would be correct or not). So, For right now I am Keeping the explanation, and once the answers are out I ll surely give my approach if any one requires

1 B
2 B
3 E
4 A
5 C
6 C

1. The author is primarily concerned with

(A) interpreting the results of surveys on traffic fatalities - out of scope
(B) reviewing the effectiveness of attempts to curb drunk driving - correct, author has shared various methods and their effectiveness
(C) suggesting reasons for the prevalence of drunk driving in the United States - not true, even Britain was discussed, US was taken as an example
(D) analyzing the causes of the large number of annual traffic fatalities - no analysis on causes is done
(E) making an international comparison of experience with drunk driving - no such comparison


2. It can be inferred that the 1967 Road Safety Act in Britain

(A) changed an existing law to lower the BAC level that defined driving while intoxicated- not true
(B) made it illegal to drive while intoxicated - correct, it is given in passage
(C) increased the number of drunk driving arrests - not given specific to this law
(D) placed a tax on the sale of alcoholic drinks - not true
(E) required drivers convicted under the law to undergo rehabilitation therapy - not given


3. The author implies that a BAC of 0.1 percent

(A) is unreasonably high as a definition of intoxication for purposes of driving
(B) penalizes the moderate drinker while allowing the heavy drinker to consume without limit
(C) will operate as an effective deterrent to over 90 percent of the people who might drink and drive
(D) is well below the BAC of most drivers who are involved in fatal collisions
(E) proves that a driver has consumed five ounces of 80 proof spirits over a short time - CORRECT


4. With which of the following statements about making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense versus increasing taxes on alcohol consumption would the author most likely agree?

(A) Making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense is preferable to increased taxes on alcohol because the former is aimed only at those who abuse alcohol by driving while intoxicated. - correct, GIVEN IN Passage
(B) Increased taxation on alcohol consumption is likely to be more effective in reducing traffic fatalities because taxation covers all consumers and not just those who drive.
(C) Increased taxation on alcohol will constitute less of an interference with personal liberty because of the necessity of blood alcohol tests to determine BAC’s in drivers suspected of intoxication.
(D) Since neither increased taxation nor enforcement of criminal laws against drunk drivers is likely to have any significant impact, neither measure is warranted.
(E) Because arrests of intoxicated drivers have proved to be expensive and administratively cumbersome, increased taxation on alcohol is the most promising means of reducing traffic fatalities.


5. The author cites the British example in order to

(A) show that the problem of drunk driving is worse in Britain than in the U.S.
(B) prove that stricter enforcement of laws against intoxicated drivers would reduce traffic deaths
(C) prove that a slight increase in the number of arrests of intoxicated drivers will not deter drunk driving - CORRECT GIVEN
(D) suggest that taxation of alcohol consumption may be more effective than criminal laws
(E) demonstrate the need to lower BAC levels in states that have laws against drunk driving


6. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the author’s statement that the effectiveness of proposals to stop the intoxicated driver depends, in part, on the extent to which the high-BAC driver can control his intake?

(A) Even if the heavy drinker cannot control his intake, criminal laws against driving while intoxicated can deter him from driving while intoxicated.
(B) Rehabilitation programs aimed at drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated have not significantly reduced traffic fatalities.
(C) Many traffic fatalities are caused by factors unrelated to excessive alcohol consumption on the part of the driver. - CORRECT.
If you negate this statement, argument falls apart
(D) Even though severe penalties may not deter intoxicated drivers, these laws will punish them for the harm they cause if they drive while intoxicated.
(E) Some sort of therapy may be effective in helping problem drinkers to control their intake of alcohol, thereby keeping them off the road.
_________________

Paragraph | Tone | Summary :-

1 | = | MV acc. in US; provide stats about intoxication-related acc.
2 | +=| No. of approaches - one of it is taxation
3 | +=| Drink & Drive another app. only for intox.; Britain's RSA - 1967 helped initially event effec. declined.
4 | +-=| Doubt on effectiveness of 2 app.; other programs as rehabs haven't worked; Conclusion - Need to deal with intox. to reduce automotive related acc.

1. The author is primarily concerned with

(A) interpreting the results of surveys on traffic fatalities - there are no such surveys ; out of scope
(B) reviewing the effectiveness of attempts to curb drunk driving - correct
(C) suggesting reasons for the prevalence of drunk driving in the United States - out of scope
(D) analyzing the causes of the large number of annual traffic fatalities - the passage is talking about more
(E) making an international comparison of experience with drunk driving - question is asking about the whole passage


2. It can be inferred that the 1967 Road Safety Act in Britain

(A) changed an existing law to lower the BAC level that defined driving while intoxicated - out of scope
(B) made it illegal to drive while intoxicated - correct
(C) increased the number of drunk driving arrests - out of scope
(D) placed a tax on the sale of alcoholic drinks - out of scope
(E) required drivers convicted under the law to undergo rehabilitation therapy - out of scope


3. The author implies that a BAC of 0.1 percent

(A) is unreasonably high as a definition of intoxication for purposes of driving - correct
(B) penalizes the moderate drinker while allowing the heavy drinker to consume without limit - no such comparison
(C) will operate as an effective deterrent to over 90 percent of the people who might drink and drive - out os scope
(D) is well below the BAC of most drivers who are involved in fatal collisions -reversal of language
(E) proves that a driver has consumed five ounces of 80 proof spirits over a short time - recycled language


4. With which of the following statements about making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense versus increasing taxes on alcohol consumption would the author most likely agree?

(A) Making driving while intoxicated a criminal offense is preferable to increased taxes on alcohol because the former is aimed only at those who abuse alcohol by driving while intoxicated. - correct
(B) Increased taxation on alcohol consumption is likely to be more effective in reducing traffic fatalities because taxation covers all consumers and not just those who drive.
(C) Increased taxation on alcohol will constitute less of an interference with personal liberty because of the necessity of blood alcohol tests to determine BAC’s in drivers suspected of intoxication.
(D) Since neither increased taxation nor enforcement of criminal laws against drunk drivers is likely to have any significant impact, neither measure is warranted.
(E) Because arrests of intoxicated drivers have proved to be expensive and administratively cumbersome, increased taxation on alcohol is the most promising means of reducing traffic fatalities.


5. The author cites the British example in order to

(A) show that the problem of drunk driving is worse in Britain than in the U.S.
(B) prove that stricter enforcement of laws against intoxicated drivers would reduce traffic deaths
(C) prove that a slight increase in the number of arrests of intoxicated drivers will not deter drunk driving - correct
(D) suggest that taxation of alcohol consumption may be more effective than criminal laws
(E) demonstrate the need to lower BAC levels in states that have laws against drunk driving


6. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the author’s statement that the effectiveness of proposals to stop the intoxicated driver depends, in part, on the extent to which the high-BAC driver can control his intake?

(A) Even if the heavy drinker cannot control his intake, criminal laws against driving while intoxicated can deter him from driving while intoxicated. - correct
(B) Rehabilitation programs aimed at drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated have not significantly reduced traffic fatalities. - out of scope
(C) Many traffic fatalities are caused by factors unrelated to excessive alcohol consumption on the part of the driver. - out of scope
(D) Even though severe penalties may not deter intoxicated drivers, these laws will punish them for the harm they cause if they drive while intoxicated. - out of scope
(E) Some sort of therapy may be effective in helping problem drinkers to control their intake of alcohol, thereby keeping them off the road. - out of scope

Hello all Thank you for your participation i have revealed OAs of this passage so you can tally your answers.

OAs are

1. B
2. B
3. A
4. A
5. C
6. A

This is a combine reply to all of you.

mohagar

OAs are now posted you got only first one correct and rest are wrong. Good luck for your GMAT Prep.

BlueBook

Thank you for your explanations you are the first person to post explanations. You got three correct and three incorrect answers.

jvdunn26

jvdunn26 I like your way of formatting your reply, please keep the format for the next RC if you post any more explanations. You also got three correct and three incorrect answers.

zs2

I would suggest you to follow jvdunn26 for the format if possible, please elaborate your reasoning a little more. You too got 50/50. Try again and this is how we all are learning on this forum.

shameekv1989

The different point of your reasoning was you have made a summary first and this a good strategy, Your result is better than others you got only two incorrect answers.

monikadkv

Need to improve as you got only 2 answers correct.

Thanks you all of you, so all of you can now judge your reasoning and can edit your answers if you want to. I will post OEs shortly. If any of you have any questions/concern let me know.

Though it was not a perfect one but explanations by shameekv1989 is on the top at the moment.

Regards
Sajjad

GOT 4 OUT OF 6 CORRECT. Thanks for the feedback will try to elaborate more next time.
_________________

1. P1: BAC effect on driving accidents, P2: reducing injuries while intoxicated, P3: examples to curb drunk driving, P4: possible alternatives explained

Ans: B

2. "At this level there is little evidence that laws serve as deterrents to driving while intoxicated. In Britain, motor vehicle fatalities fell 25 percent immediately following implementation of the Road Safety Act in 1967." --> fact about the law's impact on drunk driving proceeds by an example where it didn't work

Ans: B

3. "Although less than 1 percent of drivers with BAC’s of 0.1 percent or more are involved in fatal crashes, the probability of their involvement is 27 times higher than for those without alcohol in their blood."

Ans: A

4. "it has been suggested that higher taxes on alcohol would reduce both. While the heaviest drinkers would be taxed the most, anyone who drinks at all would be penalized by this approach. To make drinking and driving a criminal offense is an approach directed only at intoxicated drivers."

Ans: A

5. "...that even with increased arrests, there are about 700 violations for every arrest. At this level there is little evidence that laws serve as deterrents to driving while intoxicated. In Britain,..."

Small inference here (as mentioned earlier): he states a fact and supports it by giving us an example
Ans: C

6. Author's statement: "In part, the answer depends on the extent to which those with high BAC’s involved in crashes are capable of controlling their intake in response to economic or penal threat."

We need something that rules otut this option - perhaps making it less important.

A does a good job: even if the mentioned solution doesn't work, there is another one that will work. Therefore, the mentioned solution is not necessary and we have undermined it.


Ans: A

Can you review #2? I don't think you can infer that the 1967 law made drinking and driving illegal, and factually it did not. Drinking and driving was already illegal as of 1960. I think you could infer that increased it the number of arrests.

(B) made it illegal to drive while intoxicated - correct
(C) increased the number of drunk driving arrests - out of scope

Road Traffic Act 1960
(1)A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs shall be liable—
(a)on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both a fine and such imprisonment;
(b)on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding four months or to both such fine and such imprisonment, or in the case of a second or subsequent conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/16/section/6/enacted

Can you post the explanation?

Official explanations are posted please visit below link

https://gmatclub.com/forum/there-is-ext ... l#p2487073

Thanks

Experts, please explain Q6 in detail along with example? I found option A is strengthening and I choose C.

You can read OE here in the link below

https://gmatclub.com/forum/there-is-ext ... l#p2487073

Regards

Hi everyone,
Got 3/6 correct in 14 minutes, including 5:50 minutes to read and 8:10 minutes to answer the questions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


P1

In this paragraph the author describes the statistics of those involved in fatal accidents and how alcohol consumption and alcohol levels affect such statistic.

Purpose: to explain the statistics related to fatal accidents and how alcohol consumption affects such statistics.


P2

Here the author explains that there are several ways of tackling the problem and that one of them is based on the correlation according to which excessive consumption is linked to total consumption. So the solution seems to be more taxes on alcohol.

Purpose: Present a possible solution to the problem of accident due to alcohol consumption.




P3

In this paragraph the author suggests a more direct way to address the problem, that is making drinking and driving a criminal offense. However, the author recognizes that the effectiveness is very limited. Then the author describes what happened in England after the implementation of an act. Such act reduced the number of fatalities.

Purpose: to present another and more direct way to prevent fatalities due to drinking and driving.



P4

In the last paragraph the author claims that the approaches above mentioned are not really effective so far. The author then introduces another approach, that is therapy, concluding that is not super effective either.

Purpose: To claim that so far the mentioned methodologies to reduce fatalities due to drinking and driving have not been effective.




Main point

To present several approaches to a problem, claiming that so far they have not been significantly effective to the solution of it.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's a great day to be alive!