Akela wrote:
The number of automobile thefts has declined steadily during the past five years, and it is more likely now than it was five years ago that someone who steals a car will be convicted of the crime.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the facts cited above?
(A) Although there are fewer car thieves now than there were five years ago, the proportion of thieves who tend to abandon cars before their owners notice that they have been stolen has also decreased.
(B) Car alarms are more common than they were five years ago, but their propensity to be triggered in the absence of any criminal activity has resulted in people generally ignoring them when they are triggered.
(C) An upsurge in home burglaries over the last five years has required police departments to divert limited resources to investigation of these cases.
(D) Because of the increasingly lucrative market for stolen automobile parts, many stolen cars are quickly disassembled and the parts are sold to various buyers across the country.
(E) There are more adolescent car thieves now than there were five years ago, and the sentences given to young criminals tend to be far more lenient than those given to adult criminals.
LSAT
Let's break down our passage:
Fact 1: the number of thefts has declined steadily (over past 5 years)
Fact 2: it is more likely that a theft today will end in a conviction (as opposed to 5 yrs ago)
As we don't have sufficient information to infer a possible explanation, we'll look to our answers.
(A) Although there are fewer car thieves now than there were five years ago, the proportion of thieves who tend to abandon cars before their owners notice that they have been stolen has also decreased.
This is a bit flimsy but could work - less thieves means less theft; thieves sticking with the car longer might result in more conviction due to a better police response. Let's check the other options.(B) Car alarms are more common than they were five years ago, but their propensity to be triggered in the absence of any criminal activity has resulted in people generally ignoring them when they are triggered.
If people ignore car alarms, there is no reason to expect either Fact 1 or Fact 2 to occur. No.(C) An upsurge in home burglaries over the last five years has required police departments to divert limited resources to investigation of these cases.
This makes Fact 1 and 2 less likely, not more likely. No.(D) Because of the increasingly lucrative market for stolen automobile parts, many stolen cars are quickly disassembled and the parts are sold to various buyers across the country.
Similarly to (C) this is the opposite of what we need. No.(E) There are more adolescent car thieves now than there were five years ago, and the sentences given to young criminals tend to be far more lenient than those given to adult criminals.
This could help explain Fact 2 as adolescent thieves might be less careful and are more easily convicted, but does not relate to Fact 1. No.(A) is the only possible option and is therefore our answer.
_________________
Sign up for 7-day free trial
I am a CR Expert - Ask Me ANYTHING about CR
I am a DS Expert - Ask Me ANYTHING about DS
Watch free GMAT tutorials in Math, Verbal, IR, and AWA.
GMAT test takers: Watch now the GMAC interview with the people who write the GMAT test!
We discussed the chances of improving a GMAT score; how important the first questions on the test are; what to do if you don’t have enough time to complete a whole section; and more.
You can watch all the action from the interview here.
close
52% (01:48) correct 
