It is currently 22 Nov 2017, 02:56

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
AGSM Thread Master
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 269 [1], given: 31

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.3
GMAT ToolKit User
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2012, 11:17
1
This post received
KUDOS
18
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

29% (01:11) correct 71% (01:25) wrong based on 670 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime.
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol.
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime.
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable.
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by WaterFlowsUp on 13 Jan 2014, 03:10, edited 1 time in total.
OA added

Kudos [?]: 269 [1], given: 31

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1216

Kudos [?]: 1692 [1], given: 116

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Premium Member
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2012, 12:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
Vineetk wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime.
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol.
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime.
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable.
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A



I'm not so sure of the OA. It is just repeating what is already given in the argument. I think C would make a better answer choice.
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Kudos [?]: 1692 [1], given: 116

1 KUDOS received
AGSM Thread Master
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 269 [1], given: 31

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.3
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2012, 21:53
1
This post received
KUDOS
MacFauz wrote:
Vineetk wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime.
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol.
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime.
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable.
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A



I'm not so sure of the OA. It is just repeating what is already given in the argument. I think C would make a better answer choice.


Even I picked C. But the explanation for C not being the right answer is that it fails to provide any reason why regulation of marijuana does not make sense.. A is correct answer because argument states that regulation of alcohol makes no sense and Choice A provides the same effect as marijuana.

Kudos [?]: 269 [1], given: 31

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [1], given: 63

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2012, 22:41
1
This post received
KUDOS
OA is right. The problem here is there is an inconsistent law on one side we have

Marijuana >> is related to crime

Alcohol >>> could lead to crime but no law for this ( if you add A to this then it fills a gap)

The main question to answer is, why the law on marijuana should be removed and why this law doesn't make sense? only A does that, cos its providing an additional assumption, which supports and answers the question. (if you go by their framework its method number 2 to strengthen an argument)
I would also think of this question as, it strengthens one side and weakens the other...

If you look carefully at C, it doesn't answer the question.

Last edited by nelz007 on 05 Dec 2012, 05:13, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 413 [1], given: 63

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 333

Kudos [?]: 430 [0], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Dec 2012, 04:37
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi,

I agree with Nelz.

'C' provides a DIFFERENT reason for not banning Cannabis. So whilst it would provide support to an overall movement to not ban Cannabis, it says nothing about the actual argument being made in the question that both Alcohol and Cannabis have the same effects so should be treated the same.

A tricky one...

James
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0



... and more

Kudos [?]: 430 [0], given: 4

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 183

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2012, 20:55
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime

(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol

(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime

(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable

(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it


OA after discussion..
_________________

If u can't jump the 700 wall , drill a big hole and cross it .. I can and I WILL DO IT ...need some encouragement and inspirations from U ALL


Last edited by BukrsGmat on 08 Dec 2012, 21:19, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2012, 22:44
sujit2k7 wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime

(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol

(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime

(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable

(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it


OA after discussion..


Hi sujit2k7.. Yes OA is very debatable, none seems OK to me... My reasons are...

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime
This is already stated in the premise " But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence "

(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol
This cannot be the answer, as we are discussing about the ill effect. the argument says : if alcohol can lead to abuse and violence and still be in the market, then marijuana also can also be. So benefits are out of scope, IMO.

(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime
This also we know from the argument, 1st and 2nd line of the argument says this...

(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable
The argument talks about whether the Marijuana regulation should be repealed or not, ability to enforce it is a subject of different argument.

(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it
The argument already says "alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands"

If I were forced to pick one then I would go with A,which seems closest to the argument.

Cheers

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Never ever give up on yourself.Period.
Joined: 23 Aug 2012
Posts: 151

Kudos [?]: 392 [0], given: 35

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Human Resources
GMAT 1: 570 Q47 V21
GMAT 2: 690 Q50 V33
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2012, 23:18
IMO B has to be the answer.
Cause author talks about violence caused by both Alcohol and Marijuana..only if we weigh benefits of both these things, we can decide whether to regulate or not. As both causes violence , marijuana has more benefits (B) and alcohol is not banned, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed(conclusion).
_________________

Don't give up on yourself ever. Period.
Beat it, no one wants to be defeated (My journey from 570 to 690) : http://gmatclub.com/forum/beat-it-no-one-wants-to-be-defeated-journey-570-to-149968.html

Kudos [?]: 392 [0], given: 35

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Dec 2012, 04:18
plumber250 wrote:
Hi,

I agree with Nelz.

'C' provides a DIFFERENT reason for not banning Cannabis. So whilst it would provide support to an overall movement to not ban Cannabis, it says nothing about the actual argument being made in the question that both Alcohol and Cannabis have the same effects so should be treated the same.

A tricky one...

James


Hello James,

One doubt, Isnt A a restatement of a premise? the 3 line in the argument says " But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands" so we already know OH indirectly causes crimes, then how can Option A strengthen the Argument?

Cheers

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 183

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2012, 21:18
Confused between C and A. Need help
_________________

If u can't jump the 700 wall , drill a big hole and cross it .. I can and I WILL DO IT ...need some encouragement and inspirations from U ALL

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2012, 23:35
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime

The argument says it can lead to this statement fills a gap.The problem here is the inconsistency treatment, you have a set of rules for cannabis and no rules for the other side. The question is why this law doesn't make sense and should be repealed? only when we justify something about alcohol, it fills a gap.

(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime

There are publications present which say that marijuana causes crime. This statement is also challenging a fact highlighted in red. it does provide support for marijuana but doesn't answer the challenge question, these question types are tricky "Most support" there can be a weak strengthener and a stronger one...

PS: There is a thread already present on this question
the-purpose-of-regulation-of-cannabis-143599.html

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 183

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Dec 2012, 00:37
nelz007 wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime

The argument says it can lead to this statement fills a gap.The problem here is the inconsistency treatment, you have a set of rules for cannabis and no rules for the other side. The question is why this law doesn't make sense and should be repealed? only when we justify something about alcohol, it fills a gap.

(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime

There are publications present which say that marijuana causes crime. This statement is also challenging a fact highlighted in red. it does provide support for marijuana but doesn't answer the challenge question, these question types are tricky "Most support" there can be a weak strengthener and a stronger one...

PS: There is a thread already present on this question
the-purpose-of-regulation-of-cannabis-143599.html


Thnkx @nelz007 for your reply.... Sry I do not fully agree with you..
C) As per the publications they tried to relate marijuana with crime. But no where it is written that marijuana causes crime..
Now as per my understanding A) tells Alcohol causes crime but it does not mean marijuana does not cause the crime(as previous publications always tried to prove)..so to attack the conclusion that regulation need to be repealed, I have to give a reason the regulation was not fruitful..... Please correct my understanding
_________________

If u can't jump the 700 wall , drill a big hole and cross it .. I can and I WILL DO IT ...need some encouragement and inspirations from U ALL

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 103

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Dec 2012, 01:43
sujit2k7 wrote:

Thnkx @nelz007 for your reply.... Sry I do not fully agree with you..
C) As per the publications they tried to relate marijuana with crime. But no where it is written that marijuana causes crime..
Now as per my understanding A) tells Alcohol causes crime but it does not mean marijuana does not cause the crime(as previous publications always tried to prove)..so to attack the conclusion that regulation need to be repealed, I have to give a reason the regulation was not fruitful..... Please correct my understanding


The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes.Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime]. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous.[b] Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

it is mentioned over there (red) that it was done to reduce crime. sry, highlighted the wrong part earlier.

The situation here is there is a regulation so some sort of enforcement on cannabis and this regulation doesn't make sense, the main premise for this (blue). Now alcohol can lead to crime no proof yet, we need something that would justify that alcohol does lead to crime. A does exactly that and supports the argument saying there is an inconsistent treatment.

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

1 KUDOS received
SVP
SVP
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2138

Kudos [?]: 1639 [1], given: 8

Location: New York, NY
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2012, 10:42
1
This post received
KUDOS
nelz007 - great to see a GMATPill student explain questions to others - that's a sign of true understanding. Keep it up! :-D

Someone suggested that (A) merely repeats what is said in the passage. Well, there is a slight (and important) difference.

Here's the difference:

The passage merely SUGGESTS that alcohol CAN lead to abuse:

"But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands"

Answer choice (A) actually tells you to consider the possibility that that statement is ACTUALLY true.

So the difference is the passage only suggested that it COULD be true. Whereas (A) suggested that it ACTUALLY IS true.

Remember the question: "Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?"

Clearly, we don't know that (A) is true based on the passage. But we are asked to consider - WHAT IF (A) were ACTUALLY true.

Hope that helps.

Here's the original question along with a video explanation: http://www.gmatpill.com/gmat-practice-t ... stion/1314

Kudos [?]: 1639 [1], given: 8

2 KUDOS received
SVP
SVP
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2138

Kudos [?]: 1639 [2], given: 8

Location: New York, NY
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2012, 10:48
2
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Jp27 wrote:
plumber250 wrote:
Hi,

I agree with Nelz.

'C' provides a DIFFERENT reason for not banning Cannabis. So whilst it would provide support to an overall movement to not ban Cannabis, it says nothing about the actual argument being made in the question that both Alcohol and Cannabis have the same effects so should be treated the same.

A tricky one...

James


Hello James,

One doubt, Isnt A a restatement of a premise? the 3 line in the argument says " But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands" so we already know OH indirectly causes crimes, then how can Option A strengthen the Argument?

Cheers



Hi Jp27,

Here's the difference:

The passage merely SUGGESTS that alcohol CAN lead to abuse:

"But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands"

Answer choice (A) actually tells you to consider the possibility that that statement is ACTUALLY true.

So the difference is the passage only suggested that it COULD be true. Whereas (A) suggested that it ACTUALLY IS true.

Remember the question: "Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?"

Clearly, we don't know that (A) is true based on the passage. But we are asked to consider - WHAT IF (A) were ACTUALLY true.

If we knew for a fact that alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime - then this supporting point is no longer just a guess. There is actual backing to this statement. That's one way to SUPPORT the argument above.

Hope that helps.

Here's the original question along with a video explanation: http://www.gmatpill.com/gmat-practice-t ... stion/1314

Kudos [?]: 1639 [2], given: 8

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2012, 12:27
gmatpill wrote:
Jp27 wrote:
plumber250 wrote:
Hi,

I agree with Nelz.

'C' provides a DIFFERENT reason for not banning Cannabis. So whilst it would provide support to an overall movement to not ban Cannabis, it says nothing about the actual argument being made in the question that both Alcohol and Cannabis have the same effects so should be treated the same.

A tricky one...

James


Hello James,

One doubt, Isnt A a restatement of a premise? the 3 line in the argument says " But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands" so we already know OH indirectly causes crimes, then how can Option A strengthen the Argument?

Cheers



Hi Jp27,

Here's the difference:

The passage merely SUGGESTS that alcohol CAN lead to abuse:

"But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands"

Answer choice (A) actually tells you to consider the possibility that that statement is ACTUALLY true.

So the difference is the passage only suggested that it COULD be true. Whereas (A) suggested that it ACTUALLY IS true.

Remember the question: "Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?"

Clearly, we don't know that (A) is true based on the passage. But we are asked to consider - WHAT IF (A) were ACTUALLY true.

If we knew for a fact that alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime - then this supporting point is no longer just a guess. There is actual backing to this statement. That's one way to SUPPORT the argument above.

Hope that helps.

Here's the original question along with a video explanation: http://www.gmatpill.com/gmat-practice-t ... stion/1314


yes that helps. Very subtle diff, A makes sense now. Good Q.

Cheers

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 32

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Dec 2012, 21:16
Thanks Zeke! with the video explanation open to public it should be crystal clear if any doubts still remain.

gmatpill wrote:
Here's the original question along with a video explanation: http://www.gmatpill.com/gmat-practice-t ... stion/1314

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2012
Posts: 114

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 57

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2013, 11:48
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime - The argument is about Marijuana
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol - We are not comparing benefits of A vs B
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime - Correct
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable - This is out of context
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it - Out of context

The argument talks about a section of the society opposing Marijuana. The support for this argument comes from how Alcohol can also lead to problems if it is in wrong hands. I guess the answer would be something which tells us that Marijuana by itself cannot cause any change in behavior, especially making one inclined towards violence. Hence C.

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 57

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Got Bling! Joined Phd Finance at IIML
Affiliations: IIMB, advantages.us, IIML
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: iim-bangalore - Class of 1994
GMAT 1: 750 Q59 V43
GPA: 3.12
WE: Research (Investment Banking)
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jul 2013, 23:59
Vineetk wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime.
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol.
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime.
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable.
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A



Straigthtforward
The answer is C

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Got Bling! Joined Phd Finance at IIML
Affiliations: IIMB, advantages.us, IIML
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: iim-bangalore - Class of 1994
GMAT 1: 750 Q59 V43
GPA: 3.12
WE: Research (Investment Banking)
Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jul 2013, 00:00
Vineetk wrote:
The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to restrict the growth in the number of people consuming a "habit-forming drug" and to lower the incidence of violent crimes. Several large newspaper publications and organizations ran campaigns in the 1930s that demonized marijuana and emphasized a connection between marijuana and crime. But even alcohol can lead to abuse and violence if in the wrong hands; yet everyone today would agree that prohibiting alcohol, a product so ingrained in people's social life today, would be preposterous. Hence, regulation of marijuana makes no sense and should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the argument above?

(A) Alcohol has been known to cause violence and crime.
(B) The benefits of marijuana outweigh those of alcohol.
(C) The regulation of marijuana does not deter the sort of activity known to result in violent crime.
(D) The regulation of marijuana is not enforceable.
(E) Alcohol is readily available to anyone who wants to obtain it.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
A



Straigthtforward
The answer is C

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Re: The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to   [#permalink] 09 Jul 2013, 00:00

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 30 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

The purpose of regulation of Cannabis (marijuana) was to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.