It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 12:07

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's

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

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 539

Kudos [?]: 602 [1], given: 2

The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2009, 16:10
1
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

64% (01:25) correct 36% (01:24) wrong based on 103 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's prescription for obtaining hypodermic needles is to lower the incidence of drug-related deaths, both accidental and intentional, involving hypodermic needles. But even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands; yet everyone would agree that imposing legal restrictions on obtaining knitting needles would be preposterous. Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

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

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury and death.

(B) The benefits of hypodermic needles outweigh those of knitting needles.

(C) The proposed law would not deter the sort of activity known to result in drug-related deaths.

(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.

(E) Knitting needles are not readily available to anybody who wants to obtain them.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by broall on 12 Sep 2017, 21:40, edited 1 time in total.
Reformatted question, OAs added

Kudos [?]: 602 [1], given: 2

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1881

Kudos [?]: 1408 [1], given: 1

Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2009, 22:00
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's prescription for obtaining hypodermic needles is to lower the incidence of drug-related deaths, both accidental and intentional, involving hypodermic needles. But even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands; yet everyone would agree that imposing legal restrictions on obtaining knitting needles would be preposterous. Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

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

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury
and death.
(B) The benefits of hypodermic needles outweigh those
of knitting needles.
(C) The proposed law would not deter the sort of activity
known to result in drug-related deaths.
(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
(E) Knitting needles are not readily available to anybody
who wants to obtain them.

A

1. the argument focuses on WHY the proposed law makes no sense and should not be enacted rather than compares the benifits of kinds of needles, so B is IRRELEVANT, B out

2. C very subtle, but C out. Although the law WOULD NOT deter many activities that result in deaths, C CANNOT suggest that the law WOULD deter knitting needles (which is assumed to be the cause of drug-related deaths).

3. The effectiveness of the law does not mean that the law making no sense, so D cannot help explain why the law should not be enacted. D out

4. E suggests that knitting needles available to amost every persons. That is, the proposed law must make sense. E weakens rather than strenthens the argument, E out

A is the best
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1408 [1], given: 1

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 276

Kudos [?]: 117 [1], given: 2

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 16:28
1
KUDOS
Wow, great question (and tricky) I actually went with D on this one.

The conclusion is this: Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

We need to strengthen the conclusion.

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury and death -
This doesn't explain why the law makes no sense.

(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
The assumption in the argument is that knitting needles are like hypodermic needles in that they are both readily available.

Thus, you can't ask doctors' for prescriptions because it's hard to enforce. You can't enforce knitting needles either. Therefore, the law makes no sense because both of these things can't be enforced.

In all honesty I think this is a really stupid question.

Kudos [?]: 117 [1], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 7 [1], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 18:20
1
KUDOS
Wow, great question (and tricky) I actually went with D on this one.

The conclusion is this: Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

We need to strengthen the conclusion.

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury and death -
This doesn't explain why the law makes no sense.

(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
The assumption in the argument is that knitting needles are like hypodermic needles in that they are both readily available.

Thus, you can't ask doctors' for prescriptions because it's hard to enforce. You can't enforce knitting needles either. Therefore, the law makes no sense because both of these things can't be enforced.

Completely agree! I went with D too. And my explanation was exactly the same.

Kudos [?]: 7 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 276

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 2

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2009, 16:22
Is it C?

Last edited by chicagocubsrule on 21 Jan 2009, 23:01, edited 2 times in total.

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 2

SVP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1534

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2009, 22:29
agree with A.

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 276

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 2

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2009, 23:01
What's the OA?

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 2

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 414

Kudos [?]: 461 [0], given: 14

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 00:07
I'll go with C

Kudos [?]: 461 [0], given: 14

Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 960

Kudos [?]: 295 [0], given: 5

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 15:36
Wow, great question (and tricky) I actually went with D on this one.

The conclusion is this: Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

We need to strengthen the conclusion.

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury and death -
This doesn't explain why the law makes no sense.

(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
The assumption in the argument is that knitting needles are like hypodermic needles in that they are both readily available.

Thus, you can't ask doctors' for prescriptions because it's hard to enforce. You can't enforce knitting needles either. Therefore, the law makes no sense because both of these things can't be enforced.

Kudos [?]: 295 [0], given: 5

Intern
Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 18:24
scthakur wrote:
agree with A.

A does nothing with hypodermic ones!

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 727

Kudos [?]: 845 [0], given: 99

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2009, 18:47
IMO C.. not sure why A is wrong though ..

Kudos [?]: 845 [0], given: 99

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2009, 04:07
It shld be C. If the law does nothing 2 stop wrong activities, then there is no use in implementing it. Hence C

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 539

Kudos [?]: 602 [0], given: 2

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2009, 09:29
OA A

Kudos [?]: 602 [0], given: 2

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2009, 09:50
A?????????????????How?
OA A

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 539

Kudos [?]: 602 [0], given: 2

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2009, 10:14
you need to support the argument and argument is "Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted"....to support this you have to show that Knitting needles are harmful as much as hypodermic needles....A shows it clearly....therefore A. make sense?
ritula wrote:
A?????????????????How?
OA A

Kudos [?]: 602 [0], given: 2

VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2009, 21:11
If knitting needles r as harmful,then this does not mean restictions shld nt be imposed on hypodermic.Althogh this may lead 2 additional restrcitions on knitting needles as well.
Somehow, im not coinvinced with the OA and OE. Can sum1 explain this?
you need to support the argument and argument is "Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted"....to support this you have to show that Knitting needles are harmful as much as hypodermic needles....A shows it clearly....therefore A. make sense?
ritula wrote:
A?????????????????How?
OA A

Kudos [?]: 530 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1402

Kudos [?]: 439 [0], given: 1

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2009, 11:38
I dont get it. How is A correct?

Proposed law makes no sense and it should not be enacted is the conclusion

proposed law's purpose is to stop accidental and intentional deaths caused by HN and not by KN. KN is used as an example to show that deaths can also be caused by them. pick the needle, which ever, death is a possibility. In essence needles are just the conduit and the root cause is some thing else.

So if proposed law does not deter the activity that is the root cause of deaths, there is no point in enacting the law.

i got C.

Kudos [?]: 439 [0], given: 1

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10106

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2014, 06:07
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 269

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 2405

GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V31
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 3: 610 Q47 V28
GMAT 4: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 5: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 6: 690 Q48 V35
GMAT 7: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT 8: 730 Q50 V39
Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2014, 06:11
This is from GMAT Pill, and the OA according to Zeke is A. However, I competely disagree, because A doesn't even affect the argument. I chose C, because it clearly shows that the law would not meet its goal of reducing the misuse of the needles.

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 2405

Intern
Joined: 23 Apr 2016
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 111

Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jul 2016, 09:57
I have been googling this question for while but have not come across any satisfactory explanation why A is the answer. My theory is that the argument employs analogy in its reasoning by comparing knitting needles to hypodermic ones. In order to strengthen the argument, we need to show that the knitting needles have something in common with hypodermic ones, thus making the analogy more likely to support the argument.

A) does just that by showing knitting needles are indeed lethal like hypodermic ones. The argument mentions that knitting needles can be lethal, but now we know they in fact are lethal.

Any CR guru wants to take a stab and tell me how right/wrong I am?

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 111

Re: The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's   [#permalink] 04 Jul 2016, 09:57

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 21 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's

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

 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®.