Bunuel
The restrictions on what one can carry inside an airplane are surely too severe. Airlines these days issue a long checklist of items that cannot be carried inside an aircraft making it cumbersome for the travelers to keep a track of all these items. In any case, barely two percent of travelers are ever caught with these restricted items, so it’s best if these restrictions are removed.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The restrictions themselves do not discourage people from carrying restricted items on to airplanes.
(B) The restrictions have been implemented all across the world.
(C) There is no scope for corrupt practices on the part of those enforcing these restrictions.
(D) There have been instances when an innocent traveler has been wrongly detained by over cautious airline personnel.
(E) Criminals are hardly likely to carry restricted items with them on an airline.
Official Explanation
Answer: A
The argument concludes that since only 2% of airline travelers are caught with restricted items, it doesn’t make sense to have these restrictions in the first place. The argument assumes that it is not the restrictions themselves that prevent the other 98% of people from carrying restricted items on to airplanes.
(A) The correct answer.
(B) This has no connection with the reasoning in the argument.
(C) Whether there is scope for corruption on the part of those enforcing these restrictions is outside the purview of the argument.
(D) This could be an example of a problem with having the restrictions but is definitely not an assumption in the argument.
(E) This could be because of the restrictions; if the restrictions were not there, the criminals would most likely carry such items with them on to airplanes.