Hi everyone,
Got 3/6 correct in 14 minutes, including 5:50 minutes to read and 8:10 minutes to answer the questions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------P1In 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.
P2Here 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.
P3In 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.
P4In 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 pointTo present several approaches to a problem, claiming that so far they have not been significantly effective to the solution of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. The author is primarily concerned with
Pre-thinking
Main point question
To present several approaches to a problem, claiming that so far they have not been significantly effective to the solution of it.
(A)
interpreting the results of surveys on traffic fatalities
(B) reviewing the effectiveness of attempts to curb drunk driving
(C)
suggesting reasons for the prevalence of drunk driving in the United States
(D)
analyzing the causes of the large number of annual traffic fatalities
(E)
making an international comparison of experience with drunk driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2. It can be inferred that the 1967 Road Safety Act in Britain
Pre-thinking
Inference question
We need to evaluate the options
(A) changed an
existing law to lower the BAC level that defined driving while intoxicated
We cannot infer that the law was already existing(B) made it illegal to drive while intoxicated
seems plausible(C) increased the number of drunk driving arrests
I would say opposite. As Britishers increasingly recognized that they could drink and not be stopped,
(D) placed a tax on the sale of alcoholic drinks
Cannot be inferred(E) required drivers convicted under the law to undergo rehabilitation therapy
Cannot be inferred --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. The author implies that a BAC of 0.1 percent
Pre-thinking
Assumption question
From P1: Almost one-half of fatally injured drivers have a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.1 percent or higher. For the average adult, over five ounces of 80 proof spirits would have to be consumed over a short period of time to attain these levels. A third of drivers who have been drinking, but fewer than 4 percent of all drivers, demonstrate these levels. 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.
We can see that a level of 0.1 or higher is extremely rare.
(A) is unreasonably high as a definition of intoxication for purposes of driving
in line with pre-thinking(B) penalizes the moderate drinker while allowing the heavy drinker to consume without limit
not a must be true statement(C) will operate as an effective deterrent to over 90 percent of the people who might drink and drive
not a must be true statement(D) is well below the BAC of most drivers who are involved in fatal collisions
Quite opposite. We know that drivers involved in fatalities and who had such levels of alcohol in their blood are a small group(E) proves that a driver has consumed five ounces of 80 proof spirits over a short time
Comic. One's alcohol level cannot prove what one has drunk. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
Pre-thinking
Inference question
So per the author, both are not significantly effective.
Plus, one difference between the two is that one is more direct than the other.
(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. We can infer this statement for 2 reasons: 1. the author says that this approach is more direct and 2. the author makes the example of England's adoption of such an approach and claims that such approach worked.
(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. Cannot be inferred
(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. personal liberty is quite outside the scope of this passage
(D) Since neither increased taxation nor enforcement of criminal laws against drunk drivers is likely to have any significant impact, neither measure is warranted. This option puts the 2 approaches in 50/50 scale of effectiveness. While it is true that both approaches are not super effective, the author makes the England example, claiming that such approach worked somehow. I would define this option a little bit too extreme.
(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. completely out of scope
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5. The author cites the British example in order to
Pre-thinking
Function question
Position strengthened:
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates, however, 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.
Portion of the passage that strengthens that position:
As Britishers increasingly recognized that they could drink and not be stopped, the effectiveness declined,
1: To show that drivers will keep drinking as soon as they see that they are not checked
(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
It is true that in England the number of fatalities was somehow reduced BUT we are asked to find the purpose of the England's example and not to find a detail. The england's example strengthens the claim above mentioned and not the effectiveness of the law.[color=#00aeef](C)prove that a slight increase in the number of arrests of intoxicated drivers will not deter drunk driving
In line with pre-thinking(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?
Pre-thinking
Weaken question
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.
Let's focus on what we are asked:
We need to weaken the above claim. The claim stresses a part: the extent to which a driver can control the intake.
So, if the driver can control the intake, the measures adopted will be more effective.
What if the driver cannot control the intake but the laws are quite convincing and he/she does not drive in the end?
(A) Even if the heavy drinker cannot control his intake, criminal laws against driving while intoxicated can deter him from driving while intoxicated.
This option weakens the claim for the above mentioned reasons(B) Rehabilitation programs aimed at drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated have not significantly reduced traffic fatalities.
irrelevant(C) Many traffic fatalities are caused by factors unrelated to excessive alcohol consumption on the part of the driver.
irrelevant(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.
irrelevant(E) Some sort of therapy may be effective in helping problem drinkers to control their intake of alcohol, thereby keeping them off the road.
irrelevant --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's a great day to be alive!