Opponents of the laws prohibiting nonprescription narcotic drugs argue

Question

Opponents of the laws prohibiting nonprescription narcotic drugs argue that in a free society, people have the right to take risks as long as the risks do not constitute a harm to others who have not elected to take such risks. These opponents conclude that it should be each person’s decision whether or not to use narcotic drugs.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?

A. Some narcotic drugs have been shown to have medicinal qualities.

B. There are laws that govern the use of prescription drugs.

C. Studies have shown that people who use nonprescription drugs are much more likely to perpetrate a violent crime when intoxicated than when sober.

D. People who use narcotic drugs are twice as likely to die of an overdose as of natural causes.

E. The rate of drug overdoses is higher in countries that do not have laws governing the use of narcotic drugs than in countries that do have such laws.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

MansikaVats · Answer

Well i think its option C becausw the opponents arguement lies on how as long as a person's actions are not affecting others that person should be free to do whatever he wants to in his live . But here this option shows us him taking these drugs can lead them into comitting crime which is offence against the whole state then it is going to weaken their arguement . 
Thankyou for your prompt attention . You are free to correct me if needed . Thanks

Dereno · Answer

There is a law which seeks to prohibit the use of nonprescription narcotic drugs. But, the opponents of this law, argue that in a free society, there exists free will and freedom of choice, without any restrictions. Until unless their freedom doesn’t hamper the freedom of others.

So, they conclude by saying, the usage of drugs should be the individual choices of the person using it.

We need to weaken this statement mentioned above.

A. Some narcotic drugs have been shown to have medicinal qualities.

The option speaks about some narcotic drugs, but the question in place is non prescription drugs. The statement might be true, when the quantity of consumption is defined. Non prescription narcotic drugs are not prescribed by the doctor for medicinal use, and it’s not available OTC ( over the counter). Hence, wrong as it doesn’t weaken the conclusion.

B. There are laws that govern the use of prescription drugs.

This is a factual statement. There might be laws which are in use, which might cover a list of drugs allowed to be prescribed. But, the question is speaking about non prescription narcotic drugs. Hence, wrong.

C. Studies have shown that people who use nonprescription drugs are much more likely to perpetrate a violent crime when intoxicated than when sober.

The options speaks about the exception clause - when freedom of choice, free will have hampered the freedom of another individual. Intoxication due to non prescription drugs have a higher likelihood of people indulging in violent crimes, which might eventually affect the freedom of the community in general. Hence, Correct.

D. People who use narcotic drugs are twice as likely to die of an overdose as of natural causes.

The question is not with respect to overdose deaths vs deaths due to natural cause. Hence, wrong.

E. The rate of drug overdoses is higher in countries that do not have laws governing the use of narcotic drugs than in countries that do have such laws.

The option speaks about drug overdoses and laws pertaining to it across two different countries. But, the question does not speak about overdoses, not about the countries laws which are in place. The main crux is the view point of opponents of the law, and their conclusion. We need to find a way to weaken their conclusion. This option doesn’t work for it. Hence, wrong.

Option C

Vibhatu · Answer

A. Some narcotic drugs have been shown to have medicinal qualities.

B. There are laws that govern the use of prescription drugs.

C. Studies have shown that people who use nonprescription drugs are much more likely to perpetrate a violent crime when intoxicated than when sober.

D. People who use narcotic drugs are twice as likely to die of an overdose as of natural causes.

E. The rate of drug overdoses is higher in countries that do not have laws governing the use of narcotic drugs than in countries that do have such laws.

arushi118 · Answer

The passage states that how in a free society (where you are allowed to take risks as long as they do not harm others) you should be allowed to take narcotic drugs without prescription. But if taking those drugs is actually harming others also - then this will weaken the conclusion - and this is exactly what C is doing - it shows how people who use nonprescription drugs commit violent crimes - thus harming others.
Hence C is correct.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation:

C

Step 1: Identify the Question Type

The phrase “weakens the conclusion” in the question stem announces that this is a Weaken question.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus

As in all argument-based questions, we need to find the conclusion and evidence. The conclusion is the last sentence: use of nonprescription narcotic drugs should be everyone’s personal decision. The evidence is that people have the right to take risks as long as taking those risks doesn’t hurt anyone besides themselves.

Step 3: Predict the Answer

In a Weaken question, the correct answer will challenge the argument’s central assumption. The opponents assume that nonprescription narcotics pose risks only to the people who use them. If narcotics could harm non-users, however, then narcotic use would not be a permissible risk; individuals would no longer have the right to use those drugs. Because this is a Weaken question, we’ll look for an answer choice that says that taking narcotics can in fact harm others besides the drug users themselves.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices

(C) does the job perfectly. If people are more likely to commit violent crimes while under the influence of drugs, then others are at risk from the drug use, and the conclusion that it is everyone’s personal right to choose whether to use drugs is greatly weakened. (C) is thus the correct answer. (A) is incorrect because it introduces the idea of medicinal qualities, which is outside the scope of the argument. The prescription drugs in (B) are likewise outside the scope of the argument, which is concerned only with nonprescription drugs. (D) has no bearing on the argument since it describes only a risk to the user of
the drug, rather than a risk to others. Finally, (E) is an irrelevant comparison between two different sets of countries. The laws of those countries have no bearing on the argument because rates of overdose only indicate personal risk, not risk to others.  Choice (C) is the correct answer.

Opponents of the laws prohibiting nonprescription narcotic drugs argue

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Opponents of the laws prohibiting nonprescription narcotic drugs argue

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards