As per my understanding author is saying that:

The National Rifle Association has done a good job of persuading its members that registration is the first step toward confiscation of all weapons. - Doing this is Nonsense.

AS

Americans register, among other things, their cars, their dogs, and the births of their children.

But, confiscation of cars, cocker spaniels, and infants has never been a (great problem) /problem/point of dispute /contention/issue. - So, registration of firearm should not be considered as the first step toward the confiscation of all weapons

Which one of the following best describes the major flaw in the author’s reasoning?

(A) He ignores the danger to the general public posed by unregulated weapons sales. - Out of context

(B) He ignores the potential for bureaucratic mismanagement of any such registration effort. - Argument is related to confiscation

(C) He ignores the existence of dog catchers, tow trucks, and child-welfare officers. - irrelevant

(D) He ignores the differences between firearms and other items that make the former a more likely target for confiscation.
- CORRECT
- Author is comparing the registration of firearm with other things like car

(E) He ignores the expertise of the members of the National Rifle Association.
- Irrelevant

We favor the registration of all firearms, regardless of type. The National Rifle Association has done a good job of persuading its members that registration is the first step toward confiscation of all weapons. Nonsense. Americans register, among other things, their cars, their dogs, and the births of their children. Yet, confiscation of cars, cocker spaniels, and infants has never been a great problem.

Which one of the following best describes the major flaw in the author’s reasoning?


(A) He ignores the danger to the general public posed by unregulated weapons sales. Incorrect

argument is concern for registration

(B) He ignores the potential for bureaucratic mismanagement of any such registration effort. Incorrect

weakens authors conclusion

(C) He ignores the existence of dog catchers, tow trucks, and child-welfare officers. Incorrect

new info wanted, this choice not weakens argument

(D) He ignores the differences between firearms and other items that make the former a more likely target for confiscation. Incorrect

changes topics, firearm registration is main point

(E) He ignores the expertise of the members of the National Rifle Association. Irrelevant

Pre-thinking- Author is talking about registration of firearms. The flaw would be how author compared different things for confiscation.

Which one of the following best describes the major flaw in the author’s reasoning?

(A) He ignores the danger to the general public posed by unregulated weapons sales. -> Incorrect. How it is flaw for firearm registration.

(B) He ignores the potential for bureaucratic mismanagement of any such registration effort. -> Incorrect.

(C) He ignores the existence of dog catchers, tow trucks, and child-welfare officers. -> Incorrect. Out of context.

(D) He ignores the differences between firearms and other items that make the former a more likely target for confiscation. -> Correct.

(E) He ignores the expertise of the members of the National Rifle Association. -> Incorrect. Out of context.

So, I think D.

Official Explanation:

D

Step 1: Identify the Question Type

“Major flaw” in the question stem indicates that we’re looking at a Flaw question.

Step 2: Untangle the Stimulus

This author concludes that contrary to what the NRA argues, confiscation of registered firearms is not likely to be a problem. The author supports this conclusion by drawing an analogy: other items that are registered (e.g., cars, dogs, children) are not likely to be confiscated, so the same can be said for firearms.

Step 3: Predict the Answer

Flaws in arguments almost always result from the author making faulty assumptions. So what’s the assumption? In an argument that proceeds by analogy, as this one does, the assumption is always that the two things being compared are sufficiently alike. That is what the author is assuming. That assumption is probably not valid, since guns are very different from cars, dogs, and babies when it comes to the likelihood of confiscation.

Step 4: Evaluate the Choices

And that’s exactly what (D) says. As for (A), unregulated weapons sales aren’t an issue in this argument, which simply attempts to prove that registration of weapons won’t lead to their confiscation. Similarly, how the registration effort proceeds, an issue introduced by (B), is not integral to the argument in any way. (C) focuses on dogs, cars, and children. Any observation about dogs, cars, and children is secondary to the major flaw, which is that the argument ignores whether they are relevant points of comparison to begin with. (E) introduces the irrelevant issue of expertise. There’s nothing here to demonstrate that the members of the NRA are experts on the issue of registration and confiscation of weapons. Choice (D) is the correct answer.
_________________