GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 16 Oct 2019, 06:19

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58381
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 08:34
1
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

63% (01:41) correct 37% (01:39) wrong based on 138 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Competition Mode Question



While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

(A) Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes.

(B) A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications.

(C) Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights.

(D) In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes.

(E) In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons.

_________________
SVP
SVP
User avatar
P
Joined: 03 Jun 2019
Posts: 1688
Location: India
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 09:18
2
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes.

B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications.

C. Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights.

D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes.

E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons.


E is the correct answer since it fills the gap by providing a reason why electronics communication is comparable to homes rather than bodily persons with respect to search by law enforcement.

Other options A,B,C & D are irrelevant to the conclusion.

IMO E
_________________
"Success is not final; failure is not fatal: It is the courage to continue that counts."

Please provide kudos if you like my post. Kudos encourage active discussions.

My GMAT Resources: -

Efficient Learning
All you need to know about GMAT quant

Tele: +91-11-40396815
Mobile : +91-9910661622
E-mail : kinshook.chaturvedi@gmail.com
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 145
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
WE: Project Management (Manufacturing)
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 09:35
1
IMO-E

Premise: Nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public but our homes only if they have a signed warrant.
Conclusion: Our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

So a premise that can relate Electronic communication & home would justify why that can be searched only if signed warrant available.


A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes. ---Incorrect---- Argument not mention that because home is private so signed warrant required and so are our electronic communication.

B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications. ---Incorrect----This choice not relate electronic communication to home. Also purpose is immaterial here to compare.

C. Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights. ---Incorrect----Whether signed warrant will not lead to hasty search is doubtful.

D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes. ---Incorrect---- Just because its more trustworthy so it should be carried out post signed warrant actually weakens the conclusion. it should be other way out.

E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons. --Correct--- This provides a comparison between home and bodily person with respect to electronic communication & therefore conclusion holds good post this.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Status: Whatever it takes!
Joined: 10 Oct 2018
Posts: 383
GPA: 4
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 09:36
1
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

Let's jot down the points:
Premise: body search - just cause/lawful reason
Premise: home search - warrant
Premise: ?
Conclusion: telephone search - warrant

The missing premise can be - since home and telephone are related to an individual, signed warrant is mandatory, or any other reason to prove that home,phones and body check have something important similarity to make warrant necessary to examine them.

A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes. - A contender according to me. everything related to a person is private. From the premise, body,home and telephone access need prior permission.

B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications. totally out of scope

C.Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights. - In layman terms if you notice, every type of search is violation of basic human rights but nothing is mentioned about any violation of human rights. Reject the option.

D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes. Another strong contender but incorrect.

E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons. -> since electronic communications are more comparable to homes, both would require a legal signed warrant as both of them are way much of priority than bodily check, which only requires just cause. CORRECT!
_________________
Kudos OK Please!!

ALL ABOUT GMAT- \(https://exampal.com/gmat/blog/gmat-score-explained\)
Director
Director
avatar
P
Joined: 24 Nov 2016
Posts: 587
Location: United States
CAT Tests
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 12:54
Quote:
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes.
B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications.
C. Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights.
D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes.
E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons.


ARGUMENT
prem: law can do a body search in public if they have just cause;
prem: law can search our home if they have warrant;
conclusion: only if they have a warrant they can search our electronics.
asump: the criteria for searching electronics is more comparable to home than to body search (you have to link the warrant to electronics)

(A) this is a trap: we might assume this, but the stem never mentions it, out;
(B) irev;
(C) irev;
(D) irev;

Answer (E)
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Mar 2019
Posts: 160
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Aug 2019, 13:02
Premise is asking for a support to put electronic equipments at par with homes. If home require search warrant, we need to question why electronic equipment should also need. If and only if they hold same value to a person.

A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes.: Question doesn't give emphasis to what is more valueable for search, Incorrect. It can be 2nd best choice answer also. looks like trap

B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications. : Opposite , to what we are looking for

C. Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights. : No discussion of human rights in premise

D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes. : It can be but we need to prove why they need to have warrant to search home, only being trustworthy cannot be factor.

E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons. This option compares equipment to homes, what we are looking for

IMO :E
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58381
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Aug 2019, 07:08
Quote:
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

A. Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes.

B. A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications.

C. Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights.

D. In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes.

E. In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons.



Official Explanation



In our approach, we can see that this argument is perfect for term matching. You might immediately sense the mismatch of terms, or you might have recognized the argument as one of those pseudo-syllogistic arguments, which are ripe for term matching.

Image

Note that, even though we have list the conclusion on the right side in these term-matching tables, you may find it easier to identify the conclusion first and fill in those terms first, since the conclusion is identifiable by its opinion-charged language.

In this case, the prompt mentions "electronic communications" for the first time in the conclusion. The fact that the term doesn't show up in the evidence statements hints at a missing logical bridge--in this case, it must be between "electronic communications" and "homes." If those two things are equivalent in all ways relevant to the argument, then the conclusion is logically drawn.

Applying the filter: (A), (D), and (E) all show some promise. Choices (A) and (D) both generate new problems by introducing out-of-scope concepts, unmatched terms: "private" and "trustworthy." (E) is incredibly exact in equating "electronic communications" and "homes" for the purposes of the argument.

Logical proof: we can use the negation test. If (E) were false, then electronic communications would not be more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons. They could be more comparable to bodily persons, and then they would be searchable without a warrant, and the argument would fall apart. Hence the non-negated (E) is indeed a premise of the argument.

The correct answer is (E).

Attachment:
image018.jpg
image018.jpg [ 9.15 KiB | Viewed 616 times ]

_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Mar 2017
Posts: 15
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
WE: Engineering (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Sep 2019, 21:41
While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant. Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant.

The conclusion above would be more reasonably drawn if which of the following were inserted into the argument as an additional premise?

Indirectly the stem asks us to strengthen the argument by adding the premise

Breaking the argument

While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in public if they have just cause, they can search our homes only if they have a signed warrant.- A fact that states Law Enforcement EF can do a search for 2 causes. First, if they have a cause and second if they have a signed warrant.

Therefore, our nation's law enforcement should be able to search our electronic communications only if they have a signed warrant. - it is a conclusion of the author - about the third aspect Electronic communications

Here the author assumes the EC are as private as our home and LE should take a signed warrant to do the search.

We need something from the answer choice option that links privacy of the EC to the requirement of a signed warrant.



(A) Our electronic communications are at least as private as our homes. - An assumption made by author to make the conclusion. No additional info to support the conclusion or our assumption - INCORRECT

(B) A search of a bodily person in public is more likely to discover something worthwhile to law enforcement than a search of electronic communications. Not relevant, We are not concerned about what it will discover and how likely it is to discover something.- INCORRECT

(C) Hasty search of electronic communications, like that of homes, violates basic human rights. We are not concerned about any human right violations as per the asgument -INCORRECT

(D) In the experience of our nation's law enforcement, electronic communications are even more trustworthy sources of information than homes.- NOT RELEVANT - no question of trustworthiness here. Also, we are not concerned about the 'In the experience of our nation's law enforcement' - simple out of context

(E) In terms of the criteria used to justify a search by law enforcement, electronic communications are more nearly comparable to homes than to bodily persons.[/quote]
-CORRECT - it mentions why a signed warrant is needed to search EC and it relates its comparison explicitly to Homes over Bodily person

_________________
If you found my post useful,
KUDOS are much appreciated. Giving Kudos is a great way to thank and motivate contributors, without costing you anything.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 19 Nov 2017
Posts: 253
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V32
GPA: 4
Premium Member
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Sep 2019, 23:46
1
between A and E, E seems to be the stronger option as it has a stronger base.
Considering something is personal vs something that is written in the law about the same thing being personal.
Which one wins?
Something that is laid down in the foundation, of course.
_________________

Vaibhav



Sky is the limit. 800 is the limit.

~GMAC
GMAT Club Bot
Re: While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu   [#permalink] 06 Sep 2019, 23:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

While our nation's law enforcement can search our bodily persons in pu

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





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne