Street crime can be averted

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

Street crime can be averted

by BTGmoderatorDC » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:52 am
Street crime can be averted through regulations mandating the lighting of streetlights during daytime. As daytime visibility is worse in nations farther from the equator, so obviously such regulations would be more successful in averting crime there. Actually, the only nations that have adopted such regulations are farther from the equator than the continental United States.

Which of the following conclusions could be most properly drawn from the information given above?

(A) Bystanders in the continental United States who were near lit streetlights during the day would be just as likely to become victims of a crime as would bystanders who were not near lit streetlights.

(B) Inadequate daytime visibility is the single most important factor in street crime in numerous nations that are located farther from the equator than is the continental United States.

(C) In nations that have daytime streetlight regulations, the percentage of street crime that happens in the daytime is greater than in the continental United States.

(D) Nations that have daytime streetlight regulations probably have fewer incidents of street crime annually than do occur within the continental United States.

(E) Daytime streetlight regulations would probably do less to avert street crime in the continental United States than they do in the nations that have the regulations.

What is wrong with Option D? I am quite confused about it.

OA E

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:18 pm
Thanked: 180 times
Followed by:12 members

by EconomistGMATTutor » Thu Oct 19, 2017 6:21 am
The passage provides us with a bunch of evidence. The question asks us to draw a conclusion from that evidence. Inferences are unstated conclusions, statements that MUST be true from the evidence.

To start with the correct choice, E says that daytime streetlight regulations would probably do less to avert street crime in the continental United States than they do in the nations that have the regulations. We know this to be true because we are told that . . .

1) Regulations would be more successful in averting crime in nations farther from the equator AND
2) The only nations with regulations are farther from the equator than the US.

Put these two pieces of evidence together and it MUST be that the regulations wouldn't be as successful in the US.

You asked about Choice D. (Note: The writing of this choice is awkward, which might have confused you. You will not find this kind of writing on the actual test.) This choice compares the number of crimes in regulated nations to the number of crimes in the US. We can't conclude anything about this relationship, since the evidence is only about averting (preventing) crime. It might be that the regulated nations have much more crime, even though the regulations helped. Maybe the number of annual street crimes in a regulated nation dropped from 1 million to 1/2 million. That smaller number could be more than, the same as, or less than, the number of annual street crimes in the US. Who knows?

I'm available if you still have questions.
GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Image