BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Click It or Ticket� law

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 313
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 7:01 am
Thanked: 2 times

Click It or Ticket� law

by jain2016 » Mon Mar 28, 2016 9:10 am
Last January, in an attempt to lower the number of traffic fatalities, the state legislature passed its "Click It or Ticket" law. Under the new law, motorists can be pulled over and ticketed for not wearing their seat belts, even if an additional driving infraction has not been committed. Lawyers and citizens' groups are already protesting the law, saying it unfairly infringes on the rights of the state's drivers. Law enforcement groups counter these claims by stating that the new regulations will save countless additional lives.

Which of the following inferences is best supported by the passage above?

A) Prior to the "Click It or Ticket" law, motorists could not be stopped simply for not wearing a seat belt.

B) The "Click It or Ticket" law violates current search and seizure laws.

C) Laws similar to "Click It or Ticket" have effectively reduced traffic fatalities in a number of states.

D) The previous seatbelt laws were ineffective in saving lives.

E) Law enforcement groups, rather than citizens groups, should determine how to best ensure the safety of motorists.


OAA

Hi Experts ,

Please explain.

Many thanks in advance.

SJ
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Mon Mar 28, 2016 2:21 pm
This question is a little weak in that the OA does not have to be true given what is said in the passage.

Which of the following inferences is best supported by the passage above?

A) Prior to the "Click It or Ticket" law, motorists could not be stopped simply for not wearing a seat belt.

The passage says that "under the new law" motorists can be stopped even if an additional driving infraction has not been committed. From this I guess one is suppose to infer that prior to the passage of the new law motorists could not be stopped unless an additional infraction had been committed.

The truth is, however, that the prompt does not say anything that confirms that prior laws did not allow for stopping of motorists who had not committed infractions other than not wearing seatbelts. For all we know earlier laws also allowed for the stopping of motorists who had not committed infractions other than not wearing seatbelts. So the OA to this question would NOT be considered a logical inference on the actual GMAT.

In other words, while what A says is likely to be true, generally the correct answer to an official question will say something that MUST be true given what is said in the prompt.

B) The "Click It or Ticket" law violates current search and seizure laws.

While some argue that rights are violated by the law, search and seizure laws are not mentioned.

C) Laws similar to "Click It or Ticket" have effectively reduced traffic fatalities in a number of states.

Nothing in the passage suggests that other states even have such laws.

D) The previous seatbelt laws were ineffective in saving lives.

It may be the case the the previous seatbelt laws saved some lives even if the previous laws did not save as many lives as the new law is expected to save.

E) Law enforcement groups, rather than citizens groups, should determine how to best ensure the safety of motorists.

Two sides of the argument are presented without anything in the passage supporting the idea that law enforcement groups should determine how to be ensure safety.

So the best answer is A, although this question does not accurately represent how official inference questions work.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1