Critical Reasoning

Criminologist: Some legislators advocate mandating a sentence of life in prison for
anyone who, having twice served sentences for serious crimes, is subsequently convicted
of a third serious crime. These legislators argue that such a policy would reduce crime
dramatically, since it would take people with a proven tendency to commit crimes off
the streets permanently. What this reasoning overlooks, however, is that people old
enough to have served two prison sentences for serious crimes rarely commit more than
one subsequent crime. Filling our prisons with such individuals would have exactly
the opposite of the desired effect, since it would limit our ability to incarcerate younger
criminals, who commit a far greater proportion of serious crimes.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second
is a claim that has been advanced in support of that conclusion.
B. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second
is the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second is an objection that
has been raised against that conclusion.
D. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second is a prediction made
on the basis of that conclusion.
E. The first is a generalization about the likely effect of a policy under consideration
in the argument; the second points out a group of exceptional cases to which that
generalization does not apply.

i choose A

Is it just me or is there no bold face font visible in the Q posted here?

komal how can you see the bold part.

No sentence is bold here.

chaya009 wrote:komal how can you see the bold part.

No sentence is bold here.

Damn i misconstrued the entire question. Dont know what i was thinking when trying to solve this question.

I'm pretty confident that A is correct answer.