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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Click It or Ticket� law

Expert replies
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
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

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.
Join the discussion