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

Redeem

Dept of Homeland Security

Expert replies
by csandeepreddy » Wed Oct 15, 2008 11:50 am
The Department of Homeland Security has proposed new federal requirements for driver’s licenses that would allow them to be used as part of a national identification system. Using licenses for purposes not directly related to operating a motor vehicle is un-American because it would require U.S. citizens to carry the equivalent of “papers.” Such a requirement would allow the government to restrict their movements and activities in the manner of totalitarian regimes. In time, this could make other limits on freedom acceptable.

The author assumes which of the following?

A) The next presidential election will be dishonest, as has happened in eastern European countries.
B) The government will soon start curtailing the activities of those it considers “dissidents.”
C) Blanket restrictions on law-abiding individuals are contrary to the traditions of American culture and law.
D) The majority of Americans are not willing to give up their right to travel and move about without identification.
E) Americans should resist all government regulation of their lives.
Last edited by csandeepreddy on Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by rohangupta83 » Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:05 pm
What do we have to do here? strengthen the conclusion? weaken? find the assumption?
Join the discussion

by csandeepreddy » Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:17 pm
opps....its an assumption.

updated the post....
Join the discussion

by rohangupta83 » Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:35 pm
imo D

although C looks enticing but its D

because the author is assuming that people will not give up travelling so they WILL carry the licence which the govt. could use for purposes other than just travel documents.
Join the discussion

by Bidisha800 » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:56 pm
(D)
Join the discussion

by pbanavara » Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:43 pm
IMHO it's C because the author says " It's unamerican to carry a license for any other purpose other than driving " which means he's assuming it's unamerican to impose restrictions.

- pradeep
Join the discussion

by gmat009 » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:02 am
IMO D
Join the discussion

by csandeepreddy » Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:12 pm
The OA is C...
Join the discussion

by rohangupta83 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:42 am
i am surprised - why is 'D' incorrect?
Join the discussion

by csandeepreddy » Fri Oct 17, 2008 5:30 pm
(D) Whether Americans are willing to give up their right to travel freely is irrelevant to this argument: that the national identification system is un-American simply because it restricts the liberties of U.S. citizens. Even if Americans were willing to give up their right to move about without identification, the system could still be considered un-American.
Join the discussion

by mberkowitz » Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:10 pm
to negate C, Blanket restrictions on law-abiding individuals are NOT contrary to the traditions of American culture and law, destroys the argument. hence it is the assumption.
Join the discussion

by logitech » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:15 pm
mberkowitz wrote:to negate C, Blanket restrictions on law-abiding individuals are NOT contrary to the traditions of American culture and law, destroys the argument. hence it is the assumption.
What happens to argument when you negate D ?

The majority of Americans are willing to give up their right to travel and move about without identification.
LGTCH
---------------------
"DON'T LET ANYONE STEAL YOUR DREAM!"
Join the discussion

by mberkowitz » Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:23 am
I think negating D doesn't hurt the argument.

The conclusion isn't based on public's opinion on this, its based on whether these restrictions are indeed un-american.
Join the discussion

by Somerandomguy » Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:32 pm
Conclusion: Using driver's licenses for "other" purposes would be un-American (because it would restrict people's freedoms and would be prolog for further restrictions).

A) The next presidential election will be dishonest, as has happened in eastern European countries.

Eliminate: Out of scope. We're talking about the U.S. and its proposal to use DLs as a lojack.

B) The government will soon start curtailing the activities of those it considers “dissidents.”

Eliminate: Unwarranted prediction. This is a proposal that "if passed" COULD result in more restrictions ("will" is too strong).

C) Blanket restrictions on law-abiding individuals are contrary to the traditions of American culture and law.
Bingo. They threw in "culture" to throw people off if they don't read carefully. Slow down to speed up is my advice.

D) The majority of Americans are not willing to give up their right to travel and move about without identification.

Eliminate: Who knows what a "majority" of Americans think. This is too strong of a statement.

E) Americans should resist all government regulation of their lives.

Eliminate: This is a suggestion/recommendation for a plan of action. This doesn't link anything together in the argument.
Join the discussion

by peter.p.81 » Wed May 11, 2016 3:22 am
I believe the correct answer should be D
Join the discussion