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.

MGMAT Test 1 CR

Expert replies
by paridhi » Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:12 am
Letter writer: Illegal drug use is often associated with other violent crimes. Statistics indicate that each time police increase their enforcement of anti-drug laws in the city, the number of violent crimes committed in the city declines as a result. However, eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime. If drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits.

In the letter writer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is support offered by the letter writer for a certain forecast; the second is that forecast.
(B) The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position.
(C) The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.
(D) The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.
(E) The first is a statement that the letter writer believes is true; the second is presented as a logical inference drawn from the truth of that statement.

OA D. Can someone please explain. I chose B and cannot understand what is wrong with it.
Also, while explaining your answers could please tell me the conclusion of the above stimulus.
Last edited by paridhi on Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by kvcpk » Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:34 am
Can you please bold the lines?
Join the discussion

by paridhi » Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:43 am
Join the discussion

by kvcpk » Thu Jul 08, 2010 7:41 am
I am unable to understand why D is correct. Will need some experts/others input on this.

(B) The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position.
I think B is wrong because, it says that the second bold part is the position. But actually, the second bold part is a IF statement. So it cannot be a position.

If the bold part was "drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits. ". May be B would have been contender.

I am clueless and may be wrong too. Request some experts' thoughts.

Praveen
Join the discussion

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:36 am
the options are quiet confusing

first bold letters :- police increase enforcement of anti drug laws the number of violent crimes committed decreases.

The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts


second bold face:-If drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits.

the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.
prediction:-police increase enforcement of anti drug laws the number of violent crimes committed decreases.

i hope its help to understand why option D is corrrect
Join the discussion

by jaghsi » Thu Jul 08, 2010 10:07 pm
B cannot be because the second bold face is not a "position" but a reason/information for that "position". The position being:"eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime."
Join the discussion

by diebeatsthegmat » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:58 am
paridhi wrote:Letter writer: Illegal drug use is often associated with other violent crimes. Statistics indicate that each time police increase their enforcement of anti-drug laws in the city, the number of violent crimes committed in the city declines as a result. However, eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime. If drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits.

In the letter writer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is support offered by the letter writer for a certain forecast; the second is that forecast.
(B) The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position.
(C) The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.
(D) The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.
(E) The first is a statement that the letter writer believes is true; the second is presented as a logical inference drawn from the truth of that statement.

OA D. Can someone please explain. I chose B and cannot understand what is wrong with it.
Also, while explaining your answers could please tell me the conclusion of the above stimulus.
B cant be true bc the main position in the argument is "However, eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime" while the second bold sentence just support or explain the idea the letter posted in the main position
Join the discussion