In 1975, the number of automobile related deaths among young people ages 16-21 was about 10,000. In 2000, this number

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

In 1975, the number of automobile related deaths among young people ages 16-21 was about 10,000. In 2000, this number was closer to 40,000. Clearly, today's young people drive much more recklessly and are more accident prone than were those in 1975.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the argument made above?

A) There were fewer traffic laws and regulations in 1975 compared with those in 2000.
B) Between 1975 and 2000, the number of licensed teenagers in the country more than quadrupled.
C) Surveys show that young drivers tend to drive more recklessly when there are other passengers of the same age riding in the car.
D) Improvements to automobile safety technology have significantly reduced the chances of being killed in an automobile accident.
E) According to insurance data, senior citizens, not teenagers, had the highest per-driver accident rate in 2000.


OA B

Source: Veritas Prep

Legendary Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
Followed by:5 members

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Premise: In 1975, the number of automobile related deaths among young people ages 16-21 was about 10,000.

Conclusion: Clearly, today's young people drive much more recklessly and are more accident-prone than were those in 1975.

Option A - Incorrect:
This option is wrong because traffic laws do not have any relation to the reckless driving of young drivers.

Option B - Correct:
From the passage argument, the number of young people involved in accident in 1975 was 10, 000 and this number increased to 40,000 in 2000. This argument only focuses on the raw number of accidents that occurred and assumed that the number of young teenagers driving is constant.

So, going by option B, if the number of licensed teenagers in 1975 is represented by X and that of 2000 represented by 4x (i.e more than quadrupled), this implies that the rate of accident (i.e from 10,000 to 40,000) only increased by 4 times that of 1975 and thus means that driving has become safer. Hence, this option is correct.

Option C - Incorrect:
This option is out of scope because it has no relevance to the comparison of teenagers driving habits in 1975 and 2000.

Option D - Incorrect:
Well, the improvement of technology will lead to fewer accidents. Therefore, this option strengthens the argument.

Option E - Incorrect:
This option is out of context