-
piyush_nitt
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
- Location: Sydney
- Thanked: 12 times
I am not sure, but looks like its E, Please provide the OA.
Thanks,
DW
BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Featured Course
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
Drug Dealer
Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning |
-
Kunal_gmat
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 45
- Thanked: 2 times
I feel (D) is the answer too. OA pls.
Basically the argument tells us that is it alright to move such people to the nonindustrial zone. We are asked, which statement goes against this:
(A) This supports, as illegal drugs are not available.
(B)This supports too as it says moving will be useful.
(C)Shelters are moved too, so since homeless will confine to shelters, this will help too.
(E)Stronger measures in Industrial areas also strengthen.
(D) - If law enforcement is highly visible in downtown, less crime could happen there might even imply that not very visible in non industrial area, hence weakens, which is required.
Basically the argument tells us that is it alright to move such people to the nonindustrial zone. We are asked, which statement goes against this:
(A) This supports, as illegal drugs are not available.
(B)This supports too as it says moving will be useful.
(C)Shelters are moved too, so since homeless will confine to shelters, this will help too.
(E)Stronger measures in Industrial areas also strengthen.
(D) - If law enforcement is highly visible in downtown, less crime could happen there might even imply that not very visible in non industrial area, hence weakens, which is required.
