Quantcast
Channel: GMAT Club Forum - latest posts
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 420781

Re: Politician: The bill that makes using car phones while

$
0
0
BukrsGmat wrote:
Frankly speaking the main reasoning lies in recognizing the conclusion.

Premise is : People would be deterred from using their car phones while driving if it were illegal to do so.
Conclusion : The bill that makes using car phones while driving illegal should be adopted.


Now Let's consider option B and D

B) The only way to reduce the threat to public safety posed by car phones is through legislation. -->
Wrong: This is a extreme ans ..we can't assume if this is the ONLY way, there can be n no. of ways
D) Any proposed law that would reduce a threat to public safety should be adopted.
Correct-
Negating it : It is not the case that any proposed that would reduce a threat to public safety should be adopted
- Definitely it hurts

So i feel D is correct.. .


B) The only way to reduce the threat to public safety posed by car phones is through legislation.
If only legislation can help reduce the threat to public safety, then the bill which we are referring can only reduce the threat..
THe conclusion is "The bill that makes using car phones while driving illegal should be adopted."

Why it should be adopted as only the the legislations can help bring the change.

D) Any proposed law that would reduce a threat to public safety should be adopted.
If any proposed law can reduce the threat, then why only this particular bill.. maybe some other bill/law can help reduce the threat...
It may be a food security bill/law or an anti-corruption bill... D is not an assumption...

Answer should be B...

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 420781

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>