Two Confusing CR Questions with anwers

[newmem2001]

1. The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's prescription for obtaining hypodermic needles is to lower the incidence of drug-related deaths, both accidental and intentional, involving hypodermic needles. But even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands; yet everyone would agree that imposing legal restrictions on obtaining knitting needles would be preposterous. Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

Which of the following, if true, would provide most support for the
argument above?

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury
and death.
(B) The benefits of hypodermic needles outweigh those
of knitting needles.
(C) The proposed law would not deter the sort of activity
known to result in drug-related deaths.
(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
(E) Knitting needles are not readily available to anybody
who wants to obtain them.


2.In 1998 more citizens from the country of Monrovia migrated from Monrovia to neighboring Abstania than during any prior year. In 1998 the number of reported violent crimes in Abstania increased dramatically over 1997. The unavoidable conclusion is that Monrovians who migrated from Monrovia to Abstania were responsible for this increase.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the claim that Monrovians were responsible for the increase in violent crime in Abstania during 1998?

(A) Each year more violent criminals are apprehended in
Abstania than in Monrovia.
(B) During 1998 more violent crimes were reported in
Abstania than in Monrovia.
(C) In 1998 no Monrovians migrated from either Monrovia
or Abstania to any country other than Monrovia or
Abstania.
(D) In 1998 the number of unreported violent crimes in
Abstania increased as well.
(E) In 1998 fewer Monrovians migrated from Monrovia to
Abstania than from Abstania to Monrovia.


(Both are from Businessweek GMAT CR Mini-test pages)

Scroll down for answers:




















1. A
2. E

I did find *not* the explanations convincing....Please explain if you got the anwers right.

Thanks!

Edited by - newmem2001 on 2002 Jul 28 12:50:44

[a user]

1. The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's prescription for obtaining hypodermic needles is to lower the incidence of drug-related deaths, both accidental and intentional, involving hypodermic needles. But even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands; yet everyone would agree that imposing legal restrictions on obtaining knitting needles would be preposterous. Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

Which of the following, if true, would provide most support for the
argument above?

(A) Knitting needles have been known to cause injury
and death.
(B) The benefits of hypodermic needles outweigh those
of knitting needles.
(C) The proposed law would not deter the sort of activity
known to result in drug-related deaths.
(D) The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
(E) Knitting needles are readily available to anybody
who wants to obtain them.

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted. to support this argument, the arguer makes an anology between the usage of hpyodermic needle and the usage of knitting needle and provides evidence that even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands, to strenghten this argument, we just have to strenghten it's evidence, an evidence that proves knitting needles can be lethal. Apprently, A provides this support.

2.In 1998 more citizens from the country of Monrovia migrated from Monrovia to neighboring Abstania than during any prior year. In 1998 the number of reported violent crimes in Abstania increased dramatically over 1997. The unavoidable conclusion is that Monrovians who migrated from Monrovia to Abstania were responsible for this increase.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the claim that Monrovians were responsible for the increase in violent crime in Abstania during 1998?

(A) Each year more violent criminals are apprehended in
Abstania than in Monrovia.
(B) During 1998 more violent crimes were reported in
Abstania than in Monrovia.
(C) In 1998 no Monrovians migrated from either Monrovia
or Abstania to any country other than Monrovia or
Abstania.
(D) In 1998 the number of unreported violent crimes in
Abstania increased as well.
(E) In 1998 fewer Monrovians migrated from Monrovia to
Abstania than from Abstania to Monrovia.

To weaken the argument, we need point out that the arguer's evidence can not lead to his conclusion. Even though In 1998 more citizens from the country of Monrovia migrated from Monrovia to neighboring Abstania than during any prior year, what if there are more Monrovians moved from Abstania to Monrovia ( that's the case of Option E). If more Monrovians leave Abstania, how can the arguer conclude the crime is done by Monrovians, it could well because more crime in Abstania that is the driving force for the leaving of Monrovians.

HTH


Lee Shi

[newmem2001]

Thanks Leeshi.

I think I now understand the answers with your explanations.

For 2) I had not read/understood choice E properly. I was assuming that it is talking about "fewer Monrovians migrated from Monrovia than
Abstanians migrated from Abstania". So I should be reading the
alternatives carefully.

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted. to support this argument, the arguer makes an anology between the usage of hpyodermic needle and the usage of knitting needle and provides evidence that even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands, to strenghten this argument, we just have to strenghten it's evidence, an evidence that proves knitting needles can be lethal. Apprently, A provides this support.

To weaken the argument, we need point out that the arguer's evidence can not lead to his conclusion. Even though In 1998 more citizens from the country of Monrovia migrated from Monrovia to neighboring Abstania than during any prior year, what if there are more Monrovians moved from Abstania to Monrovia ( that's the case of Option E). If more Monrovians leave Abstania, how can the arguer conclude the crime is done by Monrovians, it could well because more crime in Abstania that is the driving force for the leaving of Monrovians.

HTH


Lee Shi