An antitheft device involving an electronic homing beacon has been developed for use in tracking stolen automobiles. ...
kristinsmith04on June 17, 2021
Why not c?
To me, answer choice C speaks to the fact that the new devices are deterrents - If before, people were rarely caught, there was an incentive to continue stealing. If now people are often times caught, and there isn’t a good way to know whether a car has a device, thieves may decrease stealing out of fear of being apprehended. Hence the dramatic decline with only a few devices… I suppose unless the thieves know there are only a few devices installed? Can someone please explain the flaw in this thinking?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
In paradox questions it is important to focus on exactly what the paradox is that you are trying to reconcile. In this case, the paradox is why having safety measures in only a few cars would cause a dramatic drop in theft.
Answer choice C only speaks to the level of effectiveness of earlier antitheft equipment. What it doesn't do is say that thieves are caught stealing more often with the device, and it doesn't say that thieves are worried about encountering this new device. Be wary whenever you have to fill in the blanks for an answer choice. While those assumptions feel logical, they need to have been actually said by the answer choice to be valid.
E does fix the paradox nicely. If there are only a few car thieves in the area, then a small number of antitheft devices could reasonably make a big difference.