June 2002 LSAT Section 4 Question 17

A year ago the government reduced the highway speed limit, and in the year since, there have been significantly fewer...

nardine6@my.yorku.ca on August 16, 2021

Why isn't it B?

In Str w Nec Assumption questions, are we trying to validate the argument as it was given or make it make sense? (E) strengthens it as per the other discussion on this message board, but isn't (B) necessary for this argument to make sense in itself? If people didn't follow the speed limit, then the reduction in fatalities can't be attributed to the change in speed limit... unless people's speeds didn't have anything to do with it in the first place, and even if they didn't reduce their speed there would have still been the same number of fatalities? I'm confused on how (B) isn't necessary... please help, thank you!

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

AndrewArabie on April 1, 2023

I'm not an instructor but I think the reason it is not B is because the word "majority"
If we say "most drivers did not obey the new speed limit" a valid rejoinder could be,
"Sure, but the few that did were the ones that would have died if they did not."

Emil-Kunkin on April 9, 2023

Agreed with Andrew! Even if only 30 percent of drivers became safer this would still likely be able to have a notable increase in road safety.