New legislation would require a seven?day waiting period in the sale of handguns to private individuals, in order tha...
Elizabeth25June 23, 2023
confused
The correct answer here said "potential criminals" which was the reason i eliminated it. this was not a discussion about potential criminals, the people other than law abiding citizens that were in question were already criminals. In previous questions minor words like this made it possible for elimination. For example one a few lessons back eliminated an answer choice because it said practicing veterinarians and the stimulus was about veterinary students. How is it possible that the slight differences in some question types eliminate and answer but here it did not? i hope i was clear in my explanation and confusion.
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
This is a good question, and I think that it might hinge one the use of the word criminal here. I think it's possible for someone to appear in the record of prisons and "be likely to hurt someone" and still be a potential criminals. There are two ways I could see this. First, it's possible that people who are not actually criminals are imprisoned. Second, one could read the term criminal to mean one who is in the action of committing a crime, rather that any person who has ever committed a crime. While I don't love this former interpretation of the term criminal, it does explain how the term potential puke fit in here.
