LSAT 141 – Section 2 – Question 13

LSAT 141 - Section 2 - Question 13

September 2014

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:20

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT141 S2 Q13
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
1%
155
B
69%
165
C
18%
159
D
1%
151
E
12%
157
145
154
164
 +Harder 146.882 +SubsectionMedium

Reformer: A survey of police departments keeps track of the national crime rate, which is the annual number of crimes per 100,000 people. The survey shows no significant reduction in the crime rate in the past 20 years, but the percentage of the population in prison has increased substantially, and public expenditure on prisons has grown at an alarming rate. This demonstrates that putting more people in prison cannot help to reduce crime.

Summarize Argument
The reformer concludes that imprisoning more people doesn't reduce crime. As support, she cites a survey showing that while prison spending and the percentage of people in prison have increased dramatically over the past 20 years, crime rates have not significantly decreased.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The reformer argues that imprisoning more people doesn’t reduce crime because the crime rate has stayed the same despite more people being imprisoned. She assumes that the crime rate would be the same or lower without those imprisonments, ignoring the possibility that the crime rate might actually have been higher if fewer people were put in prison. If that were the case, it’s not accurate to conclude that putting more people in prison doesn’t reduce crime.

A
infers without justification that because the national crime rate has increased, the number of crimes reported by each police department has increased
The reform points out that the national crime rate has increased based on a survey of police departments. But she never assumes that the number of crimes reported by each individual police department has also increased.
B
ignores the possibility that the crime rate would have significantly increased if it had not been for the greater rate of imprisonment
The reformer ignores the possibility that the crime rate might have been even higher if fewer people were imprisoned. In other words, maybe imprisoning more people actually helped keep the crime rate stable.
C
overlooks the possibility that the population has increased significantly over the past 20 years
It doesn't matter whether the population increased significantly because the reformer’s argument addresses the rate of crimes and the percentage of the population in prison. The number of people that makes up the population is irrelevant.
D
presumes, without providing warrant, that alternative measures for reducing crime would be more effective than imprisonment
The reformer’s argument only addresses the effectiveness of imprisonment on reducing crime. She doesn’t suggest any alternative measure for reducing crime, nor does she assume that other measures would be more effective. She just concludes that imprisonment is not effective.
E
takes for granted that the number of prisoners must be proportional to the number of crimes committed
The reformer never assumes that the number of prisoners and the number of crimes must be proportional. In fact, she doesn’t cite the actual number of prisoners or crimes at all.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 141 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply