LSAT 102 – Section 3 – Question 02

LSAT 102 - Section 3 - Question 02

June 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:03

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
PT102 S3 Q02
+LR
+Exp
Necessary assumption +NA
Quantifier +Quant
A
1%
158
B
1%
155
C
84%
166
D
8%
158
E
6%
157
138
147
157
 +Medium 147.613 +SubsectionMedium

A large number of drivers routinely violate highway speed limits. Since driving at speeds that exceed posted limits is a significant factor in most accidents, installing devices in all cars that prevent those cars from traveling faster than the speed limit would prevent most accidents.

Summary
The argument concludes that modifying all cars to prevent them from exceeding the speed limit would prevent most car accidents. This is supported by the claim that exceeding the speed limit is a significant factor in most accidents.

Notable Assumptions
The argument’s conclusion aims at preventing most accidents by preventing speeding, which is a “significant factor” in most accidents. This requires the assumption that speeding actually determines whether most accidents will happen—in other words, that there aren’t other significant factors that would still lead most accidents to happen.
It also requires assuming that preventing speeding would not cause so many additional accidents that the total number of accidents would stay high.

A
A person need not be a trained mechanic to install the device properly.
The argument merely claims that installing these devices in all cars would prevent most accidents. How easy it is to install the devices, or who is able to do it, is irrelevant.
B
Most accidents are caused by inexperienced drivers.
The argument’s claim that preventing speeding would prevent most arguments doesn’t depend on who is causing accidents, so this isn’t necessary to assume.
C
A driver seldom needs to exceed the speed limit to avoid an accident when none of the other drivers involved are violating the speed limit.
If we negate this, meaning that drivers would frequently need to speed in order to avoid otherwise non-speeding accidents, that would be one way that installing the device would cause more accidents. And the argument relies on that not being the case!
D
Most drivers who exceed the speed limit do so unintentionally.
The argument that preventing speeding would prevent most accidents doesn’t rely on the intention behind speeding. That makes this irrelevant.
E
Even if the fines for speed-limit violations were increased, the number of such violations would still not be reduced.
The argument never claims that installing this device is the only way to reduce or prevent speeding, so this is irrelevant.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 102 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply