PT120.S3.Q6 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11

PASSAGE 3

Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18

PASSAGE 4

Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

Breed-specific legislation can’t protect the public from dogs. For support, the citizen illustrates that the primary cause of violence in dogs is environment (not breed), and claiming that such legislation will overlook this.

The conclusion is a critique of legislating based on breed: “... such breed-specific legislation could never effectively protect the public from vicious dogs.”

This is the main conclusion. The rest of the argument supports this by showing that breed-specific legislation doesn’t address the primary factor in determining disposition.

This is premise. (B) supports the conclusion that breed-specific legislation won’t be effective; it overlooks the most important factor.

This is premise. (C) supports the conclusion that breed-specific legislation won’t be effective; it overlooks the most important factor.

This is premise. It illustrates that home environment is more important than breed in determining dog disposition.

All we know about current laws is that the citizen thinks they’re adequate; we don’t know what they address. If anything, there’s some support to say that, if the citizen thinks the law are adequate, the opposite of (E) is true.

PrepTest 120 - Section 3 - Question 6

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action