Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.2K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 7 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 580 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
PTF97.S3.Q.18 - Citizen: Each year since 1970...
caya.berndt
Core Member
I am having the hardest time understanding how E is the answer to this one. It was an answer I dismissed outright because I didn't see what the healthcare had to do with the murder rate. Perhaps the question was phrased weird, but I can't figure how to work it in my brain. Any advice?
Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question."
Comments
This is definitely a tricky question upon my first look. AC E seems to latch onto an assumption in the official's argument while also making use of the term "murder" in an exact sense. The official is essentially saying that despite the number going up, the percentage per 100 murder victims has actually gone down.
But AC E is basically coming in and saying "Sure this is true, but if the medical care received now was actually the same quality as it was in 1970 (presumably worse), the murder rates per 100 would actually be way higher". Essentially, improved medical care might be the reason for the decrease in murders, since more people now survive murder attempts, so the number of murders, if all things were equal (which they again aren't, because of the medical care), could actually be way higher now than is currently shown. Therefore the city official's response and evidence would be greatly weakened.