LSAT 146 – Section 3 – Question 19

LSAT 146 - Section 3 - Question 19

June 2016

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

Target time: 1:27

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
PT146 S3 Q19
+LR
Argument part +AP
Rule-Application +RuleApp
A
12%
160
B
73%
166
C
1%
151
D
13%
159
E
0%
144
147
155
164
 +Harder 146.758 +SubsectionMedium

Jurist: To ensure that a legal system remains just, it is important to guarantee that lawbreaking does not give lawbreakers an unfair advantage over law abiders. Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that criminal punishment may serve, it should certainly attempt to ensure that criminal wrongdoing remains profitless.

Summarize Argument
The jurist tells us that one of the goals of criminal punishment should be to ensure that criminal wrongdoing doesn’t yield a profit. In support, the jurist explains the general rule that it’s important not to allow lawbreakers to get an unfair advantage over people who follow the law. In other words, breaking the law shouldn’t be profitable. This, then, supports the conclusion that criminal punishment should aim to prevent crime from being profitable.

Identify Argument Part
The claim about the importance of guaranteeing that lawbreakers don’t get an unfair advantage is the premise offered to support the conclusion that criminal punishment should seek to keep criminal acts profitless.

A
It states a condition that, if fulfilled, will ensure that a legal system remains just.
The jurist suggests that avoiding an unfair advantage to lawbreakers is a necessary, not sufficient, condition for a just system. The argument actually doesn’t include any condition that would guarantee a just legal system.
B
It expresses a principle that is offered as support for the conclusion.
This is a good description of the role played by the claim about the importance of preventing crime from being unfairly advantageous. It’s a general principle that acts as a premise supporting the conclusion about a goal of criminal punishment.
C
It is a conclusion for which the only support offered is the claim that the legal system serves multiple goals.
Firstly, the claim about lawbreakers not getting an unfair advantage isn’t a conclusion: nothing else supports it. Secondly, the jurist never specifically claims that the legal system serves multiple goals.
D
It is a premise presented as support for the claim that the most important goal of criminal punishment is to ensure that criminal wrongdoing remains profitless.
The jurist doesn’t claim that preventing crime from being profitable is the most important goal of criminal punishment, just that it should be a goal. There’s nothing in the argument comparing goals and saying which is most important.
E
It is presented as refuting an argument that criminal punishment has goals other than guaranteeing that lawbreaking remains profitless.
This argument isn’t about refuting someone else’s point, it’s just about establishing one specific goal. Also, the jurist never claims that guaranteeing that lawbreaking remains profitless is the only goal of criminal punishment.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 146 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply