LSAT 152 – Section 4 – Question 23

LSAT 152 - Section 4 - Question 23

November 2018

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

Target time: 1:44

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
PT152 S4 Q23	+LR	Resolve reconcile or explain +RRE Causal Reasoning +CausR	A 12% 157 B 7% 154 C 33% 160 D 6% 159 E 43% 166	157 165 173	+Hardest	147.181 +SubsectionMedium

An antitheft device involving an electronic homing beacon has been developed for use in tracking stolen automobiles. Although its presence is undetectable to a car thief and so does not directly deter theft, its use greatly increases the odds of apprehending even the most experienced car thieves. The device is not yet used by a large percentage of car owners, but in cities where only a small percentage of car owners have the device installed, auto thefts have dropped dramatically.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why have auto thefts dropped dramatically in cities where car owners have the antitheft device installed, even though only a small % of car owners in those cities have installed the device?

Objective

The correct answer should help explain how only a small proportion of cars being equipped with antitheft devices can still lead to a significant decrease in the car theft rate.

Car thieves will tend to be less cautious if they are unaware that a car they have stolen contains a homing beacon.

But there’s still only a small % of cars with the device. Car thieves might be less cautious if they don’t know about these devices, which might mean these thieves get caught, but how could this dramatically decrease overall theft rates?

Typically, the number of cars stolen in cities where the homing beacons are in use was below average before the device was used.

We’re trying to explain how theft rates could have decreased. Whether theft rates started below, at, or above the average theft rates for cities doesn’t explain how those rates could have declined dramatically.

Before the invention of the homing beacon, automobile thieves who stole cars containing antitheft devices were rarely apprehended.

Even if we interpret this answer as suggesting thieves today are more frequently apprehended, wouldn’t we expect only a small proportion of thieves to be caught, since the device is installed in only a small proportion of cars? How could this significantly decrease cars stolen?

A large proportion of stolen cars are stolen from people who do not live in the cities where they are stolen.

We know only a small % of cars have the device installed in the relevant cities. Whether thieves live in other cities doesn’t affect our expectation that a small % of cars with the device should have only a small impact on overall theft rate.

In most cities the majority of car thefts are committed by a few very experienced car thieves.

If only a few car thieves are responsible for a large portion of car thefts, catching only a few car thieves can lead to a dramatic decline in thefts. This is how the devices could decrease thefts significantly despite being in only a small % of cars.

LSAT 152 – Section 4 – Question 23

LSAT 152 - Section 4 - Question 23

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 152 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel