We don’t know that people driving SUVs believe that the SUV is the measure that will most reduce risk to their occupants compared to driving more carefully. We also don’t know that people who might get cancer believe cures are the measure that most reduces the risk of cancer compared to avoiding smoking and overexposure to the sun. So the argument doesn’t conform to (A).

Driving less carefully can lead to the consequence of injury to the occupants. Smoking can lead to the consequence of cancer. But since there are ways to protect from these consequences (SUV, cancer cure), that can make people less careful to avoid the behaviors that can lead to those consequences. In other words, people are more likely to drive less carefully and to smoke. (B) fits the reasoning of the argument.

We don’t get any descriptions of behaviors that people “believe would not harm them at all.” We don’t know that SUV drivers don’t think they’ll harmed at all from driving less carefully, or that people believe they won’t be harmed at all from smoking.

We don’t know that an SUV driver believes the risk of driving les carefully is unknown, or that a smoker believes the risk of smoking is unknown. So a principle about how people behavior when performing activities of unknown risk doesn’t match the reasoning.

(E) involves a comparison about harm to oneself vs. less harms. But we don’t know that SUV drivers view harm to oneself as more serious than other kinds of harm, or that smokers view harm to oneself as more serious than other kinds of harms.