The author does mention that jury trials are rare, but the author does not use this fact to support the claim that the unanimity requirement doesn’t need to be reexamined. Additionally, the author’s main point is that the benefits of requiring unanimous verdicts outweighs the costs of hung juries, not that the requirement doesn’t need to be reexamined.

The second half of (B) is incorrect. The author does not say that most hung juries are caused by irresponsible jurors. Instead, the author claims that hung juries show that jurors are being responsible.

While the author does claim that hung juries often occur when neither side has presented completely convincing evidence, this not the main point of the passage as a whole. Instead, this acts as support for the passage’s main point.

This conditional claim is not the author’s main point. The main point is that the positive aspects of the unanimity requirement outweigh the costs of hung juries. The author’s main point is not a conditional claim about when the unanimity requirement is effective.

This is the main point, as stated in the beginning of P2. The author’s main point is that the benefits of requiring unanimous juries outweighs the material costs of hung juries.