PT144.S2.Q6 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The lawyer concludes that making criminals pay a surcharge to support victims of violent crimes is unfair because it would also have nonviolent offenders paying the charge.

The support explains how this surcharge would have nonviolent criminals paying to fund services for victims of crimes unlike the ones they themselves committed, but it doesn’t explain why that would be unfair.

To help justify the conclusion, we’re looking for a principle that confirms that nonviolent criminals should not have to contribute money towards services related to violent crimes.

Leads to the wrong conclusion. The lawyer’s argument isn’t concerned with preventing crime, just with the unfairness in requiring nonviolent criminals to pay for the consequences of violent crime.

Wrong trigger. The support only establishes that the criminals are being made to pay a $30 surcharge. It doesn’t establish anything about the severity of other penalties for crime, such as jailtime.

Wrong trigger. The support establishes that the money is to be put towards services for victims of violence, and there’s no indication that the cash is going elsewhere.

The support establishes that all criminals, even petty ones, are now required to pay for services for victims of violent crimes. (D) would help justify the conclusion that nonviolent criminals should not be forced to pay for such services.

Irrelevant. The argument isn’t concerned with the amount that thieves will be required to pay, nor does it establish how the value of any stolen property compares to the $30 surcharge.

PrepTest 144 - Section 2 - Question 6

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action