2. 职称英语
  3. Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning a considerabl

Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning a considerabl

游客2024-01-12  32
问题 Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning a considerable number of officers from traffic enforcement to work on higher-priority, serious crimes. Reducing traffic enforcement for this reason would be counterproductive, however, in light of the tendency of criminals to use cars when engaged in the commission of serious crimes. An officer stopping a car for a traffic violation can make a search that turns up evidence of serious crime.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument given?
选项 A、An officer who stops a car containing evidence of the commission of a serious crime risks a violent confrontation, even if the vehicle was stopped only for a traffic violation.
B、When the public becomes aware that traffic enforcement has lessened, it typically becomes lax in obeying traffic rules.
C、Those willing to break the law to commit serious crimes are often in committing such crimes unwilling to observe what they regard as the lesser constraints of traffic law.
D、The offenders committing serious crimes who would be caught because of traffic violations are not the same group of individuals as those who would be caught if the arresting officers were reassigned from traffic enforcement.
E、The great majority of persons who are stopped by officers for traffic violations are not guilty of any serious crimes
答案 C
解析 Argument Construction
Situation Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning many officers from traffic enforcement to work on serious crimes. But criminals often drive when committing serious crimes, and police who stop cars for traffic violations can find evidence of those crimes.
Reasoning What additional information, when combined with the argument provided, would suggest that it would be counterproductive to reassign officers from traffic enforcement to work on serious crimes? The argument implicitly reasons that because officers working on traffic enforcement can turn up evidence of serious crimes by searching cars that commit traffic violations, reassigning those officers would hinder police efforts to prevent serious crime, even if the officers were reassigned to work directly on serious crime. The argument could be strengthened by information suggesting that traffic enforcement may increase the probability that evidence relating to serious crimes wil1 be discovered.
A If anything, this risk of violence might discourage traffic enforcement officers from stopping and searching as many cars, thus reducing their effectiveness at preventing serious crimes.
B This suggests that reassigning officers from traffic enforcement to work on serious crimes would increase the number of unpunished minor traffic violations, not the number of unpunished serious crimes.
C Correct. This suggests that people committing serious crimes often commit traffic violations as well, increasing the likelihood that traffic enforcement officers will stop and search their cars and find evidence of those crimes.
D The question at issue is not whether the same offenders would be caught if the officers were reassigned, but rather whether more or fewer offenders would be caught.
E This weakens the argument by suggesting that most work by traffic enforcement officers is unrelated to preventing serious crimes.
The correct answer is C.
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3357406.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)