Q24 - Robert: Speed limits on residential streets

[Aquamarine]

I was stuck between B and E because I thought both could be right answers. So I finally chose E because of the word "net effect". But the answer is B.
The more I looked into, the more I had no idea why E was wrong.
Can anyone explain me why B is correct and E is wrong?

[iryankees13]

Robert starts off by addressing the problem that speed limits of residential streets are ignored and adds that there aren't enough officers to patrol every street. He concludes therefore, that the city should install speed bumps along with signs to slow the traffic.

Sheila retorts by attacking Robert's conclusion. Adding that speed bumps may actually add to the danger because a speeding car may lose control when it hits a speed bump.

First lets start off with E. E is wrong because it's not that there is no "net effect," in fact the effect would be a possibility and potential for more danger. Basically Sheila is saying that Robert's solution (adding speed bumps and signs) would not solve the problem and may in fact make it worse.

Thus B is the right answer because is it states that Robert's proposal may have "undesirable side effects of its own." This is exactly right! Adding speed bumps will increase the risk because now people will be speeding and lose control of their cars when they hit the speed bumps.

[christine.defenbaugh]

Thanks for posting, Aquamarine, and fantastic explanation, iryankees13!

Let me add just a little to it:

ROBERT

PREMISE:
1) People speed on residential streets
2) Police too busy to stop them
3) The speeding is dangerous for pedestrians
CONCLUSION: We should install speed bumps (with warning signs)

Robert raises a bad situation (dangers for pedestrians), then proposes a fix (speed bumps). He's assuming that the fix will be safer than not having the fix.

Sheila challenges his assumption, and raises the possibility that his fix could actually be more dangerous than the current situation. (B) restates this with "undesirable side effects", just as iryankees13 notes!

Let's take a look at each wrong answer choice:

(A) Sheila doesn't disagree with Robert's premises that the situation is dangerous. She just takes issue with the proposed fix.

(C) Sheila never raises any alternative course of action.

(D) Sheila never indicates that the solution would be effective - quite the opposite.

(E) This would be the correct answer if Sheila were simply saying 'Nah, that fix just won't do anything!' But she doesn't say that! She thinks the fix will cause problems, e.g., people losing control of their vehicles.

Great work, iryankees13!