GWD-9-Q30: Boldface

Criminologist: Some legislators advocate mandating a sentence of life in prison for anyone who, having twice served sentences for serious crimes, is subsequently convicted of a third serious crime. These legislators argue that such a policy would reduce crime dramatically, since it would take people with a proven tendency to commit crimes off the streets permanently. What this reasoning overlooks, however, is that people old enough to have served two prison sentences for serious crimes rarely commit more than one subsequent crime. Filling our prisons with such individuals would have exactly the opposite of the desired effect, since it would limit our ability to incarcerate younger criminals, who commit a far greater proportion of serious crimes.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second is a claim that has been advanced in support of that conclusion.

B. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.

C. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against that conclusion.

本题答案为C，可为什么对于这种题目我的思路总是选择B呢？？请求大牛不吝赐教之，不胜感谢之！

B 第一句为整篇驳论想要驳斥的结论； 第二局为整篇驳论得出的主要结论

GMAT考的是区分结论和论据（事实) 的能力；第二句充其量算的上是个论据，不是结论。

犯罪学家说：

1。一些制定法规的人主张让那些由于严重罪行已经坐过两次牢的人，在第三次犯罪后直接被判无期徒刑。因为他们认为这样能把那些有犯罪倾向的人永久性的从大街上驱除， 从而能有效的降低犯罪率。

2。 但是这个推论或略了一点， 那些由于严重罪行坐过两次牢的人，一般已经老的最多能再坐一次（严重罪行）牢。把监狱用来关这些人，恰恰不能达到上面提到希望的效果， 因为很可能会没有多余的监牢来关押那些年轻的，但是罪行更严重的罪犯。

对于这道题， 如果不能判断哪个观点是主要结论（main conclusion）。 那至少可以判断第二个加粗的句子作用：用于反驳第一个加粗的句子。 其次，第二点只是指出了第一点忽略的一个问题， 也就是说第二点只是减弱了第一点， 而不是完全否认第一点。

我不牛 我是小青蛙

I still support B

觉得是B啊