one que

breew

many people think that the only way to remedy the problem of crime is y increasin tthe numer of police officiers, but recent statistics show that many major cities had similarratios of police officiers to citizens, yet diverged widely in their crime rates

the statistics cited function in the argument to

the right answer is : suggest that the numeber of police officiers is not the only influence on the crime rate

can someone tell me why the following answer is wrong? 3x

prove that there factors other than the number of police officersthat are more important in reducing the crime rate

when i do this question, i cant make a decision between these two, is there any problem between suggest and prove or more??3x

icewarm

"prove that there factors other than the number of police officersthat are more important in reducing the crime rate" is too strong an assertion and not necessarily true based on the statistics.

Being more or less important than the number of police officers, other factors can influence the crime rates, blurring the relationship between # of police and crime rate.

zzhou

agree, there is no confidence to say that other factors are more important than the number policeman.
I recalled one LR, you'll understand what I'm talking about when u see the question
answer C  "some crime means there are some laws"
answer D"many crime means there are many laws"
Key is C, because you can deduce whether the existence of crime means the existence of law, but you can't deduce the relationship between the amount of the two.