这道题E也靠谱呀！大家怎么看？

frankzhiwei

Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm others as a result of taking the risks. As a result, they conclude that it should be each person’s decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?
(A) Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
(B) Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
(C) Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
(D) The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat-belt laws is greater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.（B）
(E) In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are passengers who do wear seat belts.

E为啥不行呢？错两次，都是选了E呀~

kevin0214

原题说，是否系安全带是个人的事情，只要不危害到别人的利益，不应该立法要求大家都系安全带。这个逻辑说得夸张一点就是：个人对自己的安全负责，有人要是想死我没有必要立法禁止他去死。

E是无关选项。即使不系安全带人的伤得多又如何？这不是自作自受不是吗？这一点都没没有影响原文的逻辑。
B选项说如果人们因为不系安全带受伤的多，所有车主的保险费就会升高，这就意味着伤害到了别人的利益，所以需要立法要求大家系安全带。