LSAT-7-1-19

valarie

When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor’s car without permission, the police merely gave her a warning. However, when Peter Foster did the same thing, he was charged with automobile theft. Peter came to the attention of the police because the car he was driving was hit by a speeding taxi. Alicia was stopped because the car she was driving had defective taillights. It is true that the car Peter took got damaged and the car Alicia took did not, but since it was the taxi that caused the damage this difference was not due to any difference in the blameworthiness of their behavior. Therefore, Alicia should also have been charged with automobile theft.

19.   If all of the claims offered in support of the conclusion are accurate, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:

(A) The interests of justice would have been better served if the police had released Peter Foster with a warning.

(B) Alicia Green had never before driven a car belonging to someone else without first securing the owner’s permission.

(C) Peter Foster was hit by the taxi while he was running a red light, whereas Alicia Green drove with extra care to avoid drawing the attention of the police to the car she had taken.

(D) Alicia Green barely missed hitting a pedestrian when she sped through a red light ten minutes before she was stopped by the police for driving a car that had defective taillights.（C）

(E) Peter Foster had been cited for speeding twice in the preceding month, whereas Alicia Green had never been cited for a traffic violation.

答案是C. Is the answer wrong? I chose B. alicia 从来没有不经过被人许可而驾驶属于别人的车。 这当然不是真的，题目中的情况就是一个反例。而C是完全有可能的，既然题目中没有信息表明。

请指教。我好像又不能回帖，回帖功能时好时坏。请原谅。

lip00ff2002

I am not NN. But I try to answer.

The argument: A and P mades the same mistakes, so A should be treated the same as P.

The key for this question is to show that A and P are different, especially, P driving records are worse than A.

B says that A doesn't have a bad record in driving others' car without permission, which could be true and support the conclusion.

C mentions that P not only drives other's car, he also runs in a red traffic light, which is worse than A.

BTW, can any NN translate the option D?

lawyer_1

D。在因驾驶尾灯有缺陷的汽车而被警察叔叔STOP前十分钟，AG在超速闯红灯时，几乎不能避免撞上一个行人。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-26 9:17:05编辑过]

valarie

以下是引用lip00ff2002在2004-7-26 4:57:00的发言：

I am not NN. But I try to answer.

The argument: A and P mades the same mistakes, so A should be treated the same as P.

The key for this question is to show that A and P are different, especially, P driving records are worse than A.

B says that A doesn't have a bad record in driving others' car without permission, which could be true and support the conclusion.

C mentions that P not only drives other's car, he also runs in a red traffic light, which is worse than A.

BTW, can any NN translate the option D?

First, thanks for lip's reply. However, I still don't understand. Sorry.

I don't think the whole question has anything to do with  "driving record".  It merely says a fact. and the question is whether B as a fact could be true - my understanding is it CANT be true because the argument itself already says "When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor’s car without permission".

And in your post, I agree in C, P's in a worse case than A, which in turn means C could be true.

Lawyer, lawyer, please help!

lawyer_1

1.原文无法得出各人以前情况，故B有可能，这次是A的第一次，怎么不可能，凡事总有第一次。不违背原文的就有可能

2。选C的原因是原文说DAMAGE是TAXI造成车的，P完全没责任（所以应跟A一样）。而C说P是闯红灯时被DAMAGE的，故有责任。和原文相反。故必错。为答案

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-27 2:20:10编辑过]

lip00ff2002

i can't type chinese here for Njstar always makes mistakes. But it is very happy to see your clean and clear comment and explanation every time.

lip00ff2002

it is an additional information which could support or undermine the argument in the options, nothing to do with "When Alicia Green borrowed a neighbor’s car without permission".

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-7-27 5:54:38编辑过]

valarie

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-7-27 2:13:00的发言：

1.原文无法得出各人以前情况，故B有可能，这次是A的第一次，怎么不可能，凡事总有第一次。不违背原文的就有可能

2。选C的原因是原文说DAMAGE是TAXI造成车的，P完全没责任（所以应跟A一样）。而C说P是闯红灯时被DAMAGE的，故有责任。和原文相反。故必错。为答案

Lawyer is really good. thank you. You are right. Thanks for lip00ff too.