LSAT 159 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q9

LR Question 9 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Having cameras at traffic intersections to automatically ticket …

QUESTION TYPE: Weaken

CONCLUSION: Red-light cameras don’t make intersections safer.

REASONING: The number of accidents increases overall when cameras are installed.

ANALYSIS: Is the number of accidents the main indicator of traffic safety? What if some accidents are much more dangerous than others? I’d certainly want to be hit in the bumper rather than being T-boned.

To weaken the argument, we’d want something that shows the author’s measure of safety is too simplistic. Maybe the overall number of crashes increases, but the new crashes are minor compared to the old ones. Or maybe the cameras prevent the types of accidents that usually cause the most harm, even if they increase less serious ones.

Anything that suggests that the type or severity of collisions matters more than the raw number would help undermine the argument’s conclusion.

___________

1. Sure, that’s great. But we’re concerned with traffic safety and specifically whether cameras improve safety at those intersections.
2. So the camera gets it wrong sometimes. But this doesn’t tell us whether in the times that it does get it right, it increases safety.
3. Whose fault it is doesn’t change whether cameras make intersections safer.
4. CORRECT. If side-impacts are much worse, then shifting from fewer dangerous crashes to more minor ones could improve overall safety, even if the total collisions go up.
5. Again, this is a fairness issue, not about safety. It doesn’t impact whether crashes are more or less dangerous with cameras.