LSAT 29, Logical Reasoning II, Q6, LSATHacks

LR Question 6 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Some judges complain about statutes that specify mandatory minimum…

QUESTION TYPE: Main Point

CONCLUSION: Mandatory minimum sentences are necessary.

REASONING: When people are free to use their own judgment, they often act arbitrarily and irrationally. Judges often act like this even if they believe their behavior is wise. 

ANALYSIS: The main point is that judges are not as rational as they like to think and therefore we need sentencing guidelines. 

___________

1. This goes too far. The argument doesn’t claim that people never have good judgment. 
2. This is what the judges argue. The argument thinks minimum sentences are a good idea.
3. Same as B. The judges argued this. 
4. This is true, but its only part of the main point. Because judges are irrational we need minimum sentences.
5. CORRECT. The minimum sentences prevent judges from acting irrationally. And judges often will act irrationally if they are given free rein. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.