这道题我的思路是这样的，这个首先是个削弱题，那么我们看题目，题目重视M与P的比较最后得出一个结论说M的居民比P的更易被violent crime伤害。首先如果看过lawyer那个帖子的话就应该立刻联想到这个术语两个比较的题，那么削弱的答案方向一般就是两个东西的本质有区别，这里也就使说M与P的一开始的对比基点不同，于是按照方向找答案D.如果是不能做到这一步的话，那我们来看题，这是写arg也会常出现的错误，只是说了在一段时间内一个比另一个处于优势或劣势，这个是不行的。攻击的方向还有几个，一个就是violent rate in some place不能代表一个地方居民是否就会become victims
Q22:
The violent crime rate (number of violent crimes per 1,000 residents) in Meadowbrook is 60 percent higher now than it was four years ago. The corresponding increase for Parkdale is only 10 percent. These figures support the conclusion that residents of Meadowbrook are more likely to become victims of violent crime than are residents of Parkdale.
The argument above is flawed because it fails to take into account
- changes in the population density of both Parkdale and Meadowbrook over the past four years
- how the rate of population growth in Meadowbrook over the past four years compares to the corresponding rate for Parkdale
- the ratio of violent to nonviolent crimes committed during the past four years in Meadowbrook and Parkdale
- the violent crime rates in Meadowbrook and Parkdale four years ago
- how Meadowbrook’s expenditures for crime prevention over the past four years compare to Parkdale’s expenditures
Answer: D
| 
