The purpose of the proposed law requiring a doctor's prescription for obtaining hypodermic needles is to lower the incidence of drug-related deaths, both accidental and intentional, involving hypodermic needles. But even knitting needles can be lethal if they fall into the wrong hands; yet everyone would agree that imposing legal restrictions on obtaining knitting needles would be preposterous. Hence the proposed law involving hypodermic makes no sense and should not be enacted.

Which of the following, it true, would provide most support for the argument above?
 

(A)	Knitting needles have been known to cause injury and death.
(B)	The benefits of hypodermic needles outweigh those of knitting needles.
(C)	The proposed law would not deter the sort of activity known to result in drug-related deaths.
(D)	The proposed law could not be effectively enforced.
(E)	Knitting needles are not readily available to anybody who wants to obtain them.

The author uses an analogy to get his conclusion.

So, in order to support his conclusion, we should find the similariy between thw two things.

The similarity is knitting needles are known to cause injury and death just like the hypodermic.

Is it right?

Please check.

vous viens de France?

我怎么倾向于B呢? 理由是:A并没有给出新的信息. 文中已经说了K-needle can be lethal, A说cause injury and death, 重复.

B说h-needle比k-needle更有benefits. 既然如此, 就应该先restrict K-needle, 因为文中已经说了两者都lethal.

It says :  they CAN be lethal.

If they have been known to be lethal (that is, we proved that they are lethal), the conclusion is supported.

Please check...

说实话，这题有点怪，不知道出处是哪里。

我做这种题的时候，一般先把选项分一分，分成三类，一类是S， support,一类是U, undermine, 还有就是N, Not related.

这题A是S

B、C、D是U

E似乎是N

这么看来，只有A稍微好一点了。

A本身是禁不起推敲的，但是题干中的If true其实就是说不用我们推敲了，当它是对的。

GMAT就是这样，没有正确答案，但有最好的答案