168. In the LACE>United StatesLACE> in 1986, the average rate of violent crime in states with strict gun-control laws was 645 crimes per 100,000 persons—about 50 percent higher than the average rate in the eleven states where strict gun-control laws have never been passed. Thus one way to reduce violent crime is to repeal strict gun control laws.>>

>>

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?>>

(A) The annual rate of violent crime in states with strict gun-control laws has decreased since the passage of those laws.>>

(B) In states with strict gun-control laws, few individuals are prosecuted for violating such laws.

(C) In states without strict gun-control laws, many individuals have had no formal training in the use of firearms.

(D) The annual rate of nonviolent crime is lower in states with strict gun-control laws than in states without such laws.

(E) Less than half of the individuals who reside in states without strict gun-control laws own a gun.

怎么枪械管制的地方的暴力犯罪率还要比没有管制的地方高50%？枪械管制怎么能减少暴力犯罪呢？

我选A

因为有的州的暴力犯罪率高，所以需要gun-control law。A说有了这项法令之后，这

些州的暴力犯罪率下降了，说明这项法令可以降低犯罪率，直接weaken原结论。

the average rate of violent crime in states with strict gun-control laws was 645 crimes per

100,000 persons是指枪械管制之前的情况吗？费解。

同意楼上的说法呵呵

绝对数并不能说明问题，而且就这题而言其他选项都有无关词，通过排除法可以解决

这个问题

应该是管制之后的情况

管制有没有效果是对施行管制的州前后而言的

我觉得可以不考虑没有施行管制的州，因为在没有管制之前的州与未施行管制的州的暴力犯罪率是未知的，没有可比性