各位牛牛们，OG的CR部分第十四题实在是不明白，看过了精华版里对该题的连接，然而还是懵懵懂懂。

问题一：要weaken这道题的conclusion，要从什么地方入手?为什么？解题思路是怎么样的？

题目如下：

Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks .As a result ,they conclude that it should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt . which of the following ,if true ,nost seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above ? A many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat . B automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need ot pay for the increased injuries of deaths of people not wearing seat belts . C passagers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings . D the rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws os greater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws E in autonobile accidents ,a great number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured that are passengers who do wear seat belts .

问题二：OG中对答案的解释如下：

The principle that people are entitled to risk injury provided they do not thereby harm others fails to justify the individual’s right to decide not to wear seat belts if it can be shown, as B shows, that that decision does harm others. Therefore, B is the best answer. A suggests that the law may be irrelevant in some cases, but it does not address the issue of the law’s legitimacy. C cites a requirement analogous to the one at issue, but its existence alone does not bear on the legitimacy of the one at issue. The argument implicitly concedes that individuals take risks by not wearing seat belts; therefore, D and E, which simply confirm this concession, do not weaken the conclusion.

第一句话看的我好吃力（严重怀疑自己看长句的能力），最后也不得其解。而且为什么它说d和e confirm了这个conclusion呢？

我觉得现在自己的思维在这道题上钻了牛角尖，看了好几天怎么看都看不懂。见笑了！！

请大家帮忙！谢谢！！