Crimes are mainly committed by the young, and for this reason merely increasing the number of police officers or expenditures on police services has little effect on reducing the crime rate. In fact, the only factor associated with a crime-rate drop is a decrease in the number of people in the community aged fourteen to thirty.

The findings above can best serve as part of an argument against

(A) the likelihood that any law enforcement program will be effective in reducing the crime rate within a short time

(B) increasing prison terms for young people found guilty of crimes

(C) introducing compulsory military conscription for people aged seventeen to nineteen

(D) raising the age at which students are permitted to leave school

(E) a community’s plan to increase the number of recreational and educational activities in which young adults can participate

the answer is A.  why?

i take E.            at first glance, A sounds irrelevant.

thanks a million for answer.

In fact, A is the best answer. Take a look at it: (A) the likelihood that any law enforcement program will be effective in reducing the crime rate within a short time.

Since no one can change the population of certain age range in a short time, the crime rate would not drop shortly.

However, I must point out that this is a very bad question b/c it has many seemingly correct choices. Hence, I don't think it can appear in any GMAT test.

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-7-14 14:11:21编辑过]

这是一个归纳题

归纳文章的意思反对选项

文章说警察没用，无法降低年轻人的犯罪率，唯一的办法就是降低年轻人的数目

A刚好反对的就是法律强制（比如警察，法庭啊什么的）