PrepTest 104, Section 4, Question 3
A just government never restricts the right of(28 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AA just government(19 more words not shown)
- BAn unjust government(13 more words not shown)
- CA just government(16 more words not shown)
- DA just government(17 more words not shown)
- EAn unjust government(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Let people do what they want—unless doing it directly threatens someone else's health or property. That exception matters. A rule against restricting any desire would protect even a desire to hurt someone; this principle leaves room to protect other citizens.
It also says when a restriction is allowed, not when one is required. If an activity threatens other people, the government could restrict it without violating this rule. We aren't told that it must restrict every dangerous activity.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for the judgment that best fits. Look for a government leaving people free to do something that doesn't pose the specified threat, while allowing a restriction when that threat appears. We don't have to endorse this account of a just government to apply it.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Buying a sports car and racing it without restriction on a public highway are different activities. Simply selling the car doesn't present the direct danger described in the rule. Unrestricted racing on a road shared with other people does: a collision can injure them or damage their property. This answer therefore leaves the sale alone while allowing a restriction on the dangerous use. The word “could” is right, too. The principle permits a restriction in that situation without requiring the government to impose it.
- B
We have a restriction on what a just government can do, not a prediction about which public services an unjust government will abolish. Calling a government unjust doesn't tell us that it will take this particular action or that its decision will depend on compulsory labor. The principle supplies neither connection.
- C
This sorts accident survivors into those who receive emergency money and those who don't. Our principle concerns restrictions on people's actions, based on danger to other citizens. It doesn't establish an emergency-funding policy or distinguish avoidable accidents from unavoidable ones for that purpose.
- D
Censoring a magazine or movie does restrict what people can do, so free expression isn't outside the principle's subject. The problem is the reason for the restriction. Criticizing the government is not, by itself, a direct threat to another citizen's health or property. The answer gives us criticism, but it needs the specified danger to justify allowing censorship under this rule.
- E
The rule doesn't tell us that an unjust government will imprison this particular citizen. Nor does it set a time limit after which imprisonment becomes unjust. The fact that the citizen harmed someone several years ago doesn't answer whether a present restriction fits the principle. We can't derive this prediction about the government's conduct from the rule we're given.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.