PrepTest 116, Section 2, Question 8
Criminologist: Increasing the current prison term for robbery(12 more words not shown)
Each of the following, if(6 more words not shown)
- AMany people who(8 more words not shown)
- BAn increase in(16 more words not shown)
- CPrison terms for(7 more words not shown)
- DMost people committing(8 more words not shown)
- EMost people committing(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why wouldn't a longer prison term discourage robbery?
It might depend on where we start. Imagine increasing a sentence from 1,000 years to 2,000 years. Either way, a person expects to spend the rest of life in prison. The extra years wouldn't change that prospect. Or perhaps the people committing the crime aren't considering the penalty at all. If they don't expect law enforcement to catch them, the official sentence might feel irrelevant.
What we’re looking for
Those are possible explanations, not facts we've been given. The criminologist simply claims that increasing the current term won't have a significant deterrent effect. The question asks for the exception among facts supporting that claim. Four choices should help us understand why the increase might not change behavior. We need the one that doesn't help.
Working the answers
- A
This provides some support, even though it doesn't settle the question. Someone primarily seeking thrills and risks may be less responsive to a tougher penalty than someone carefully weighing the costs. That helps explain why an increase might not discourage robbery.
Could a thrill-seeker still be deterred by a sufficiently severe sentence? Sure. That is a fair reservation. But the choice only needs to support the criminologist, not guarantee the prediction. A gives us a relevant motive; C supplies no comparable link to behavior.
- B
A penalty increase failed to change the rate of another crime. Robbery and embezzlement aren't identical, so this isn't proof that the same result will occur. Still, it is an example of the very pattern the criminologist predicts: a longer term without a corresponding reduction in the crime. That offers some support.
- CCorrect
Sentences recently got shorter. What happened to robberies as a result? We aren't told. Without information about people's behavior, this trend doesn't tell us whether a future increase would discourage them. A change in the penalty by itself is not evidence that people ignore penalty changes.
- D
If most robbers think they won't be caught, they may see little reason to worry about how long a sentence would be. A longer penalty matters much less to someone who expects never to face it. That gives us a reason the predicted lack of deterrence could occur.
- E
People who don't know the average sentence are poorly positioned to base their decision on it. That supports the thought that increasing the term may have little effect on their conduct. It doesn't prove they'll never learn about an increase, but it does make the proposed link between sentence length and behavior less persuasive.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.