PrepTest 155, Section 1, Question 16
Park ranger: It is unfair to cite people(64 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(14 more words not shown)
- APeople should not(10 more words not shown)
- BRegulations regarding park(5 more words not shown)
- CThe public should(15 more words not shown)
- DPeople who fish(21 more words not shown)
- EPeople who are(25 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If even the rangers haven't heard about the new restrictions, how are people fishing supposed to know?
That makes the ranger's concern understandable. Someone could be fishing where it was allowed until recently, unaware that the rules changed. A warning could explain, 'This area is now restricted; please don't fish here,' without immediately issuing a citation.
But why does being unaware make a citation unfair? The ranger takes that connection for granted. Someone could instead hold that people are responsible for following a rule regardless of whether they've learned about it. We're not deciding what the real law says; we're identifying the principle this particular argument needs.
What we’re looking for
To strengthen the ranger's reasoning, connect the probable ignorance with the recommended response: people shouldn't be cited for violating laws they don't know about. That gets us from the concern about poor publicity to the decision to warn rather than cite.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This directly connects awareness with whether a citation is appropriate. The ranger thinks people probably don't know about the new restrictions and concludes they should receive only warnings for now. A supplies a principle making that lack of knowledge a reason not to cite them.
- B
Publicizing the rules may be a good idea, but it doesn't answer what to do with people who violate them before that happens. We could agree that regulations should be widely publicized and still think violators should receive citations. The argument needs a connection to the enforcement decision.
- C
This is tempting because it sounds like the ranger's concern: if enforcement officials don't know, we shouldn't expect more from the public. But that only supports the point about what people can reasonably be expected to know. We still need the next step: should their lack of knowledge prevent a citation? A addresses that step directly.
- D
This places a responsibility on people fishing to learn the restrictions. It doesn't support excusing their lack of awareness. Even if they should make every effort to learn the rules, we would still need a principle telling us whether to cite someone who remains uninformed.
- E
Giving someone a chance to explain is different from deciding not to cite that person. Also, thinking a law doesn't apply to you is different from not knowing the law exists. The ranger's reason concerns awareness of newly changed restrictions, not an opportunity to argue about an exemption.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.