扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2017V-CR-142
Budget constraints have made police officials consider reassigning a considerable number of officers from traffic enforcement to work on higher priority, serious crimes. Reducing traffic enforcement for this reason would be counterproductive, however, in light of the tendency of criminals to use cars when engaged in the commission of serious crimes. An officer stopping a car for a traffic violation can make a search that turns up evidence of serious crime.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument given?
An officer who stops a car containing evidence of the commission of a serious crime risks a violent confrontation, even if the vehicle was stopped only for a traffic violation.
When the public becomes aware that traffic enforcement has lessened, it typically becomes lax in obeying traffic rules.
Those willing to break the law to commit serious crimes are often in committing such crimes unwilling to observe what they regard as the lesser constraints of traffic law.
The offenders committing serious crimes who would be caught because of traffic violations are not the same group of individuals as those who would be caught if the arresting officers were reassigned from traffic enforcement.
The great majority of persons who are stopped by officers for traffic violations are not guilty of any serious crimes.
C的支持是
（那些愿意犯严重罪的人经常不愿意遵守他们看起来有较少约束的交通法）
如果用白话说就是
重罪犯一般作案时，根本不屌交通规则。
这个补充很完美：
重罪犯在作案时会违反交通，这样交警就会把他们拦下来了。完美地补上了逻辑链中的一个假设。
答案C如果写这个白话“重罪犯一般作案时，根本不屌交通规则。”，题目难度就会降低一些。出题者有意把这个支持一般化（abstraction, generalization)，这样如果你没有办法看清其中的指代关系，就觉得这个没什么关系。大家应该多熟悉些这种一般化的说法。看玩笑时想想怎样把简单的事，搞得高大上。是一个道理。答案看到这种明显一般化的选项，一定要多读多想一下。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论