Reformer: A survey of police departments keeps track of the national crime rate, which is the annual number of crimes per 100,000 people. The survey shows no significant reduction in the crime rate in the past 20 years, but the percentage of the population in prison has increased substantially, and public expenditure on prisons has grown at an alarming rate. This demonstrates that putting more people in prison cannot help to reduce crime.
A flaw in the reformer’s argument is that it
(A) infers without justification that because the national crime rate has increased, the number of crimes reported by each police department has increased
(B) ignores the possibility that the crime rate would have significantly increased if it had not been for the greater rate of imprisonment
(C) overlooks the possibility that the population has increased significantly over the past 20 years
(D) presumes, without providing warrant, that alternative measures for reducing crime would be more effective than imprisonment
(E) takes for granted that the number of prisoners must be proportional to the number of crimes committed
A. Irrelevant, as it doesn't address the argument's flaw.
B. Correct. It highlights the flaw that the argument assumes jail isn’t effective without considering that it might be preventing an increase in crime rates.
C. Irrelevant, as it focuses on population size, not the effectiveness of jail.
D. Not relevant, as the argument’s flaw lies in the assumption about jail's effectiveness, not in alternative solutions.
E. Confusing, as proportionality isn’t central to the argument.
