Logical Reasoning

PT109 · S4 · Q15 In 1992, there were over 250 rescues

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

In 1992, there were over 250 rescues of mountain climbers, costing the government almost 3 million dollars.

Proposal

Climbers should have to post a "insurance bond" of sorts, so that a large sum of money goes to the government if something calamitous happens to them while climbing.

Evaluate

The task force is like, .

More or less. That's not a direct quote.

Goal

We want something like, if your activity is known to be super risky and to potentially cost others a lot of money to save you, then you should be responsible for pre-paying for your own rescue.

15.

Each of the following principles, if valid, supports the task force members' proposal EXCEPT:

Taxpayers should not subsidize a
Supports
Mountain climbing is a freely chosen hobby, and when the government spends $3 million to rescue 250 stranded climbers, that money is coming from taxpayers, so taxpayers are "subsidizing" their hobby. This rule is saying that shouldn't happen, which is the same spirit as saying "y'all climbers are going to have to post your own rescue fund, in case we have to rescue you".
9% picked this
The government is obliged to
Supports
Mountain climbing is definitely an activity that involves risk to one's life, given that 25 people died in a year from it. By making mountain climbers post a large sum of money, the government is definitely making it harder to go climbing. This principle endorses the notion that the government would do something that deters people from this risky activity.
8% picked this
Correct
For physically risky sports the
Why this is right
This is a pretty unrelated answer. We weren't talking about permits, although maybe that's what you would get once you posted the large sum of money. But this rule essentially sounds like the government could let anyone climb that has at least minimal training. That lenient standard might lead to more beginner / amateur climbers getting themselves in trouble and needing expensive rescues.
Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
77% picked this
Citizens who use publicly subsidized
Supports
This is similar in effect to (A). Since the $3 million to pay for 250 rescues is being funded with taxpayer revenue, we taxpayers who aren't mountain climbing are probably mad that so much of our money is going to rescuing these people. This principle sympathizes with us. The climbers should be paying for more of this than us. Making them put up their own large sums of money would guarantee that the climbers are paying more than random taxpayers.
3% picked this
People who engage in physically
Supports
Is mountain climbing a physically risky behavior that is not essential to anyone's welfare? Yes. Okay, so this rule says that mountain climbers should be held responsible for the cost of treating any injuries they get from mountain climbing. Would that support this proposal? Sure. The cost of treating a mountain climber's broken leg isn't just the bill you pay at the hospital; it's also the bill you pay for the rescue helicopter that found you and transported you to that hospital. And since this proposal is making the climbers pay for their own rescue transport, this principle would support it.
3% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free