Question

Last January, in an attempt to lower the number of traffic fatalities, the state legislature passed its "Click It or Ticket" law. Under the new law, motorists can be pulled over and ticketed for not wearing their seat belts, even if an additional driving infraction has not been committed. Lawyers and citizens’ groups are already protesting the law, saying it unfairly infringes on the rights of the state’s drivers. Law enforcement groups counter these claims by stating that the new regulations will save countless additional lives.Which of the following inferences is best supported by the passage above?A. Prior to the "Click It or Ticket" law, motorists could not be stopped simply for not wearing a seat belt.B. The "Click It or Ticket" law violates current search and seizure laws.C. Laws similar to "Click It or Ticket" have effectively reduced traffic fatalities in a number of states.D. The previous seatbelt laws were ineffective in saving lives.E. Law enforcement groups, rather than citizens groups, should determine how to best ensure the safety of motorists.

Answer 1

Answer:

The inference that is best supported by the passage is: A. Prior to the "Click it or Ticket" law, motorist could not be stopped simply for not waring a seatbelt."

Explanation:

In the passage is very clear that in the new law motorist can be now pulled over and ticketed for not wearing seatbelts (later in the passage it implies that's the reason why lawyers and citizens' gorups are protesting), which implies that before the state legislature passed the law this was not a reason to be pulled over even though this is not stated in the passage, the entire text circles around the novelty of  pulling over motorist for not wearing seatbelt, therefore the best option is A especially because that is the main idea of the text.