Bunuel wrote:
The recent increase in the number of accidents related to bungee jumping has led to a lot of people asking for a ban on bungee jumping. Opponents of the ban argue that it is a personal choice whether someone wants to indulge in bungee jumping and the constitution guarantees every individual’s right to freedom. They assert that as long as nobody else is getting harmed, an individual should be allowed to indulge in bungee jumping.
Which of the following most strengthens the argument made by the opponents of the ban?
(A) Bungee jumping is safer than other activities such as free style rappelling or zip lining.
(B) The operating licenses of a lot of bungee jumping companies have been cancelled after incidents of accidents were reported from these companies.
(C) Most accidents related to bungee jumping happen because of a weak or defective bungee cord.
(D) In the more than 400 documented accidents connected to bungee jumping, nobody other than the person making the jump has ever got injured.
(E) Bungee jumping companies can be allowed to operate as long as they implement some new safety measures.
Official Explanation
Answer: D
The opponents of the ban argue that as long as nobody else is getting harmed, people should be free to indulge in bungee jumping. D strengthens this by giving empirical evidence that every time, so far, the only person who has got injured in bungee jumping is the person who is making the jump. As long as this person is aware of the risks involved, it is his personal choice whether to make the jump or not.
(A) The safety aspect of other activities is outside the scope of the argument.
(B) This actually weakens the argument by suggesting somebody other than the person making the jump has had to suffer because of the said accidents.
(C) The cause of the accidents is not our concern in the argument.
(E) Nobody is asking us to make a suggestion as to what bungee jumping companies should do in the future.