I think the answer should be A because as we read through the paragraph the conclusion is
“The government should … new drivers” and there is several evidence (reasons) in the support of the conclusion such as being caught on cameras thus the Assumption should be that “A large number of deaths of young drivers is caused by speeding” if speeding were not a cause of accidents then there is no point of placing limiters on cars and our conclusion will fall apart.
you can also negate the answer option A : A large percentage of death of young drivers is not caused by speeding on negating the statement we can clearly see that the conclusion don’t make any sense.
Answer is thus, A
Someone please check it with me.
Hope it helps:)
Yes I agree with Ujjwal there is no explicitly stated link between speeding and deaths so it has to be.
thank you so much for the explanation!
may I ask why not B? I was thinking A would be some kind of by-conclusion as it is directly stated. I thought B made sense because the paragraph states that only young drivers should be given the speed limit. in this case can’t we assume that older drivers are better at driving so we only consider the young ones?
hope I could explain
The reason for A not being a co-conclusion because the Author is talking about placing speed limiters on cars to reduce the no. of deaths assuming that speed is the major cause of all these deaths make sense if not speed then there is no point placing the limiters and accidents will continue to happen.
The reason B doesn’t seems a answer as if reaction times of young drivers are better then they will be able to avert accidents and in fact they will better drivers which is not the case here.
I’m not sure if i’m completely clear.
Hope it helps
thank you so much! it is clear now