Logical reasoning PrepTest 104 · Section 4 · Question 3

This answer is about a just government, which we know means the government places restrictions on people only to protect others. This government doesn’t ban the sale of sports cars - which lines up with the principle, since owning a sports car doesn’t hurt others. This government does, however, restrict the ability to race the cars on public highways, which does protect others. Since this answer lines up with what we are told about just governments from the stimulus, it’s the correct answer.

This answer is about an unjust government, which we know means the government does place restrictions on people for reasons other than protecting others. That said, this answer doesn’t really bring up restrictions being placed on people, so it’s out of scope.

This answer is about a just government, which we know means the government places restrictions on people only to protect others. Here, however, there are no restrictions being placed on people for any reason, so it’s out of scope.

This answer is about a just government, which we know means the government places restrictions on people only to protect others. Here, the government is placing restrictions on magazines/movies (and the audience for them) for reasons other than protecting other citizens - it’s designed to protect the government. As such, this government is unjust, and this answer runs counter to the principle in the stimulus.

This answer is about an unjust government, which we know means the government does place restrictions on people for reasons other than protecting others. Here, there is a restriction placed on a person, but it’s unclear whether it protects others. Maybe this incarceration protects people from further crimes; maybe it doesn’t. Since we don’t know, we can’t say whether this answer conforms to the stimulus.