Question

Police statistics have shown that automobile antitheft devices reduce the risk of car theft, but a statistical study of automobile theft by the automobile insurance industry claims that cars equipped with antitheft devices are, paradoxically, more likely to be stolen than cars that are not so equipped. Which one of the following. if true, does the most to resolve the apparent paradox? (A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered. (B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen. (C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft. (D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed. (E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

Short answer

Option D best resolves the paradox by indicating that high-risk factors align with device presence.

Step-by-step solution

Understand the Paradox

The paradox suggests that while antitheft devices are supposed to reduce car theft, statistics show that cars with these devices are stolen more often. To resolve this, we must identify which option provides a plausible explanation for this contradiction.

Analyze Each Option

Review each option to see which one provides an explanation for why cars with antitheft devices are reported as being stolen more frequently.

Evaluate Option A

Option A suggests delays in reporting thefts to insurance companies. This does not explain the correlation between antitheft devices and increased theft.

Evaluate Option B

Option B states that most stolen cars do not have antitheft devices. This does not directly address why cars with devices are reported stolen more.

Evaluate Option C

Option C indicates that common antitheft devices often give false alarms. While this might impact perception of effectiveness, it doesn't resolve the statistical correlation.

Evaluate Option D

Option D explains that cars with antitheft devices are owned by people in high-risk areas or with theft-prone cars, which could lead to a higher incidence of theft despite the devices. This resolves the paradox by showing that these cars are simply more likely to be targeted.

Evaluate Option E

Option E suggests professional thieves can bypass devices. While valid, it doesn't focus on why the theft rate seems higher for equipped vehicles.

Conclusion

Option D provides the best explanation; although antitheft devices are present, the cars are still targeted more often due to being in high-risk areas or being theft-prone.

Key concepts

Paradox Resolution

A paradox is a situation that contains seemingly contradictory elements. In this case, antitheft devices should theoretically decrease car theft, yet statistics suggest the opposite—cars with such devices are stolen more. This creates an apparent contradiction, or paradox. To resolve it, we must seek an underlying reason that reconciles these opposing facts.
Option D from the step-by-step solution holds the key. It tells us that individuals who live in high-theft areas or own particularly theft-prone vehicles are more likely to install antitheft devices. Therefore, while these devices may deter theft, the high inherent risk of theft due to location and type of vehicle leads to them being stolen regardless. By considering this, the paradox is resolved and makes logical sense.

Automobile Theft

Automobile theft is a significant issue worldwide, affecting individuals, insurance industries, and law enforcement. When examining theft statistics, it’s important to understand the various factors that contribute to these numbers. Vehicles can be stolen for parts, for resale, or simply for joyriding.
Several variables impact theft probability:

• Location: Urban areas often report higher theft rates than rural ones, due to larger populations and more foot traffic.
• Vehicle Type: Some car models are more attractive to thieves because of their resale value or parts availability.
• Theft Prevention: The use and type of antitheft devices can also affect whether a car is likely to be stolen.

Considering these elements offers crucial insights into automobile theft statistics.

Antitheft Devices

Antitheft devices, such as alarms, immobilizers, and tracking systems, are designed to prevent or deter car theft. They are marketed with the promise of increased security but effectiveness can vary widely.
Common types of antitheft devices include:

• Audible Alarms: Designed to scare away thieves, but often criticized for frequent false alarms.
• Steering Wheel Locks: A visible deterrent, though not foolproof.
• Immobilizers: Help prevent the car from being driven away without a proper key.

Despite these measures, determined and skilled thieves can sometimes circumvent even the most advanced systems. Thus, while antitheft devices can lower the likelihood of theft, they are not a guarantor of safety.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis in the context of automobile theft provides a quantitative approach to understanding crime trends. By evaluating various data points, stakeholders can identify patterns and develop strategies to combat theft.
Key elements of analysis include:

• Data Collection: Gathering information on theft rates, types of vehicles involved, and regions most affected.
• Correlation vs. Causation: Understanding the difference is crucial; not all correlations imply causation.
• Risk Factors: Identifying and analyzing these factors helps in creating strategies that mitigate the risk of theft.

For instance, the contradiction between antitheft devices and increased theft rates could initially seem illogical. Yet upon deeper statistical evaluation, as shown in the paradox resolution, the analysis reveals deeper interconnections and factors at play.