1. Statement:
Should the practice of transfer of sub- inspectors from police stations of one city to those of another be stopped?
Arguments:
I. No. Transfer of officers is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it.
II. Yes, it involves a lot of government expenditure and causes inconvenience to many in comparison to the benefits it yields.
A. Only I am strong
B. Only II is strong
C. Both are equally valid
D. None are valid
Answer - Option D
Explanation -The argument I call for continuing an official custom just for the sake of it. It does not give any other concrete reason for continuing the routine transfer of sub-inspectors or. It is not necessary that it is right to practice a ‘routine administrative matter’. Argument II, on the other hand, talks about transfers leading to a lot of government expenditure and causing inconvenience to many as compared to the benefits it yields. Now a government should continue or discontinue a practice on the basis of the output yielded. Certainly, if continuing a practice yields better outcomes than discontinuing it, the practice should be continued. The concern, thus, should not be the expenditure, procedure or convenience of the people involved in the process. Hence, neither of the statements is strong enough to support the given statement.
2. Statement:
Anti-Romeo squad is unlawful.
Arguments:
I. Yes, the couple should be free from moral policing
II. No, this is a precautionary measure to ensure that public places should be free from eve-teasing.
A. Only I am strong
B. Only II is strong
C. Both are equally valid
D. None are valid
Answer - Option B
Explanation - Anti- Romeo squad is the special wing of state police which ensures that a girl/ ladies should go to any place without fear of eve-teasing. It has nothing to do with moral policing.