Passage Summary: Since we can't actually stop people from gambling no matter how hard we try, and we shouldn't have laws that don't work, we should just get rid of the laws against gambling.

Conclusion: There should be no legal prohibition against gambling.

Reasoning: Gambling laws are impossible to enforce, and any law that is not effective should not exist.

Analysis: This is a Sufficient Assumption question, so we need a bridge that perfectly connects the premises to the conclusion. The editor establishes a rule: if a law is 'ineffective,' it shouldn't be a law. They then state a fact: gambling laws are 'impossible to enforce.' To make the conclusion follow logically, we must assume that being 'impossible to enforce' is enough to categorize a law as 'ineffective.' Look for an answer that explicitly equates the inability to enforce a law with a lack of effectiveness.