According to futuristic writings in the 1960s, robots would soon drastically reduce crime. With night vision and ability to detect the chemicals involved in ballistics, such robots could be programed to paralyze anyone roaming the street at night with a gun: virtually all criminals fit that description. These criminals would be incapacitated and thus unable to resist an easy arrest. Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that the logic of the prediction is flawed? ["It's not obvious that reducing the number of criminals will always be beneficial.", 'Because these robots could pose a hazard to cars at night, special barriers would have to be constructed between the paths of the robots and the lanes of traffic.', 'Since police officers carry guns, the robots would incapacitate them just as efficiently as they incapacitate criminals.', 'Such robots would need to be charged during the daytime.']