Bernie's explanation is correct, and I'll just add the following which might help you see why choice A is not logically inconsistent (or is logically consistent) with the stimulus.
Let's say two people were arguing. The first says:
I believe that the government should not try to prevent those from taking part in apparently dangerous activities, by imposing financial impediments ( taxing certain items) on those taking part in the activities.
The second says:
My belief is that the government should impose financial impediments on people ( taxing certain items), if doing so will help to fund education.
We can not be certain, based on person two's statement, that person two would disagree with person one. The reason we can not be certain is because the argument stated by person two does not contradict the argument stated by person one. Although person two believes that taxing items for the purpose of funding education is reasonable, he might still believe that taxing for deterring dangerous activities is unreasonable. Because nothing in person two's statement expresses disagreement with person one, we can not say that person two's statement is logically inconsistent with person one's. Because it is logically consistent, it can not be the correct answer choice.