1 . With the possible exception of equal rights, perhaps the most controversial issue across the United States today is the death penalty. Many argue that it is an effective deterrent (威慑) to murder, while others maintain there is no convincing evidence that the death penalty reduces the number of murders.
The principal argument advanced by those opposed to the death penalty, basically, is that it is cruel and inhuman punishment, which is the mark of a brutal society, and finally that it is of questionable effectiveness as a deterrent to crime anyway.
In our opinion, the death penalty is a necessary evil. Throughout recorded history there have always been those extreme individuals in every society who were capable of terribly violent crimes such as murder. But some are more extreme than others.
For example, it is one thing to take the life of another in a fit of blind rage, but quite another to coldly plot and carry out the murder of one or more people in the style of a butcher. Thus, murder, like all other crimes, is a matter of relative degree. While it could be argued with some conviction that the criminal in the first instance should be merely separated from society, such should not be the fate of the latter type murderer.
The value of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime may be open to debate. But the overwhelming majority of citizens believe that the death penalty protects them. Their belief is strengthened by evidence which shows that the death penalty deters murder. For example, from 1954 to 1963, when the death penalty was consistently imposed in California, the murder rate remained between three and four murders for each 100,000 population. Since 1964 the death penalty has been carried out only once, and the murder rate has risen to 10.4 murders for each 100,000 population. The sharp climb in the state’s murder rate, which began when executions stopped, is no coincidence. It is convincing evidence that the death penalty does deter many murderers. If the bill reestablishing the death penalty is banned, innocent people will be murdered—some whose lives may have been saved if the death penalty were in effect. This is literally a life or death matter. The lives of thousands of innocent people must be protected.
1. The principal purpose of this passage is to________.| A．speak for the majority | B．initiate a ban |
| C．criticize the government | D．argue for the value of the death penalty |
| A．negative | B．friendly |
| C．supportive | D．neutral |
| A．the death penalty is the most controversial issue in the United States today |
| B．the ban of the bill reestablishing the death penalty is of little importance |
| C．the second type of murderers should be sentenced to death |
| D．the value of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime is not to be debated |
| A．the effects of execution and the effects of isolation |
| B．the murder rate and the imposition of the death penalty |
| C．the importance of equal rights and that of the death penalty |
| D．executions and murders |
| A．opposing | B．supporting |
| C．neutral | D．not clear |
2 . Visitor Code of Conduct
Please help us maintain a healing environment for our patient. Visiting hours and policies vary throughout the hospital. Please ask a staff member about the policy on the unit you wish to visit. We ask that you comply with the following visitor rules:
• Do not visit if you are sick (fever, cough, sore throat, nausea, or vomiting) or have been exposed to chicken pox (水痘) or other contagious (传染的) illness within the past three weeks.
• Clean your hands each time you enter and leave the patient’s room.
• Follow isolation precautions (隔离预防措施) that are posted on the patient’s door.
• You must wear shoes and shirts at all times. Clothing must be clean and neat.
• Visitors are limited to two per patient each time.
• Do not use waiting rooms on a unit if you are not visiting a patient in that unit.
• Waiting rooms are not for overnight stays.
• Children must have adult supervision (监护) at all times and must be respectful of the hospital’s healing environment. Some units do not allow children’s visiting.
You will be asked to leave for violating (违反) any of the above rules or for the followings:
• Your behavior creates a risk to patients, families or staff.
• You appear to be ill.
• You refuse to follow isolation precautions.
• You are not respectful or considerate of others.
• You fail to supervise children.
If you believe someone is violating these rules, or you need assistance, please notify security by dialing 7363 on the hospital phones or 813-844-7363 on your mobile phone. Security is available at all times.
Waiting areas are monitored at all times by a security video camera.
1. The underlined phrase “comply with” in Paragraph 1 probably means ________.| A．obey | B．study |
| C．discover | D．pass |
| A．make an appointment | B．ask permission from the doctor |
| C．check the visiting policy | D．ring up the patient first |
| A．stay at the waiting room of any unit | B．be supervised at all times |
| C．refuse to follow isolation precautions | D．create a new environment for patients |
| A．touch patient equipment | B．visit patients in group of two |
| C．stay overnight in the waiting room | D．change into slippers in the patient room |
| A．Children can go to visit patients by themselves. |
| B．If you seem to be ill, you can still visit the patients unless it is contagious. |
| C．Visitors who violate the rules will not be allowed to visit again. |
| D．You can ask for security’s help at any time. |
Enough ＂meaningless drivel＂. That’s the message from a group of members of the UK government who have been examining how social media firms like LinkedIn gather and use social media data.
The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee’s report, released last week, has blamed firms for making people sign up to long incomprehensible legal contracts and calls for an international standard or kitemark (认证标记) to identify sites that have clear terms and conditions.
＂The term and conditions statement that we all carelessly agree to is meaningless drivel to anyone,＂ says Andrew Miller, the chair of the committee. Instead, he says, firms should provide a plain-English version of their terms. The simplified version would be checked by a third party and awarded a kitemark if it is an accurate reflection of the original.
It is not yet clear who would administer the scheme, but the UK government is looking at introducing it on a voluntary basis. ＂we need to think through how we make that work in practice,＂ says Miller.
Would we pay any more attention to a kitemark? ＂I think if you went and did the survey, people would like to think they would,＂ says Nigel Shadbolt at the University of Southampton, UK, who studies open data. ＂We do know people worry a lot about the inappropriate use of their information.＂ But what would happen in practice is another matter, he says.
Other organisations such as banks ask customers to sign long contracts they may not read or understand, but Miller believes social media requires special attention because it is so new. ＂We still don’t know how significant the long-term impact is going to be of unwise things that kids put on social media that come back and bite them in 20 years’ time,＂ he says.
Shadbolt, who gave evidence to the committee, says the problem is that we don’t know how companies will use our data because their business models and uses of data are still evolving. Large collections of personal information have become valuable only recently, he says.
The shock and anger when a social media firm does something with data that people don’t expect, even if users have apparently permission, show that the current situation isn’t working. If properly administered, a kitemark on terms and conditions could help people know what exactly they are signing up to. Although they would still have to actually read them.
1. What does the phrase ＂ meaningless drivel＂ in paragraphs 1 and 3 refer to?
| A．Legal contracts that social media firms make people sign up to. |
| B．Warnings from the UK government against unsafe websites. |
| C．Guidelines on how to use social media websites properly. |
| D．Insignificant data collected by social media firms. |
| A．social media firms would conduct a survey on the kitemark scheme |
| B．people would pay as much attention to a kitemark as they think |
| C．a kitemark scheme would be workable on a nationwide scale |
| D．the kitemark would help companies develop their business models |
| A．their users consist largely of kids under 20 years old |
| B．the language in their contracts is usually harder to understand |
| C．the information they collected could become more valuable in future |
| D．it remains unknown how users’ data will be taken advantage of |
| A．think carefully before posting anything onto such websites |
| B．read the terms and conditions even if there is a kitemark |
| C．take no further action if they can find a kitemark |
| D．avoid providing too much personal information |
| A．Say no to social media? |
| B．New security rules in operation? |
| C．Accept without reading? |
| D．Administration matters! |
