1 . Hundreds of new drivers have been given bans (禁令) for using their mobile phones at the wheel, as part of stricter new laws introduced. In March, the punishment for driving while on the phone was doubled to six points — meaning drivers with less than two years’ experience faced a ban.
New laws meant the punishment for being caught on a mobile phone at the wheel was increased to six points. The new rules were introduced in England, Scotland and Wales. Drivers who get six points within two years of passing their test will lose their licence, creating a one-strike rule for mobile phone users. To get back behind the wheel, new drivers have to retake both the theory and practical parts of the driving test.
Mr Williams in the RAC said, “These people have spent hours and hours and hundreds of pounds learning to drive to gain their personal freedom only to throw it all away through this foolish behaviour. The only comfort is that they won’t be drawn into some terrible crashes caused by the distraction (使人分心的事物) of a hand-held mobile phone.”
When the new laws were introduced, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said they would act as a strong warning to mobile phone users. However, the numbers suggested a total of 15,752 drivers received the punishment of six points for using a mobile phone between March and August. This is an increase from 15, 237 drivers in the same period of last year.
National Police Chiefs’ Council Lead on roads Policing, Chief Constable Anthony Bangham, said the police took the offence (违法行为) seriously. “This is not a small offence and is never a risk worth taking because a moment’s distraction behind the wheel can change lives forever.” “Our message is simple — don’t do it,” he added.
1. What can we infer from Paragraph1?| A．The new laws have not been passed. |
| B．The new laws are not strict enough. |
| C．Drivers with less than two years’ experience won’t be affected. |
| D．Punishment for driving while phoning used to be three points. |
| A．He will be fined a lot. |
| B．He must learn the new rules. |
| C．He will lose his driving licence. |
| D．He will be given a warning. |
| A．traffic accidents were cut down |
| B．there were still many drivers who broke them |
| C．drivers thought the laws were unfair to them |
| D．fewer people broke them compared |
| A．The police didn’t take the new rules seriously. |
| B．The roads policy should be improved for safety. |
| C．A moment of carelessness may cause big accidents. |
| D．The laws need to be improved a lot and retested. |
2 . Drivers who drive a little too close to cyclists on the road could soon be caught on the spot. A new technology adopted by legal departments in Ottawa could help carry out legal distance between bikers and cars on the road.
The device, which is fixed on a bicycle’s handlebars like a bike bell, uses sonar(声呐) technology to measure the distance between the bike and passing cars. The device will make a loud noise if the car is within one meter of the bike, the legal limit in the city of Ottawa, allowing the police rider to radio ahead to his colleagues so that the driver can be pulled over. “The safety of all road users is extremely vital, including cyclists. These cycling changes are directed at encouraging cycling, promoting road safety, and sharing the road,” said Rob Wilkinson, coordinator of the Safer Roads Ottawa Program.
The authorities started the program last week with a single sonar device. One police officer rode the bike bearing the device around the city on Tuesday to prove the effectiveness(有效性) of the technology. Within a few minutes of riding, the device was beeping, registering that two drivers had violated the one-meter distance requirement. The drivers were pulled over and given brochures informing them that they had broken the safe distance law.
Wilkinson noted that the device is not currently being used to issue fines, which can go up to $110, and that there are no plans to use it for enforcement(执法)in the future. At this point, its main use is to spread awareness about the safe distance law, which was passed last September in an effort to encourage rider safety and reduce deadly crashes.
1. What will happen if the safe distance is beyond the legal limit?| A．The cyclist will soon be caught on the spot. |
| B．The police will make the driver stop by the road. |
| C．The driver will be arrested for driving too fast. |
| D．The device will at once call the police of itself. |
| A．To make the bicycle attractive. | B．To encourage people to walk. |
| C．To guarantee road safety. | D．To warn drivers of danger. |
| A．Making a loud noise. | B．Receiving an urgent message. |
| C．Sending a stop signal. | D．Radioing the police rider. |
| A．It is being developed at present. | B．It still has room for improvement. |
| C．It may be used to fine drivers later. | D．It helps reduce traffic accidents. |
3 . Communities across the world are starting to ban facial recognition technologies. The efforts are well intentioned, but banning facial recognition is the wrong way to fight against modern surveillance （监 视）.Generally, modern mass surveillance has three broad components: identification, correlation and discrimination.
Facial recognition is a technology that can be used to identify people without their consent. Once we are identified, the data about who we are and what we are doing can be correlated with other data. This might be movement data, which can be used to "follow” us as we move throughout our day. It can be purchasing data, Internet browsing data, or data about who we talk to via email or text. It might be data about our income, ethnicity, lifestyle, profession and interests. There is an entire industry of data brokers who make a living by selling our data without our consent.
It's not just that they know who we are; it's that they correlate what they know about us to create profiles about who we are and what our interests are. The whole purpose of this process is for companies to treat individuals differently. We are shown different ads on the Internet and receive different offers for credit cards. In the future, we might be treated differently when we walk into a store, just as we currently are when we visit websites.
It doesn't matter which technology is used to identify people. What's important is that we can be consistently identified over time. We might be completely anonymous （匿名的）in a system that uses unique cookies to track us as we browse the Internet, but the same process of correlation and discrimination still occurs.
Regulating this system means addressing all three steps of the process. A ban on facial recognition won't make any difference. The problem is that we are being identified without our knowledge or consent, and society needs rules about when that is permissible.
Similarly, we need rules about how our data can be combined with other data, and then bought and sold without our knowledge or consent. The data broker industry is almost entirely unregulated now. Reasonable laws would prevent the worst of their abuses.
Finally, we need better rules about when and how it is permissible for companies to discriminate. Discrimination based on protected characteristics like race and gender is already illegal, but those rules are ineffectual against the current technologies of surveillance and control. When people can be identified and their data correlated at a speed and scale previously unseen, we need new rules.
Today, facial recognition technologies are receiving the force of the tech backlash （抵制），but focusing on them misses the point. We need to have a serious conversation about all the technologies of identification, correlation and discrimination, and decide how much we want to be spied on and what sorts of influence we want them to have over our lives.
1. According to Para. 2, with facial recognition _______.| A．one’s lifestyle changes greatly |
| B．one's email content is disclosed |
| C．one's profiles are updated in time |
| D．one's personal information is released |
| A．discrimination based on new tech surveillance is illegal |
| B．different browsing data bring in different advertisements |
| C．using mobiles anonymously keeps us from being correlated |
| D．data brokers control the current technologies of surveillance |
| A．people's concern over their safety |
| B．the nature of the surveillance society |
| C．proper regulation of mass surveillance |
| D．the importance of identification technology |
| A．call for banning facial recognition technologies |
| B．advocate the urgent need for changes in related laws |
| C．inform readers of the disadvantages of facial recognition |
| D．evaluate three broad components in modem mass surveillance |
4 . Smoking in your own home in Thailand may now be considered a crime , if the smoke is considered harmful to other people in the house.
The new law , Family Protection and Development Promotion Act , was initiated(启动) by the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security and was announced in the Royal Gazette on May 22 ,2019.
The law aims at curbing smoking at home which might be hazardous for others' health residing under the same roof. In that case, it will be considered as “domestic violence". The new law came into force on August 20.
According to the center for research and knowledge management for tobacco control , at the Faculty of Medical Science of Mahidol University , there are about 4.9 million households where one or more family members smoke.
An average of 10. 3 million people have unwittingly (不知不觉地) become passive smokers because they've been breathing in smoke at home. Scientific studies show that passive smokers are al greater risk of being affected by cancer.
Of 75 child patients from houses where smoking is practiced ,76% of them were found to have nicotine traces in their urine , with 43% of them having nicotine content exceeding permissible levels.
Smoking at home also “may lead to physical or emotional violence” because of aggressiveness when there is a . lack of smoking, and might as well ruin relationships between smokers and non-smoker family members.
According to the new law , anyone who thinks they are affected by domestic smoking can report to officials concerned so that inspectors will be sent to investigate and take legal action against the smokers.
Once convicted , the court may order a person to receive treatment to quit smoking in an attempt to protect the person's family.
In February in 2019 ,Thailand had banned smoking at six of its airports along with a ban in public places.
1. What is the fact about the new law in Thailand?| A．It makes it clear that smoking at home is a crime. |
| B．I’s a law on protecting the health of non-smokers. |
| C．It was drafted and adopted by the royal family. |
| D．It classifies smoking as a form of domestic violence. |
| A．Treating. | B．Changing. |
| C．Improving. | D．Controlling. |
| A．It may increase the risk of cancer in passive smokers. |
| B．It will probably cause physical or emotional violence. |
| C．It will make the smokers become more aggressive. |
| D．It may lead 10 disharmony in family relations. |
| A．Smoking is illegal anywhere in Thailand. |
| B．Smokers are less likely 10 develop cancer than non-smokers. |
| C．People who smoke at home in Thailand will be sent to prison. |
| D．Thailand is committed to creating a smoke-free environment. |
5 . Britain’s government is to introduce a law making it a legal requirement for the first time for every public sector (部门) worker in a public-facing role to speak English fluently, the Cabinet Office announced Sunday. The Cabinet Office said it will mean all public sector organisations must ensure staff can communicate effectively with the public, at what will be similar to a language skill good enough to pass a high-level high college exam.
A spokesman for the Cabinet Office said: “This requirement would increase depending on the nature of the role and profession. Doctors, for example, are already required to have a much higher level of English.”
“Organisations including the National Health Service (NHS), armed forces and state-funded schools will all be bound by a new code (法规) of practice which will be produced following a consultation in the autumn. The law and code of practice will apply to both existing and new employees working in public-facing roles.”
Hancock said: “We are controlling immigration (移民) for the benefit of all hard-working people. That includes making sure that foreign nationals employed in customer-facing public sector roles are able to speak English of a high standard. We have already introduced tough new language requirements for migrants, now we will introduce new law in the coming Immigration Bill to deliver the commitment (承诺) made by Prime Minister David Cameron to go further.”
The new primary law will be used to extend the same level of language control to every public sector worker in a customer facing role. It will include police officers, social workers, teaching staff and assistants, and local government employees. Added Minister Hancock: “This will be the first time there has been an approach to enforcing (强制实施) fluent English across the public sector and will create a consistent experience for taxpayers, while promoting integration (整合；一体化) and British values in the United Kingdom.”
1. In public sectors, the English requirement .| A．is going to apply only to new employees |
| B．will be different for different jobs |
| C．is the hardest for doctors |
| D．aroused a heated debate |
| A．People in Britain will have to work harder. |
| B．There are too many migrants in Britain. |
| C．It will be harder for foreigners to be Englishmen. |
| D．The requirement can help promote employment. |
| A．the new law will involve many public sectors |
| B．it may be hard to carry out the new law |
| C．many public sector workers can’t use English well |
| D．the new law may change British values |
| A．English is more and more popular and important in the world. |
| B．Fluent English will be a requirement in public sectors in Britain. |
| C．English can make a difference in effective communication at work. |
| D．A new primary law on immigration has been made in Britain. |
6 . Traveling by subway can sometimes be quite an adventure, especially during rush hour. There are the times when you have to avoid cups of coffee that could spill (溅) on you. The smells of some passengers’ food are very strong, too. According to the Beijing subway passenger regulations, which went into effect on May 15th, passengers except babies and the sick are no longer allowed to eat or drink on the subway. Violators (违反者) who do not stop after being asked to will be asked to get off. The violation will also be recorded in the violators’ credit record.
Some support the rule. The reason is that the smell of food and drink can annoy other passengers. “The smell of food fills the carriage, causing people discomfort, especially in the hot summer, Besides, eating on the subway produces rubbish. And on subway trains, people often spill their drinks,” said Zheng Yiou, 17, a student from Hefei.
However, others question this rule. “Some citizens live so far from their work places that they have limited time to have breakfast before they go to work. Eating while they travel saves them time and decreases the chance that they will be late for work,” He Songlin, a 17-year-old student from Chengdu said, “And some people, like those with low- blood sugar levels, get sick if they can’t eat when they must.”
Other Chinese cities like Nanjing and Chengdu have similar regulations. Some foreign cities also ban eating and drinking on the subway. For example, eating and drinking have long been banned on the subway in Washington DC. Singapore fines people who eat or drink on the subway up to 500 Singapore dollars, which is RMB 2,417 yuan.
Chen Yanyan, a professor from Beijing University of Technology, believed we should consider the need of some people to eat or drink on the subway. “Commuters (上班族) and travelers are sometimes too busy to eat. Maybe we could learn from Tokyo, where there are many subway stations equipped with services, allowing passengers to eat and drink,” she said.
1. In which city was subway passenger regulations carried out on May 15th?| A．Chengdu. | B．Nanjing. |
| C．Washington DC. | D．Beijing. |
| A．Eating on the subway. | B．Drinking on the subway. |
| C．Being fined up to 2417 yuan. | D．Being asked to get off the train. |
| A．Worried. | B．Sympathetic. |
| C．Doubtful. | D．Uninterested |
| A．Food and Drink Banned on Subway. |
| B．The Adventure of Subway Traveling |
| C．Ways to Eat and Drink on Subway. |
| D．The Services on Subway Stations |
The expensive trip to church was a surprise for Richard Albert, who lives right on the Canadian border. Like the other half-dozen people of Township 15, crossing the border is a daily occurrence for Albert. The nearby Quebec village of St. Pamphile is where they shop, eat and go to church.
There are many such situations in these areas along the largely unguarded 5,530-mile border between Canada and the US-which in some cases actually runs down the middle of streets or through buildings.
As a result, Albert says he did not expect any problems three weeks ago when he returned home to the US after attending church in Canada, as usual. The US customs（海关）station in this are is closed on Sundays, so be just drove around the locked gate, as he had done every weekend since the gate appeared last May, following a tightening of border security. Two days later. Albert was told to go to the customs office, where an officer told him be had been caught on camera crossing the border illegally（非法）.
Ottawa has given out special passes to some 300 US citizens in that area so they can enter the country when Canadian customs stations are closed, but the US stopped a similar program last May. That forces the people to a 200-miledetour along hilly roads to get home through another border checkpoint.
Albert has requested that the customs office change their decisions on the fine, but he has not attended a Sunday church since. “I feel like I’m living in a prison,” he said.
1. We learn from the text that Richard Albert is .
| A．an American living in Township 15 |
| B．a Canadian living in a Quebec village |
| C．a Canadian working in a customs station |
| D．an American working in a Canadian church |
| A．failed to obey traffic rules | B．broke the American security rules |
| C．worked in St. Pamphile without a pass | D．damaged the gate of the customs office |
| A．a drive through the town | B．a race across the fields |
| C．a roundabout way of travelling | D．a journey in the mountain area |
| A．A Cross-country Trip | B．A Special Border Pass |
| C．An Unguarded Border | D．An Expensive Church Visit |
