1 . Las Vegas city in Nevada is built in a desert. The city may be known to the world for its partying. But officials have found that there are 21 square kilometers of useless grass. The grass is never laid on, played on or even stepped on. The grass is only there to look nice.
Now, the city is asking the Nevada state legislature (立法机构) to ban useless grass. It is trying to become the first place in America to ban that kind of grass often seen between streets, in housing developments and in office parks.
Useless grass nearly makes up 40% of all the grass in Las Vegas and it needs lots of water to survive. Grass needs four times more water than dry climate plants. By tearing out the grass, the city could reduce yearly water usage by 15%.
In 2003, the Southern Nevada Water Authority banned developers from planting grass in front of new homes. It also offered homeowners $30 for each square meter of grass they tear out. But fewer people are now using the program. Water usage has increased here by 9% since 2019. And last year, Las Vegas set a record of 240 days without major rainfall. The Colorado River provides much of Nevada’s drinking water. The river could lose more water as climate change affects it.
Water officials in other dry cities said water usage needs to be reduced. But they fear the reaction to reforms like the ones in Las Vegas if their communities do not accept them. Cynthia Campbell is the water resources adviser for the city of Phoenix in Arizona. “The city restrictions (限制) may get too hard for some residents (居民). They’ll say that is the point of no return for them,” Campbell said. “For some people, it’s a pool. For some people, it’s grass.”
1. Why does Las Vegas city try to ban useless grass?| A．To protect the local people. | B．To beautify the city. |
| C．To reduce water usage. | D．To reduce waste. |
| A．Allowing planting grass before new houses. |
| B．Awarding those who reduced water usage. |
| C．Praising those who signed on the program. |
| D．Encouraging the residents to tear out grass. |
| A．Many residents won’t follow the ban. |
| B．Reaction to the reform will vary personally. |
| C．Water officials should consider many factors. |
| D．Other measures should be taken to protect water. |
| A．Las Vegas Plans to Ban Useless Grass |
| B．A Method Is Adopted to Save Las Vegas |
| C．Choices between Beauty and Practice |
| D．Grass Is Important but Useless in Las Vegas |
2 . Learning to drive is important to the independence of teenagers, but it is also a great responsibility. Although having a law that keeps 16-year-old drivers from having more than one teenager in the car with them at first seems unfair, there are convincing reasons for this requirement.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reports that teens are four times more likely than older drivers to be involved in an automobile accident. It also reports that 16-and-17-year-old drivers are twice as likely to have an accident if they have two teenage friends in the car and four times as likely to have one if they have three or more teenage friends in the car with them. Fatal (致命的) crashes of 16-year-old drivers involve the highest percentage of speeding, driver error, and number of passengers. This information is enough to cause any reasonable person to wonder about the wisdom of allowing new teen drivers to take a carload of friends anywhere, even if the law permits it.
A study at the National Institutes of Health indicates that the part of the human brain that controls judgment and evaluates the consequences of our actions might not be fully formed until the age of 25. Until this study, researchers had placed the age at 18. If this is true, it could explain the reckless (鲁莽的) behavior of many teens, behavior that often extends into their twenties. It also could be a strong reason for being cautious about the driving circumstances of young people.
This is not the only study that indicates such caution is necessary. One study at Temple University in Philadelphia examines the results of peer pressure in risky driving situations. The study, which uses a driving game, has an individual guide a car through a course, both alone and in the presence of friends. Three different age groups participated in the study: 13-16, 18-22, and 24 and older. Members of the oldest group showed caution whether driving alone or with friends present, but the two younger groups took more chances when they were with their friends. Furthermore, because these drivers were accustomed to the noise and distraction of many passengers, they were unable to see their own mistakes. Once again, this is a good indication that a law restricting the number of teenagers in the car with a young driver is a good idea.
1. What does the author mainly tell us in Paragraph 2?| A．Many deaths have occurred because of inexperience and overconfidence. |
| B．It’s reasonable to severely limit the passenger number of teen drivers. |
| C．New teen drivers have to ask permission before driving with friends. |
| D．There are many causes behind the teens’ driving accidents. |
| A．different age groups have different peer pressure |
| B．teenagers often give wrong judgments above passengers’ noise |
| C．underdeveloped brain makes teens ignore their mistakes |
| D．driving circumstances are bound up with the risk of accidents |
| A．protect teens on the highway | B．raise teens’ sense of responsibility |
| C．reduce the number of fatal crashes | D．force teens to drive with caution |
| A．Some teenagers have risky behavior while driving. |
| B．Certain laws treat teenagers and adults differently. |
| C．We still need more studies on teen driving. |
| D．Driving is important to a teenager’s sense of independence. |
3 . People who cross the street while looking at their phones may be fined in the city of Xiamen, Fujian province, as traffic police officers are enforcing (施行) a local regulation that was put into effect on August 1st.
A pedestrian who was crossing the street on Tuesday while looking at their phone was given a warning, becoming the city’s first to receive a reprimand (训斥) for the behavior.
The Traffic Safety Regulation on Zebra Lines in Xiamen Special Economic Zone, made into a law on Tuesday, states pedestrians should not browse their electronic devices or engage in other activities that may end anger traffic safety while using crossing lanes. Those who violate this rule and delay or stop the progress of the normal passage of vehicles are supposed to be given a warning or a fine of 50 yuan($7).
The regulation was made in response to motions by legislators (立法委员) to the Xiamen people’s congress. “Through putting uncivilized behavior right via legal means, we hope to create a better environment for drivers and pedestrians to better understand and interact with each other,” said Wu Tao, an official at the local congress.
Su Guoqiang, a deputy to the congress among those who raised the motion, said more than 20 percent of traffic accidents in Xiamen happened on crosswalks. “We hope to use the punishment of the ‘small’ act of browsing phones as something to prevent people from doing such a thing,” he told China Central Television.
Peng Chong, a traffic police officer in Xiamen, told CCTV for the time being they will mostly educate and warn violators and make everyone involved in traffic aware of the rules.
1. What does the underlined word “motions” in paragraph 4 mean?| A．Formal invitations. | B．Formal features. |
| C．Formal proposals. | D．Formal apologies. |
| A．The concrete contents of the punishment. |
| B．The reason why the motion was put forward. |
| C．The reason why people browse phones on crosswalks. |
| D．The factors that have an influence on traffic on streets. |
| A．Mostly by giving them a ticket. | B．Mostly by giving them a warning. |
| C．Mostly by making them recite the law. | D．Mostly by making them catch another violator. |
| A．Pedestrians on crosswalk warned not to end anger traffic safety in Xiamen |
| B．Xiamen expects drivers and pedestrians to better understand each other |
| C．20 percent of traffic accidents in Xiamen happen on crosswalks |
| D．Xiamen regulation on crosswalk behavior enters force |
After 1028 days of detention (拘押)，Meng Wanzhou, the CFO (首席财务官) of Huawei Technology Company, finally returned to China.
On Dec 1, 2018, Meng was detained by the Canadian police at the request of the US, accused of violating US sanctions (制裁) against Iran.
According to a statement issued by one of the lawyers
The news of Meng’s release has aroused a strong reaction among Chinese internet
“As an ordinary Chinese citizen who
5 . The recent reports of a 4-year-old girl on a Shanghai beach have gone viral on social media platforms, provoking debate about whether China should criminalize negligence in child supervision.
The father of the little girl claimed that he left her alone on the beach for about 12 minutes to fetch his phone. However, she was nowhere to be found when he was back. Surveillance (监控) videos show that she waited for about 10 minutes before walking toward the water’s edge alone, and then disappeared into the water. Two weeks later, her body was discovered about 100 kilometers away in neighboring Zhejiang Province.
The core issue in this case is the father’s leaving his young daughter unattended on the beach, causing her tragic death. Should such behavior, when it causes harm to a child, be seen as a criminal act? In an online survey, more than 90 percent of respondents insisted that the father be held legally responsible and face criminal punishments.
Nevertheless, according to Liu Chunquan, a lawyer, it may not satisfy the criteria for criminal negligence, since the primary focus of Chinese criminal law is on extreme cases of parental neglect, such as physical abuse and mental torture. Rarely do legal authorities charge parents; instead, they are just likely to face penalties consisting of warnings and fines.
In 2022, a 2-year-old baby drowned in a cesspool while in the company of his father. The court ruled shared responsibility between the father and the cesspool’s owner, with a 7:3 proportion. The owner was ordered to pay 20,000 yuan to the child’s family. Unluckily, similar cases do exist nationwide. Roughly, 100,000 children lose their lives in accidents annually in China, which is largely due to negligence, such as parents leaving their children unattended, either in locked cars or at home. Besides, drowning is now the main cause of death for children aged 1 to 14 years old.
It is no wonder that an increasing number of netizens request that specific laws and regulations be passed to ensure the safety of children and their well-being. Hopefully, criminalizing child supervision negligence in China can serve as a warning and precaution.
However, downsides of introducing such legislation may also emerge. For instance, it’s difficult to distinguish between a regrettable accident and criminal negligence, so that over-criminalization can be triggered, in which well-meaning parents making honest mistakes are charged with a crime.
Therefore, a more balanced approach to addressing the issue of infant safety should involve a combination of new legislation, education and support services. The ultimate objective is to prevent similar catastrophes in the future. We must recognize that children are not only their parents’ offspring, but also the nation’s future.
1. What can we infer from the tragedy of the 4-year-old girl?| A．Her father’s carelessness and negligence should be to blame. |
| B．The beach in Shanghai should not be open to small children. |
| C．Her father has been sentenced to severe penalties by the police. |
| D．She would have survived if she had not waited in the water for a long time. |
| A．Irresponsible adults contribute to children’s death. | B．People can’t be too concerned about child safety. |
| C．Kids shouldn’t be allowed to swim alone. | D．Parents’ constant monitoring is a must. |
| A．the mild penalties in the existing laws | B．parents’ ignorance of potential dangers |
| C．frequent occurrence of such incidents | D．masses of netizens’ urgent appeals |
| A．Indifferent. | B．Negative. | C．Objective. | D．Supportive. |
6 . Dogs are welcome in the outdoor areas of restaurants in New York, US. In the past, health and safety laws made it illegal (违法的) to bring dogs to any restaurant in New York. But last May state lawmakers voted (表决) to let people bring dogs to restaurants that have tables outdoors: Not one lawmaker voted no. The law was soon passed. Several special rules are included in this law. The dogs must be kept on a leash (皮带). Dogs must not share water bowls. Also, restaurants can choose to let people bring dogs or not.
New York joins California, Florida and Maryland in the list of states with similar laws. In many European countries, bringing dogs to restaurants is common. Paris in France has allowed dogs to go with their owners in restaurants for a long time.
Governor Andrew Cuomo believes that this new law will help businesses grow. But not all New Yorkers are happy about this new law. Christopher Miller is the spokesman for the New York City Department of Health. He told the New York Daily News that letting dogs in restaurants could cause problems. “The Health Department loves all dogs, but just not at restaurants where they can create a risk to the health and safety of diners, restaurant workers and other dogs,” Miller said.
New York City is often the center of the new ideas in the US. A law asking some restaurants in the city to show the amount of calories (卡路里数量) in the food they served was passed in 2009. The city leader tried unsuccessfully to stop the sale of large amounts of soft drinks in 2012. Smoking was made illegal in restaurants in 1993.
1. What can we know about the new law from Paragraph 1?| A．Who made it. | B．Why it was made. |
| C．Why there are special rules. | D．What the special rules are. |
| A．Two. | B．Three. | C．Four. | D．Five. |
| A．It could help businesses grow. | B．It could be bad for the environment. |
| C．It could bring health and safety problems. | D．It could make people pay more attention to dogs. |
| A．Smoking. | B．Bringing dogs. |
| C．Supplying high-calorie food. | D．Selling soft drinks in big cups. |
7 . French children are saying “Hello” to the new academic year and “Bye” to their cell phones during school hours. That’s because a new law has come into effect which bans phone use by students up to the age of 15. The rule, which follows a campaign promise by French President Emmanuel Macron, also bans tablets and smart watches.
The ban ıs also in place at break times with exceptions in cases of emergency and for disabled children, the French Education Ministry said in a statement. In emergencies, students can ask their teachers for permission to use their phones. Meanwhile, high schools can voluntarily carry out the measure.
Education Minister Jean-Michel Blanquer said the new rules aim to help children focus on lessons, better socialize and reduce social media use. The ban is also designed to fight online bullying and prevent thefts and violence in school. Blanquer has claimed the rule would improve discipline among France’s 12 million school students, nearly 90% of whom have mobile phones. “Being open to technologies of the future doesn’t mean we have to accept all their uses,” Blanquer said in June as the bill was going through in Parliament.
As for carrying out the ban, it’s up to individual school administrations to decide how to put through the ban. School principals can decide to store students’ phones in lockers or allow them to keep them, switched off, in their backpacks. The law allows teachers to take away the phones until the end of the day in case of someone disobeying the bans.
Jacqueline Kay-Cessou, whose 14-year-old son, David, is entering eighth grade at the Camille See International School, told the reporter she was happy to hear of the ban. “It’s fantastic news. It’s something I’ve wanted for years,” Kay-Cessou said. “I think phones are socially harmful. Kids can’t think and sit still anymore and it’s highly addictive.”
1. What is the new rule for ordinary French students in the new term?| A．They are not allowed to use their watches. |
| B．They should follow President Macron. |
| C．They should say “Hello” to school teachers. |
| D．They can’t use their cell-phones at school. |
| A．Cell phones are the only reason for school violence. |
| B．The society should be strict with all the school students. |
| C．New technology should be properly used at school. |
| D．None of the young students should have mobile phones. |
| A．To show the parental response to the ban. |
| B．To provide a conclusion for the text. |
| C．To offer an example for the new law. |
| D．To make a list of cell phone’s harms. |
8 . Lawmakers in Massachusetts have introduced a law that would ban children in the seventh grade or younger from playing tackle football (冲撞式橄榄球). The Act for No Organized Head Impacts to Schoolchildren, or the NO HITS Act, was introduced last month in an effort to protect children’s heads from blows (重击) while at a particularly fragile age.
The bill would cause fines of up to $ 2,000 for each time the law is broken. People who frequently break the law, or those whose actions cause physical harm, would face bigger fines.
“It’s all about kids’ health and we have a number of studies that say that repeated contacts to the head are very bad for you and the younger that starts, the worse it is,” said Paul, who introduced the bill with House Minority Leader Bradley Jones .
According to a 2017 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers examining 111 brains belonging to former NFL (National Football League) players found the brain disease Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, or CTE, in 110 of them. The disease is associated with repeated head injuries, not just concussions (脑震荡), and is generally found in athletes, retired soldiers and others with a history of repetitive brain injuries, according to the Concussion Legacy Foundation, a non-profit organization that works to study, treat and prevent future cases of brain injuries among athletes and other at-risk groups.
Similar laws have been considered elsewhere in the country, including California and Illinois last year, though they didn’t secure enough votes to become law. Those against previously proposed (提议的) bans have argued that adequate progress has been achieved to make the sport safer and that the sport offers too many benefits for children to totally avoid it.
Several former NFL players, who have been directly or indirectly affected by CTE, have argued differently, however. “I made the mistake of starting tackle football at 9 years old. Now, CTE has taken my life away.Youth tackle football is all risk with no reward,” Nick Buoniconti, a former NFL player, told CNN last year.
1. Why was the law introduced by lawmakers in Massachusetts?| A．To ban children from doing sports too young. |
| B．To make tackle football safer for players. |
| C．To keep young children from suffering brain injuries. |
| D．To encourage the popularity of some safe sports. |
| A．The fines of playing tackle football incorrectly. |
| B．The causes of the new law in Massachusetts. |
| C．The consequences of breaking the new law. |
| D．The reason why the sport is forbidden. |
| A．Brain injuries can really be prevented with action. |
| B．Repeated head blows can result in brain diseases. |
| C．NFL players used to pay much attention to CTE. |
| D．Future cases of brain injuries can be reduced. |
9 . The local government killed more than 34,000 stray dogs (流浪狗) several months ago because those officials were afraid that the dogs would spread rabies (狂犬病).
This caused a debate across the country. Some people said that it was very cruel to dogs. There might be a better way to prevent the disease.
In the future, killing stray dogs might be seen as a crime. Last month, the Chinese government published a draft of animal rights laws. It says that a person who kills a stray dog without one good reason will be put in prison.
The draft also says that animal abuse and abandoning animals will be considered crimes under the criminal law.
The government published the draft so that the public could read it and discuss their thoughts. People have different reactions. Some think the law is good. They say other countries like Britain and Japan have similar laws. They say we will do better at protecting animals if there is one. But others say it’s not crucial to fight animal abuse with a new law. Criticism and fines can do the job.
Some people also say that the draft doesn’t deal with the biggest issues facing the country’s development. The country should make progress to give all people equal rights, they say, before turning attention to animals.
Another part of the draft is causing discussion. It says that people should not force animals to do something dangerous, like jumping through a ring of fire. But many people enjoy watching this kind of performance at the circus, especially kids. They say that if the animal does it properly, it will not get hurt.
1. Why did the local government kill many dogs?| A．The dogs were dirty. | B．Those officials wanted to prevent rabies. |
| C．The dogs were homeless. | D．Those officials wanted to eat the dogs. |
| A．Killing a dog with rabies. | B．Beating an animal for fun. |
| C．Abandoning a blind pet dog. | D．Forcing a cat to jump through a ring of fire. |
| A．All people agree with the law. |
| B．Criticism and fines can protect animals. |
| C．Protecting animals is the biggest issue in China. |
| D．People have different opinions on the law. |
| A．People can’t kill stray dogs any longer. |
| B．The country won’t have human right problems. |
| C．Kids may not be able to watch animals’ performances in a circus. |
| D．Animals will not be killed. |
10 . Yang Le Ge Yang, a game on WeChat’s mini program platform, has spread widely on Chinese social media, with a related topic lopping the trending charts (排行榜) on Weibo.
The game is characterized by comic-like art design and background music and its brief introduction that less than 0.1% of players can complete all the levels.
In order to pass the level efficiently, a huge crowd, especially the teenagers, focus their energy and pocket money on seeking the strategy, with little knowledge of the potential risk of being cheated.
Hanging over the situation, China’s top legislature (立法机关) took an effective measure against telecom and online fraud (诈骗) on September 2 by adopting widely expected law that will smooth out these crimes (犯罪) which have long disturbed the public and led to people’s financial losses after receiving spam messages (垃圾短信) and calls.
The law on telecom and online fraud, which has 50 articles, was passed after being reviewed three times by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. China’s top legislative body, aiming to offer strong protection of people’s rights and punish cheaters.
As some people, particularly teenagers, were defrauded by being tricked into buying online game equipment, the Cyberspace Administration of China has worked with the Ministry of Public Security in the fight against cheaters since the beginning of this year. So far, they have dealt with more than 12,000 such cases and asked internet operators to improve the public’s channels to provide fraud-related information.
1. Why does the passage begin with a popular game?| A．To share a hot game. | B．To entertain the readers. |
| C．To introduce the topic. | D．To attract readers’ attention. |
| A．Telecom and online fraud is a new crime. |
| B．Teens focus on the game as a result of feeling secure and protected. |
| C．China’s legislation will take action to fight against the online fraud. |
| D．Some individuals fail to recognize the truth of spam messages and calls. |
| A．It was officially reviewed 50 times. |
| B．It didn’t reach the public’s expectation. |
| C．It hardly contributed to guarding against online fraud. |
| D．It was passed to protect people’s rights and punish cheaters. |
| A．The ways to rise to frauds. |
| B．The details of various frauds. |
| C．The frauds that teenagers were tricked into. |
| D．The channels to provide fraud-related information. |
