网友您好， 请在下方输入框内输入要搜索的题目：
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
单选题
A
To show how prisoners are now making the rules in the city’s jails.
B
To explain that the racial divisions of the country are reflected in local jails.
C
To prove that local jails are more dangerous than the state or federal jails.
D
To examine why local jails house criminals of all different types.
参考答案
参考解析
解析：
录音提到“Unfortunately, in local jails, criminals committing all levels of offense are housed in the same facilities and are often separated to avoid violence ...”以及“The LA County jail has a history of prisoner-on-prisoner murder”，由此可知地方监狱监禁着的各种犯罪分子比联邦监狱或州立监狱监禁着的犯罪分子更危险。
【听力原文】
Now, as we discussed last class, our current system of prisons is a legacy of the history of the nature of penal reform and the attempts at social reform at all levels of society in the 1960s. Currently, we have three types of prisons: federal, state, and local. Federal prisons house the most dangerous criminals and those who have committed serious crimes against the government. State prisons have different levels, with maximum security housing violent offenders such as murders and rapists while minimum security prisons house large numbers of white collar and minor offenders.
Local jails, sometimes called county jails, house people awaiting trial and those serving very short sentences for minor infractions. Unfortunately, in local jails, criminals committing all levels of offense are housed in the same facilities and are often separated to avoid violence ... This isn’t always successful. An example would be the Los Angeles County jail, which is notorious for being divided along racial lines. White, black, Hispanic, and Asian prisoners are segregated, not by official policy, but by a jailhouse policy established by the prisoners themselves. Each group has a “shot caller”, a de facto leader whose job is to represent his group in any negotiations with the others in order to keep the peace or, at times, go to war. The LA County jail has a history of prisoner-on-prisoner murder, most of which is related to the rival street gangs of the city. While crime in the nation has gone down, our prisons still have one of the largest inmate populations in the world. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of prisoners has almost doubled from 1.2 million to just over two million. It may not surprise you that most of the nation’s prisoners are males. Females account for only six percent of all prisoners. In addition, the prisoners are not representative of America’s social groups. Blacks and Hispanics comprise two thirds of the prisoners yet are less than one third of the nation’s population. This is a telling statistic concerning the social woes of our nation’s minority groups. As for the type of crime, approximately half are in jail for violent crimes, including murder, rape, robbery, and assault. Most of the remaining prisoners are in jail for property crimes, which include burglary and various types of theft. Finally, there is a large and growing group that is incarcerated for drug offenses, whether manufacturing, selling, or using drugs.
Questions 56 to 58 are based on the passage you have just heard.
56. What aspect of crime does the professor mainly discuss?
57. According to the professor, what happened to the size of the prison population in America between 1990 and 2000?
58. Why does the professor discuss the Los Angeles County jail in detail?
录音提到“Unfortunately, in local jails, criminals committing all levels of offense are housed in the same facilities and are often separated to avoid violence ...”以及“The LA County jail has a history of prisoner-on-prisoner murder”，由此可知地方监狱监禁着的各种犯罪分子比联邦监狱或州立监狱监禁着的犯罪分子更危险。
【听力原文】
Now, as we discussed last class, our current system of prisons is a legacy of the history of the nature of penal reform and the attempts at social reform at all levels of society in the 1960s. Currently, we have three types of prisons: federal, state, and local. Federal prisons house the most dangerous criminals and those who have committed serious crimes against the government. State prisons have different levels, with maximum security housing violent offenders such as murders and rapists while minimum security prisons house large numbers of white collar and minor offenders.
Local jails, sometimes called county jails, house people awaiting trial and those serving very short sentences for minor infractions. Unfortunately, in local jails, criminals committing all levels of offense are housed in the same facilities and are often separated to avoid violence ... This isn’t always successful. An example would be the Los Angeles County jail, which is notorious for being divided along racial lines. White, black, Hispanic, and Asian prisoners are segregated, not by official policy, but by a jailhouse policy established by the prisoners themselves. Each group has a “shot caller”, a de facto leader whose job is to represent his group in any negotiations with the others in order to keep the peace or, at times, go to war. The LA County jail has a history of prisoner-on-prisoner murder, most of which is related to the rival street gangs of the city. While crime in the nation has gone down, our prisons still have one of the largest inmate populations in the world. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of prisoners has almost doubled from 1.2 million to just over two million. It may not surprise you that most of the nation’s prisoners are males. Females account for only six percent of all prisoners. In addition, the prisoners are not representative of America’s social groups. Blacks and Hispanics comprise two thirds of the prisoners yet are less than one third of the nation’s population. This is a telling statistic concerning the social woes of our nation’s minority groups. As for the type of crime, approximately half are in jail for violent crimes, including murder, rape, robbery, and assault. Most of the remaining prisoners are in jail for property crimes, which include burglary and various types of theft. Finally, there is a large and growing group that is incarcerated for drug offenses, whether manufacturing, selling, or using drugs.
Questions 56 to 58 are based on the passage you have just heard.
56. What aspect of crime does the professor mainly discuss?
57. According to the professor, what happened to the size of the prison population in America between 1990 and 2000?
58. Why does the professor discuss the Los Angeles County jail in detail?
更多 “单选题A To show how prisoners are now making the rules in the city’s jails.B To explain that the racial divisions of the country are reflected in local jails.C To prove that local jails are more dangerous than the state or federal jails.D To examine why local jails house criminals of all different types.” 相关考题
考题
Which command is used to display a address pool for a DHCP Local Server?()
A. show ip local poolB. show ip dhcp local poolC. show ip dhcp-local poolD. show ip pool
考题
On a five to three vote,the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States,the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to“establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial.Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy,joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals,ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately“occupied the field”and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as“a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect,the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government,and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status,it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes,no state should be allowed to do so either.Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.
It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that the Alien and Sedition ActsA.violated the Constitution.
B.undermined the states’interests.
C.supported the federal statute.
D.stood in favor of the states.
考题
On a five to three vote,the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States,the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to“establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial.Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy,joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals,ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately“occupied the field”and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as“a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect,the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government,and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status,it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes,no state should be allowed to do so either.Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.
On which of the following did the Justices agree,according to Paragraph4?A.Federal officers’duty to withhold immigrants’information.
B.States’independence from federal immigration law.
C.States’legitimate role in immigration enforcement.
D.Congress’s intervention in immigration enforcement.
考题
On a five to three vote,the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States,the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to“establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial.Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy,joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals,ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately“occupied the field”and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as“a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect,the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government,and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status,it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes,no state should be allowed to do so either.Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.
What can be learned from the last paragraph?A.Immigration issues are usually decided by Congress.
B.Justices intended to check the power of the Administrstion.
C.Justices wanted to strengthen its coordination with Congress.
D.The Administration is dominant over immigration issues.
考题
On a five to three vote,the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States,the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to“establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial.Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy,joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals,ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately“occupied the field”and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as“a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect,the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government,and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status,it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes,no state should be allowed to do so either.Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.
Three provisions of Arizona’s plan were overturned because theyA.deprived the federal police of Constitutional powers.
B.disturbed the power balance between different states.
C.overstepped the authority of federal immigration law.
D.contradicted both the federal and state policies.
考题
On a five to three vote,the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona’s immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration.But on the more important matter of the Constitution,the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administration’s effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v.United States,the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona’s controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law.The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to“establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization”and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial.Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy,joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court’s liberals,ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun.On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately“occupied the field”and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal’s privileged powers.However,the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement.That’s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute.The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia,who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as“a shocking assertion assertion of federal executive power”.The White House argued that Arizona’s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities,even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter.In effect,the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government,and control of citizenship and the borders is among them.But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status,it could.It never did so.The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn’t want to carry out Congress’s immigration wishes,no state should be allowed to do so either.Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim
The White House claims that its power of enforcementA.outweighs that held by the states.
B.is dependent on the states’support.
C.is established by federal statutes.
D.rarely goes against state laws.
考题
共用题干
第一篇Carbon FootprintHow often do you travel by plane?How much electricity do you use?These days everyone is worried about the size of their carbon footprint.In order to reduce global warming we need to make our carbon footprints smaller. But how much CO2 are we responsible for?A new book might be able to help.The Carbon Footprint of Everything looks at the different things we do and buy,and calculates the amount of CO2 all of the following created:the ingredients, the electricity used in the brewery，the equipment,the travel and commuting of the beer,and the packaging. It's amazing how many different things need to be included in each calculation.And it's frightening how much carbon dioxide everything produces.But all of this can help us decide which beer to drink.From Berners-Lee's calculations,it's clear that a pint(568ml)of locally-brewed beer has a smaller carbon footprint than a bottle of imported beer. This is because the imported beer has been transported from far away,and it uses more packaging. The local beer only produces 300g of CO2,but the imported beer produces 900g! So, one pint of local beer is better for the environment than three cans of cheap foreign lager from the supermarket.Berners-Lee has even calculated the carbon footprint of cycling to work.Nothing is more environmentally-friendly than riding a bike,surely?Well,it depends on what you've had to eat before. To ride a bike we need energy and for energy we need food.So if we eat a banana and then ride a kilometer and a half,our footprint is 65g of CO2.However,if we eat bacon before the bike ride,it's 200g. In fact,bananas are good in general because they don't need packaging,they can be transported by boat and they grow in natural sunlight.So,does this mean that cycling is bad for the environment?Absolutely not,for a start,if you cycle,you don't use your car,and the fewer cars on the road,the fewer traffic jams.And cars in traffic jams produce three times more CO2 than cars traveling at speed.Cycling also makes you healthy and less likely to go to a hospital. And hospitals have very big carbon footprints!So maybe it's time for us all to start making some changes.Pass me a banana and a pint of local beer,please.The main idea of this passage is to explain that_________.A:we should start making some changesB:let's eat banana and drink a pint of local beerC:how carbon footprint is createdD:how big is our carbon footprint
考题
Why does the author mention Fuller s The Sea？( ) A.To point out a dance of Fuller’s in which music did not play an important role.
B.To explain why Fuller sometimes used music by progressive composers.
C.To ilustrate a particular way in which Fuller developed as an artist.
D.To ilustrate how Fuller’s interest in science was reflected in her work.
考题
In the United States,educational policies are determined by（）A、the federal governmentB、the state and board of trustees in some statesC、local school districtD、board of trustees
考题
Which command is used to display a address pool for a DHCP Local Server?（）A、show ip local poolB、show ip dhcp local poolC、show ip dhcp-local poolD、show ip pool
考题
单选题According to the conversation, the following statement is true about the local bands except ______.A
The local bands will play in the entertainment tentB
The local bands will play on the night of the fairC
This year’s show is supposed to be more exciting than ever
考题
单选题The Rules state that vessels may depart from the Rules when（）.A
there are other vessels in the vicinityB
operating in a traffic separation schemeC
engaged in a situation involving more than two vesselsD
necessary to avoid immediate danger
考题
问答题Challenges for Chinese Government China’s plans to diversify its ever-growing dollar mountain, while vague, are a welcome sign that the country will not try to sustain the unsustainable forever. They are not, however, meaningful steps towards repairing the cracks in the Chinese economy. China’s foreign reserves, the world’s largest, are now more than a trillion dollars. They are expected to increase by several hundred billion dollars more over the next year. Small wonder there is so much interest in how they are managed and where they are invested. Much of the money is now in US Treasury bonds, but it may eventually be managed more ambitiously, and by one or more new agencies.
考题
单选题The Rules state that a seaplane shall（）.A
not be regarded as a vesselB
in general，keep well clear of all vesselsC
proceed at a slower speed than surrounding vesselsD
when making way，show the lights for a vessel not under command
考题
问答题Practice 1 The catchphrase of the hour is that America is living beyond its means. The expression is used so much by politicians, economists and editorial writers that it is depreciating faster than the dollar. But there's no way around it. It tells the story. The Data Resources numbers show Americans increase their spending this year almost three times as fast as their after-tax income. What else can we explain it? What is more, as a nation, the U.S. has been doing the same thing throughout the 1990s. For years the country has been consuming more than it produces, making up the difference by borrowing abroad. It can't go on. The stock market's tumble, which has caused a loss of $1 trillion in paper wealth, is but the first step in a process that must sober the nation. At the same time, in the next few years the U. S. will have to throw its amazing dream machine into reverse and start paying its debts. Inevitably, this will mean a lowering in the U.S. standard of living as Americans are forced to produce more than they consume to service a soaring foreign debt. Per capital income may keep rising but more slowly than in the past. The trade account will go slowly towards balance or even surplus in the mid-1990s. But in the meantime, Americans will receive less for their exports because the dollar will fall considerably before U. S. exports are competitive. And pressures to reduce the federal deficit will tighten the lid on defense spending.
考题
问答题Practice 1 In general, investment in the United States will be in the form of a subsidiary. It is possible for a non-U. S. corporation to operate a branch office in the United States, but there are significant disadvantages to a branch, particularly with respect to its tax treatment. Branches of non-U. S. corporations are not subject to federal regulation or registration requirements. However, each state will require a “foreign” corporation to “qualify” before “doing business” in that state. A corporation will be considered “foreign” if it is organized under the laws of another country or another state, and so this is not a requirement imposed only on non-U. S. investors. “Doing business” is a technical term that implies a substantial presence in the state. This would include the ownership or leasing of real property, the maintenance of a stock of goods for local sale; employees and the like. Selling products to local customers, either directly or through an independent sales representative or distributor, would not in itself constitute “doing business.” The states actually exercise little control over the qualification process other than to ensure that the qualifying entity’s name is not confusingly similar to an already registered entity and that all registration fees and taxes are paid (qualification is basically a form of taxation). In most states, qualification for a non-U.S. corporation consists of a relatively easy application, a registration fee, and a notarized or legalized copy of the corporation’s articles of incorporation English or a certified translation).
考题
单选题Why does Ms, Kuhn mention that she studied journalism?A
To correct a misunderstandingB
To prove her qualifications for a jobC
To elaborate on her educational backgroundD
To explain how she met an acquaintance
考题
单选题In which area does the local government encourage telecommuting programs according to the passage?A
New York City.B
Adirondack Mountains.C
Washington.D
New York State.
考题
单选题In Paragraph 2, cities like London, Copenhagen, and Amsterdam are mentioned______.A
to show that they are not good cities in terms of geography and climateB
to tell us how wealthy their residents areC
to suggest that these cities lack places of historic interest and scenic beautyD
to prove that they have got more tourists than they can handle
考题
单选题What is the author's main purpose in the passage?A
To prove that football is the world's most important sport.B
To show that Argentina is better than all others.C
To compare Scotland with Argentina.D
To explain the role of sport.
考题
单选题In Paragraph 2, cities like London, Copenhagen and Amsterdam are mentioned _____.A
to show that they are not good cities in terms of geography and climateB
to tell us how wealthy their residents areC
to suggest that these cities lack places of historic interest and scenic beautyD
to prove that they have got more tourism than they handle
考题
单选题Why does the speaker ask us to consider “turning off a light switch”?A
To show that the climate system is sensitive to light.B
To illustrate the sudden move from one climate state to another.C
To demonstrate how to operate the light switch.D
To explain how the operating mode works under increasing pressure.
考题
单选题A
The jobs are around the country.B
The jobs are overseas.C
The jobs are on the other side of the state.D
They are local jobs.
考题
单选题What is the author’s main purpose in the passage?A
To prove that football is the world’ most important sport.B
To show that Argentina is better than all others.C
To compare Scotland with Argentina.D
To explain the role of sport.
考题
单选题How and why this language has survived for more than a thousand years, while spoke by very few, is hard to explain.A
How and whyB
hasC
spokeD
to explain
热门标签
最新试卷
