In the USA, 85% of the population over the age if 21 approve of the death penalty. In the many states whcih still have the death penalty, some use the electric chair, which can take up to 20 minutes to kill, while others use gas or lethal injection.
The first of these was the case of Ruth Ellis who was hanged for shooting her lover in what was generally regarded as a crime of passion. The second was hanged for murders which, it was later proved, had been committed by someone else.
The pro-hanging lobby uses four main arguments to support its call for the reintroduction of capital punishment. First there is the deterrence theory, which argues that potential murderers would think twice before committing the act if they knew that they might die if they were caught. The armed bank robber might, likewise, go back to being unarmed.
The other two arguments are more suspect. The idea of retribution demands that criminals should get what they deserve: if a murderer intentionally set out to commit a crime, he should accept the consequences. Retribution, which is just another word for revenge, is supported by the religious doctrine of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
The arguments against the death penalty are largely humanitarian. But there are also statistical reasons for opposing it: the deterrence figures do not add up. In Britain,1903 was the the record year for executions and yet in 1904 the number of murders actually rose. There was a similar occurrence in 1946 and 1947. If the deterrence theory were correct, the rate should have fallen.
The other reasons to oppose the death penalty are largely a mather of individual conscience and belief. One is that murder is murder and that the state has no more right to take a lifer than the individual. The other is that Christianity advises forgiveness, not revenge.
According to the first four paragraphs, which of the following statements is NOT correct

A:Ruth Ellis was shot by his lover, which was regarded as a crime of passion. B:The death penalty may help the potential murderers to arouse moral awareness. C:The intentional murderer should eat his own bitter fruit. D:According to the religious doctrine, punishment should be as severe as the injury suffer

In the USA, 85% of the population over the age if 21 approve of the death penalty. In the many states whcih still have the death penalty, some use the electric chair, which can take up to 20 minutes to kill, while others use gas or lethal injection.
The first of these was the case of Ruth Ellis who was hanged for shooting her lover in what was generally regarded as a crime of passion. The second was hanged for murders which, it was later proved, had been committed by someone else.
The pro-hanging lobby uses four main arguments to support its call for the reintroduction of capital punishment. First there is the deterrence theory, which argues that potential murderers would think twice before committing the act if they knew that they might die if they were caught. The armed bank robber might, likewise, go back to being unarmed.
The other two arguments are more suspect. The idea of retribution demands that criminals should get what they deserve: if a murderer intentionally set out to commit a crime, he should accept the consequences. Retribution, which is just another word for revenge, is supported by the religious doctrine of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
The arguments against the death penalty are largely humanitarian. But there are also statistical reasons for opposing it: the deterrence figures do not add up. In Britain,1903 was the the record year for executions and yet in 1904 the number of murders actually rose. There was a similar occurrence in 1946 and 1947. If the deterrence theory were correct, the rate should have fallen.
The other reasons to oppose the death penalty are largely a mather of individual conscience and belief. One is that murder is murder and that the state has no more right to take a lifer than the individual. The other is that Christianity advises forgiveness, not revenge.

According to the first four paragraphs, which of the following statements is NOT correct（）

A:Ruth Ellis was shot by his lover, which was regarded as a crime of passion B:The death penalty may help the potential murderers to arouse moral awareness C:The intentional murderer should eat his own bitter fruit D:According to the religious doctrine, punishment should be as severe as the injury suffere

{{B}}第二篇{{/B}}

According to politicians, when children commit crimes, they should be treated in the same way as ______.

A:adults B:criminals C:victims D:murderers

{{B}}第二篇{{/B}}

According to politicians, when children commit crimes, they should be treated in the same way as______.

A:adults B:criminals C:victims D:murderers

{{B}}第二篇{{/B}}

According to politicians, when children commit crimes, they should be treated in the same way as ______.

A:adults B:criminals C:victims D:murderers

The Pentagon ordered 16,099 body bags to be shipped to the Persian Gulf to bring home dead Americans. In the end, 15,773 of the bags were not necessary.
The Iraqi army would have needed--what One hundred thousand body bags More No one knows or will ever know. No one has counted the Iraqi corpses(尸体). Many of them were buried in the sand, without ceremony; some have been taken care of by vultures.
That so few soldiers in the coalition died somehow seemed to Americans a vindication. It was even a return of their shining self, of Buffalo Bill, who (E. E. Cummings wrote) could "ride a water smooth-silver stallion and break one two three four five pigeons just like that." The unspoken text was this: the nation had recovered its immunity, its divine favour, or anyway its gift for doing things right. The victory was as satisfying as anything Americans have done together since landing on the moon.
Would it be seemly to have a moment of silence for the Iraqi corpses
It is not inconsequential (不合理的) to kill 100,000 people. That much life suddenly and violently extinguished must leave a ragged hole somewhere in the universe. One looks for special effects of a metaphysical (超自然的) kind to attend so much death—the whoosh of all those souls departing. But many of them died ingloriously (不体面的), like road kill, full of their disgrace, facedown with the toot scattered around them. The conquered often die ignominiously. The victors have not given them much thought.
Still, killing 100,000 people is a serious thing to do. It is not equivalent to shooting a rabid dog, which is, down deep, what Americans feel the war was all about, exterminating a beast with rabies. All those 100,000 men were not megalomaniacs (夸大狂者), torturers and murderers. They did not all commit atrocities in Kuwait. They were ordinary people: peasants, truck drivers, students and so on... They had the love of their families, the dignity of their lives and work. They cared as little for politics, or less, than most people in the world. They were, precisely, not Saddam Hussein. Which means, since Saddam was the coalition’s one true target in all of this, that those 100,000 corpses are, so to speak, collateral (附带的) damage. The famous smart bombs did not find the one man they were seeking.
These 100,000 people were

A:not megalomaniacs, torturers and murderers B:Peasants, drives, students and the President C:ordinary people and soldiers D:all of the above

{{B}}第二篇{{/B}}

According to politicians, when children commit crimes, they should be treated in the same way as

A:adults B:criminals C:victims D:murderers

? ?The Pentagon ordered 16,099 body bags to be shipped to the Persian Gulf to bring home dead Americans. In the end, 15,773 of the bags were not necessary.
? ?The Iraqi army would have needed--what? One hundred thousand body bags? More? No one knows or will ever know. No one has counted the Iraqi corpses(尸体). Many of them were buried in the sand, without ceremony; some have been taken care of by vultures.
? ?That so few soldiers in the coalition died somehow seemed to Americans a vindication. It was even a return of their shining self, of Buffalo Bill, who (E. E. Cummings wrote) could "ride a water smooth-silver stallion and break one two three four five pigeons just like that." The unspoken text was this: the nation had recovered its immunity, its divine favour, or anyway its gift for doing things right. The victory was as satisfying as anything Americans have done together since landing on the moon.
? ?Would it be seemly to have a moment of silence for the Iraqi corpses?
? ?It is not inconsequential (不合理的) to kill 100,000 people. That much life suddenly and violently extinguished must leave a ragged hole somewhere in the universe. One looks for special effects of a metaphysical (超自然的) kind to attend so much death—the whoosh of all those souls departing. But many of them died ingloriously (不体面的), like road kill, full of their disgrace, facedown with the toot scattered around them. The conquered often die ignominiously. The victors have not given them much thought.
? ?Still, killing 100,000 people is a serious thing to do. It is not equivalent to shooting a rabid dog, which is, down deep, what Americans feel the war was all about, exterminating a beast with rabies. All those 100,000 men were not megalomaniacs (夸大狂者), torturers and murderers. They did not all commit atrocities in Kuwait. They were ordinary people: peasants, truck drivers, students and so on... They had the love of their families, the dignity of their lives and work. They cared as little for politics, or less, than most people in the world. They were, precisely, not Saddam Hussein. Which means, since Saddam was the coalition’s one true target in all of this, that those 100,000 corpses are, so to speak, collateral (附带的) damage. The famous smart bombs did not find the one man they were seeking.

These 100,000 people were

A:not megalomaniacs, torturers and murderers B:Peasants, drives, students and the President C:ordinary people and soldiers D:all of the above

? ?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 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, that it 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 another 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 isolated 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 reinforced 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 imposed 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 vetoed, 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.

It can be inferred that the author thinks that ______.

A:the value of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime is not to be debated B:the death penalty is the most controversial issue in the United States today C:the veto of the bill reestablishing the death penalty is of little importance D:the second type of murderers mentioned in Paragraph 4 should be sentenced to death