2. 职称英语
  3. The image was fascinating, as justice John Paul Stevens, a Chicago native, p

The image was fascinating, as justice John Paul Stevens, a Chicago native, p

游客2023-08-25  6
问题     The image was fascinating, as justice John Paul Stevens, a Chicago native, presented it. A gang member and his father are hanging out near Wrigley Field. Are they there "to rob an unsuspecting fan or just to get a glimpse of Sammy Sosa leaving the ball park"? A police officer has no idea, but under Chicago’s anti-gang law, the cop must order them to disperse. With Stevens writing for a 6-to-3 majority, the Supreme Court last week struck down Chicago’s sweeping law, which had sparked 42,000 arrests in its three years of enforcement.
    The decision was a blow to advocates of get-tough crime policies. But in a widely noted supporting opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor suggested that a less harsh approach — distinguishing gang members from innocent bystanders — might pass constitutional muster(集合). New language could target loiterers(游荡者)"with no apparent purpose other than to establish control over identifiable areas, to intimidate others from entering those areas or to conceal illegal activities", she wrote. Chicago officials vowed to draft a new measure. "We will go back and correct it and then move forward," said Mayor Richard Daley.
    Chicago officials, along with the League of Cities and 31 states that sided with them in court, might do well to look at one state where anti-gang loitering prosecutions have withstood constitutional challenges: California. The state has two anti-loitering laws on the books, aimed at people intending to commit specific crimes — prostitution(卖淫)and drug dealing. In addition, a number of local prosecutors are waging war against gangs by an innovative use of the public-nuisance laws.
    In cities such as Los Angeles and San Jose, prosecutors have sought injunctions(禁令)against groups of people suspected of gang activity. "The officers in the streets know the gang members and gather physical evidence for lengthy court hearings," says Los Angeles prosecutor Martin Vranicar. If the evidence is enough to convince a judge, an injunction is issued to prohibit specific behaviour — such as carrying cell phones or pagers or blocking sidewalk passage — in defined geographical areas. "It works instantly," says San Jose city attorney Joan Gallo, who successfully defended the tactic before the California Supreme Court. "A few days after the injunctions, children are playing on streets where they never were before."
    So far, only a few hundred gang members have been targeted, out of an estimated 150,000 in Los Angeles alone. But experts say last week’s decision set the parametres for sharper measures. Says Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe: "It just means they have to use a scalpel(解剖刀)rather than an invisible mallet(棒槌)." [br] What does the author mean by saying "It just means they...invisible mallet" at the end of the article?
选项 A、The gang members should be given a get-tough treatment.
B、The injunctions are more powerful in controlling crimes.
C、A scalpel can cut off the tumours of the society while the invisible mallet fails.
D、A scalpel is more powerful than the invisible mallet.
答案 B
解析 根据题干中的It just means they．．．invisible mallet将本题出处定位于最后一段最后一句。该句是为了说明倒数第2句的意思(上周的决定为实施更为严厉的措施确立了参照标准)，这个“上周的决定”指的是前面提到的两个城市施行的禁令。也就是说禁令是控制犯罪的更为有效的工具，选B)。选项A)和文章内容不符；选项C)和D)虽然和文章内容相符，但是作者并没有比较手术刀和棒槌的好与坏，应该挖掘文章的深层次含义。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2956572.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)