单项选择题

Do we need laws that prevent us from running risks with our lives If so, then perhaps laws are needed prohibiting the sale of cigarettes and alcoholic drinks. Both products have been known to kill people. The hazards of drinking too much alcohol are as bad or worse than the hazards of smiking too many cigarettes. All right then, let’s pass a law closing the liquor stores and the bars in this country. Let’s put an end once and for all to the ruinous disease from which as many as 10 million Americans currently suffer--alcoholism. But wait. We’ve already tried that. For 13 years, between 1920 and 1933, there were no liquor stores anywhere in the United States. They were shut down abilished by an amendment to the Constitution and by a law of Congress. After January 20, 1920, there was supposed to be no more manyfacturing, selling, or transporting of "intoxicating liquors". Without any more liquor, people could not drink it. And if they did not drink it, how could they get drunk There would be no more dangers to the public welfare from drunkenness and alcoholism. It was all bery logical. And yet prohibition of liquor, beer, and wine did not work. Why Because, law or no law, millions of people still liked to drink alcohol. And they were willing to take risks to get it. They were not about to change their tastes and habits just because of a change in the law. And gans of liquor smugglers millions of gallons of the outlawed beverages across the Canadian and Mexican borders. Drinkers were licky to know of an illegal bar that served Mexican or Canadian liquor. Crime and drunkenness were both supposed to decline as a rusult of prohibition. Instead, people drank nore alcohol than ever-often poisoned alcohol.

Which of the following was NOT characteristic reason for the proposal of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution and the Volstead Act()

A.There would be no further danger to the public from alcoholism.
B.There would be a rise in the cost of alcoholic beverages.
C.Without liquor, people would not drink.
D.People would not become drunk of create a public nuisance.

热门 试题

问答题
2013年12月份以来,中国25个省份、100多座大中城市再次遭遇雾霾侵袭。北京、上海、南京等相继沦陷为雾霾重灾区,湖北、浙江、湖南、江苏、安徽等地雾霾天创下历史纪录。国家气象局数据显示,今年以来中国平均雾霾天数已经创出52年来之最。 虽然政府部门采取了工业企业关停减产的措施应对雾霾肆虐,但收效甚微,雾霾正在对人们的生活产生越来越多的负面效应:学校停课、汽车限行、高速封闭。而更让有关部门尴尬的是,制造出雾霾的空气污染物来源,目前仍然是一个迷。 自京津冀频繁发生雾霾起,几年过去了,对于其形成的具体原因暂无定论。大多数的专家给出答案,重污染天气形成的主要原因有二:污染物排放总量过大和不利气象条件。具体看来,长三角周边更多为化工、水泥等企业,其工业废气组成更为复杂。 当然,问题的复杂性从来不是延缓解决方案的借口。在历经了京津冀地区的雾霾恐慌后,今年9月国务院出台了《大气污染防止行动计划》,涉及包括京津冀、长三角和珠三角在内的重点控制区的水泥、化工等六大重污染行业以及燃煤工业锅炉的新建项目。 从目前学界的研究来看,PM2.5的治理绝非易事。这样的长期计划要先布局,再行动,最后是对企业发力。 类比国外相关案例,上个世纪四五十年,无论是代洛杉矶雾霾爆还是伦敦雾霾事件,最后都是在政府和企业合力后,达成协议,最后以《清洁空气法》等法案的形式完成监督。