2. 監(jiān)獄更多的對(duì)罪犯來(lái)說(shuō)是一種懲罰,因此能夠避免再犯。

Being locked up behind the bars is a punitive measure imposed on criminals who are highly unlikely to turn into a recidivist in consideration of their fear of setting foot into jails ever again.

Arguments for education and job retraining

1. 罪犯在監(jiān)獄里所被包圍的是一群囚犯,這對(duì)罪犯的改造不是好的,反而是不好的影響。接受教育可以讓罪犯在一個(gè)積極的環(huán)境里,真正的意識(shí)到對(duì)與錯(cuò)。

“Captivity of negativity” is a terminology intended to describe the destructive, rather than constructive impact on criminals who are locked up in prison, surrounded by people who probably have committed even more serious charges. Education serves to correct any misconception or eliminate twisted thoughts they have by immersing them in a positive environment.

2. 大多數(shù)罪犯往往是沒(méi)有什么文化知識(shí)和生存技能,出獄后通常很難找到工作。教育和就業(yè)培訓(xùn)能夠讓他們?cè)谌蘸蟮纳钪锌孔约荷嫦氯?,而不至于因?yàn)闆](méi)有收入來(lái)源而再次誤入歧途。

A significant proportion of criminals are sadly illiterate without adequate fundamental knowledge and survival skills and it wouldn’t be easy for them to find a decent job after being released from the jail. With convenient access to education and job retraining, they are able to survive by themselves, greatly reducing the chance of becoming a recidivist in times when they are financially challenged.

3. Should individual choices interfere with the society that is based on rules and laws

這是08年10月11號(hào)的考題,這道題目主要討論的核心是一種矛盾。那就是社會(huì)始終是以法規(guī)和法律為基礎(chǔ)的,而有時(shí)社會(huì)的利益往往是與個(gè)人的選擇相矛盾的。當(dāng)這種矛盾發(fā)生時(shí),應(yīng)該將哪一個(gè)放在首位?為什么?這次考試結(jié)束后,我曾經(jīng)與幾個(gè)參與考試的學(xué)生討論過(guò),很多學(xué)生的反映就是這個(gè)題目其實(shí)并不難,但就是不知道如何下手。還有某位學(xué)生直接就舉了一個(gè)我們不能隨便殺人,因?yàn)檫@是違反法律的事情的這樣一個(gè)例子。其實(shí),這個(gè)題目最為關(guān)鍵的是兩點(diǎn):如何去法律的范圍還有就是要找到一個(gè)合適法律與個(gè)人選擇發(fā)生沖突的這么一個(gè)結(jié)合點(diǎn)。我對(duì)這個(gè)題目的段落結(jié)構(gòu)以及內(nèi)容的理解如下:

1. 這種矛盾的產(chǎn)生主要是因?yàn)榉煞ㄒ?guī)是從大眾和國(guó)家的利益出發(fā),而個(gè)人利益則絕大多數(shù)情況下是站在個(gè)人角度考慮問(wèn)題的。一個(gè)有利于個(gè)人的問(wèn)題如果給其他人造成了無(wú)謂的傷害,則是不應(yīng)該允許的。

The conflict of public interest and personal interest accounts largely for the issue of the extent to which is the interference of personal choices justified with the society governed by rules and laws.

這里我們可以舉一個(gè)例子,就知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)(Intellectual Property Rights).很多人都會(huì)去網(wǎng)絡(luò)上下載免費(fèi)電影,音樂(lè)以及電子書(shū)。這樣做的原因就是正版(authentic copy)相對(duì)中國(guó)消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)太貴。雖然說(shuō)這看起來(lái)合情合理,大多數(shù)人都會(huì)從中受益,但是這也同時(shí)傷害到了娛樂(lè)明星們(celebrities)和唱片公司的利益,所以這時(shí)候應(yīng)該以法律為根本,杜絕這種行為。

2. 反過(guò)來(lái)說(shuō),我們不可否認(rèn)個(gè)別特別情況下法律也應(yīng)該給正當(dāng)?shù)膫€(gè)人選擇讓步

On the other hand, rules and laws should give in to personal choices in some special cases.

比如說(shuō),開(kāi)車送心臟病突然發(fā)作的人趕往醫(yī)院。盡管說(shuō)途中司機(jī)可能會(huì)闖紅燈(run red lights,會(huì)造成一定的交通混亂,甚至說(shuō)還有發(fā)生交通事故的可能。但是這樣一種行為我認(rèn)為應(yīng)該被理解(tolerated). 這是出于法律之外的,但是又合乎情理的。當(dāng)然,這種法律的讓步是有限的,很多時(shí)候確實(shí)很難判斷。所以,無(wú)論是法律還是個(gè)人選擇,最終都是從應(yīng)該是整體的利益出發(fā).

以上就是對(duì)三個(gè)比較典型的法律犯罪類的題目的講解,希望能夠幫助到在緊張備考雅思的考生們。