In paragraph 1 of selection 2, the use of quotation marks with the word " dangers " presents the author’s tone as
A)concerned.


B)indifferent.


C)questioning.


D)sarcastic.

(the paragraph)
When crime spikes in a city, one of the first things local governments propose is enforcing a teen curfew. Officials often use emotional arguments that teens either aren’t safe at night or are causing trouble. A curfew, they say, will help reduce crime and save children from all sorts of “dangers.”

Answer:

c

Explanation:

Select three quotes that support the central idea in Part A.


A)"'Ultimately we hope to have advertisements on every bus to maximize our income,' said Robin Adair, D-38 spokeswoman.” (paragraph 23)


B)“Like Lewis-Palmer most districts that allow advertising on their buses choose to put the money in general funds to help with such things as higher fuel and utility expenses and increased contributions to pension funds and student activities.” (paragraph 24)


C)“'It’s being part of the community, helping out the schools. They need funds. I thought it was neat to use dollars to support the community as well as the community supporting us.'” (paragraph 27)


D)“The districts report that the ads are approved by administrators before they are placed on the buses. There are none inside the buses to entice kids.” (paragraph 28)


E)“Advertisers can choose to run their ads only on certain bus routes to ensure coverage in certain neighborhoods and audiences, said Leigh Howe, of Brilliant Outdoor Media.” (paragraph 33)

Which claim from Selection 1 has insufficient evidence?


A)Major crimes usually occur at night.


B)Some cities offer flexibility in curfews.


C)Teen curfews can work if they are enforced.


D)Minor crimes can use up valuable resources


(the paragrapg)



1 Crime is a continuing problem in our society, and to combat it, we must engage in a variety of tactics to give the courts and law enforcement the tools they need to keep us all safe. One valuable tool is a teen curfew, a simple law that restricts when youths under 18 years old can be outside of the home.

2 The benefit of curfews is twofold—they reduce the number of people on the streets who might cause trouble, and they keep youths safe. Even good kids might be tempted to get in minor trouble late at night. Small violations can take up large amounts of police time—time that is better spent dealing with more serious issues. A curfew just takes away the opportunity for kids to get in trouble by keeping them at home.

3 While some teens may be irritated by such restrictions, curfews actually keep youths safe. An old saying goes, “Nothing good happens after midnight.” For young people, this is particularly true. Serious crimes often happen at night, and curfews can keep kids from becoming victims.

4 Many cities set curfews for 11 p.m. during the week. There is simply no need for teens to be out of the house after that. At that hour, students should be done with part-time jobs, sports events, or other activities. Some cities allow teens to stay out until midnight on Fridays and Saturdays. However, most believers in curfews would argue that an earlier deadline would be much more effective.

5 Of course, children can always be out with their parents or guardians. The purpose of the curfew is to make sure teens are under some sort of adult supervision. This can take place at home or away from home, as long as adults are present. Curfews have been proven to work. A 1997 United States Conference of Mayors survey of 347 cities found that curfews improved safety in 88 percent of the cities that enforced them.

6 A teen curfew is not going to immediately end all crime, but it will help. In conjunction with other techniques, such as graffiti cleanup, educational and recreational opportunities for youths, and police intervention in high-crime areas, a teen curfew can help keep us all safer.

There never was a time when the world was without fire, but there was a time when men did not know how to kindle fire; and after they learned how to kindle one, it was a long, long time before they learned how to kindle one easily. In these days we can kindle a fire without any trouble, because we can easily get a match; but we must remember that the match is one of the most wonderful things in the world, and that it took men thousands of years to learn how to make one. Let us learn the history of this familiar little object, the match.

Fire was first given to man by nature itself. When a forest is set on fire by cinders from a neighboring volcano, or when a tree is set ablaze by a thunderbolt, we may say that nature strikes a match. In the early history of the world, nature had to kindle all the fires, for man by his own effort was unable to produce a spark. The first method, then, of getting fire for use was to light sticks of wood at a flame kindled by nature—by a volcano, perhaps, or by a stroke of lightning. These firebrands were carried to the home and used in kindling the fires there. The fire secured in this way was carefully guarded and was kept burning as long as possible. But the flame, however faithfully watched, would sometimes be extinguished. A sudden gust of wind or a sudden shower would put it out. Then a new firebrand would have to be secured, and this often meant a long journey and a deal of trouble.

In 1827, John Walker, a druggist in a small English town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. The druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. It is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. Although Walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. It could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. In a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. The match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. It would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. This was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar.

How does the author develop the idea that humanity's early fire-starting tools may have been dangerous? Please respond in three to five complete sentences, using evidence from the text to support your answer.