育才学习网1. “有罪”用英语怎么说
guilty
有罪的. adj
guilty
[5^ilti]
adj.
犯罪的， 有罪的， 心虚的
guilty
[5^ilti]
adj.
犯罪的， 有罪的
自觉有罪的， 内疚的， 心虚的
have a guilty conscience
问心有愧； 做贼心虚
guilty looks
做贼心虚的表情； 内疚的神色
guiltily
[5^iltili]
adv.
guiltiness
n.
be found guilty
被判决有罪
be guilty of a crime
犯了罪
be inwardly guilty
理亏心虚
bring in guilty
（陪审团）判定（某人）有罪
bring sb. in guilty
（陪审团）判定（某人）有罪
plead guilty
【律】服罪， 认罪
2. 求一篇关于犯罪的英文作文
Unlike other countries, police in UK do not carry guns. Some think it leaves citizen unprotected, others think it reduce the overall violence in the society. Please discuss.
At the mention of a policeman, most people will have in their mind the image of a strong man or woman with a gun on his belt. But it is not the case in UK: police there do not carry guns. People's opinions towards this vary.
Some people think this contributes to the decrease of violence in society. For one thing, when a robber sees a policeman pointing a gun at him, he may get exasperated and desperate and, out of despair, he may hurt people around him. If the policeman does not carry a gun, nothing of the kind will happen. For another, to err is human and no one can guarantee that a policeman does not mis-shoot the pedestrians when he is hurriedly chasing a criminal. Lastly, some policemen have committed serious crimes with the guns they had.
However, other people hold different views: police without guns leave citizens unprotected. To begin with, at critical moments, guns in policemen's hands can be essential in fighting against the criminals. Imagine a bank robber pointing a gun at the head of a hostage. A policeman can hardly do anything about it if he does not carry a gun. However, the situation can be totally reversed otherwise. Moreover, policemen are well-trained and thus rarely hurt innocent people with their guns.
As far as I am concerned, the latter is more favorable. To my mind, policemen are the very few people on earth who should carry guns, with which they can effectively protect the citizens. (283 words)
3. 求一篇关于犯罪的英文作文
Unlike other countries, police in UK do not carry guns. Some think it leaves citizen unprotected, others think it reduce the overall violence in the society. Please discuss.
At the mention of a policeman, most people will have in their mind the image of a strong man or woman with a gun on his belt. But it is not the case in UK: police there do not carry guns. People's opinions towards this vary.
Some people think this contributes to the decrease of violence in society. For one thing, when a robber sees a policeman pointing a gun at him, he may get exasperated and desperate and, out of despair, he may hurt people around him. If the policeman does not carry a gun, nothing of the kind will happen. For another, to err is human and no one can guarantee that a policeman does not mis-shoot the pedestrians when he is hurriedly chasing a criminal. Lastly, some policemen have committed serious crimes with the guns they had.
However, other people hold different views: police without guns leave citizens unprotected. To begin with, at critical moments, guns in policemen's hands can be essential in fighting against the criminals. Imagine a bank robber pointing a gun at the head of a hostage. A policeman can hardly do anything about it if he does not carry a gun. However, the situation can be totally reversed otherwise. Moreover, policemen are well-trained and thus rarely hurt innocent people with their guns.
As far as I am concerned, the latter is more favorable. To my mind, policemen are the very few people on earth who should carry guns, with which they can effectively protect the citizens. (283 words)
