Slashdot Mirror

It's Oil and Gas combined cycle power plants
You can get the info easily enough from the state public service commission
http://www.psc.state.fl.us/Fil...

And the consumer savings are b.s. as well FPL is playing games with the Solar Base rate adjustment program and fuel recovery cost programs

http://www.psc.state.fl.us/lib...

The SoBRA factors are incremental cost recovery factors that will be applied to base rate charges in order for the Company to collect the revenue necessary to recover the costs associated with building and operating the 2017 SoBRA projects. Witness Cohen testified that the SoBRA factors are based on the ratio of the Company’s jurisdictional revenue requirements for each Project (by year) and the forecasted retail base revenue from electricity sales for the first twelve months of each rate year, beginning January 1, 2018 for the 2017 Project and March 1, 2018 for the 2018 Project. Witness Cohen also presented an exhibit to demonstrate the inputs and calculations performed to determine the resulting incremental cost recovery factor of 0.937 percent for the 2017 SoBRA projects. FPL asserted in its brief that even when all of the SoBRA projects are reflected in customer bills, FPL’s typical residential bills will remain below national and statewide averages. Table 7 below reflects the base rate changes and fuel cost recovery changes that will occur for typical monthly residential bills for customers using 1,000 kWh of electricity. Column 3 in Table 7 reflects a typical bill before the application of incremental cost recovery factors for any SoBRA projects. Column 4 in Table 6 reflects a typical bill for a residential customer using 1,000 kWh of electricity when the incremental cost recovery factor of 0.937 percent for the 2017 SoBRA projects is applied, and Column 5 reflects a typical bill for a residential customer using 1,000 kWh of electricity when all of the projects are implemented.11

It's Oil and Gas combined cycle power plants
You can get the info easily enough from the state public service commission
http://www.psc.state.fl.us/Fil...

And the consumer savings are b.s. as well FPL is playing games with the Solar Base rate adjustment program and fuel recovery cost programs

http://www.psc.state.fl.us/lib...

The SoBRA factors are incremental cost recovery factors that will be applied to base rate charges in order for the Company to collect the revenue necessary to recover the costs associated with building and operating the 2017 SoBRA projects. Witness Cohen testified that the SoBRA factors are based on the ratio of the Company’s jurisdictional revenue requirements for each Project (by year) and the forecasted retail base revenue from electricity sales for the first twelve months of each rate year, beginning January 1, 2018 for the 2017 Project and March 1, 2018 for the 2018 Project. Witness Cohen also presented an exhibit to demonstrate the inputs and calculations performed to determine the resulting incremental cost recovery factor of 0.937 percent for the 2017 SoBRA projects. FPL asserted in its brief that even when all of the SoBRA projects are reflected in customer bills, FPL’s typical residential bills will remain below national and statewide averages. Table 7 below reflects the base rate changes and fuel cost recovery changes that will occur for typical monthly residential bills for customers using 1,000 kWh of electricity. Column 3 in Table 7 reflects a typical bill before the application of incremental cost recovery factors for any SoBRA projects. Column 4 in Table 6 reflects a typical bill for a residential customer using 1,000 kWh of electricity when the incremental cost recovery factor of 0.937 percent for the 2017 SoBRA projects is applied, and Column 5 reflects a typical bill for a residential customer using 1,000 kWh of electricity when all of the projects are implemented.11

As for enclosures, I'm not sure which cabinet this project is going to be in, I was asked for help, this isn't really the area I work the most but I tend to be good at finding the right things.

It's going to be in a cabinet akin to this, plus or minus on size, probably minus considering what's going into this particular box. Some of the stuff I've built is in cabinets bigger than this by far, and some of it's in smaller, and yes, I've put stuff in nearly identical cabinets.

https://fdotwp1.dot.state.fl.u...

It is unlawful to harm or threaten to harm any public servant, his or her immediate family ...

Plenty of statutes in plenty of jurisdictions carry heavier penalties if an offense is committed against a public servant.

And that's before we even consider the application of the SAME laws when applied to different members of society.

Figure 2 shows where the lead is in the various parts of a typical color CRT used in a TV or computer monitor. The lead in the funnel and face plate glass is physically and chemically bound up in the glass matrix and does not leach very readily. The lead in the frit which joins or welds the face plate glass to the funnel glass is in the form of a lead oxide paste. The lead in the frit does leach quite readily when subjected to the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test used to determine whether a discarded material is a hazardous waste or not. Research done at the University of Florida in 1999 and sponsored by the DEP showed that CRTs usually test to be a hazardous waste when subjected to the TCLP test.

There is of course lead also in the soldered connections, as with most e-waste.

And those people would be wrong in NY and FL. Your personal morals are irrelevant when determining if something is against the law or not.

http://law.justia.com/codes/ne...

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/sta...

Of course you'd have to really piss someone in law enforcement/prosecution and be remarkably law abiding in all other areas for someone to try to get a conviction under those laws - but they do in fact exist as laws.

That's because there are two vacancies on the commission, including one for a commissioner who is supposed to represent the environmental community.

Show me your credentials. Enthusiasm and passion don't count. I don't give a damn what you have dedicated your life to as far as causes go. The only thing that an unelected regulatory board should have on it is qualified experts whose regulations can at least in theory be assumed to be based in professional experience, verifiable by private individuals with similar qualifications (informal, but substantial education, formal credentials, etc.)

You want to push your activism, push it through the democratic process which elects the people who run the executive and legislative branches.

Except the people of the State of Florida, through its Democratic Process HAS already done so. Do note this is an administrative board, appointed by the governor, and it has a certain constituency:

  Membership shall be representative of agriculture, the development industry, local government, the environmental community, lay citizens, and members of the scientific and technical community who have substantial expertise in the areas of the fate and transport of water pollutants, toxicology, epidemiology, geology, biology, environmental sciences, or engineering.

But as you can see, they are covering the issues of technical and scientific expertise. They're just not limiting themselves to it, for reasons that are entirely up to the people of the State of Florida.

Perhaps they don't want unelected scientists being the only people doing anything, after a few bad experiences with that, it's an entirely prudent course of action.

Somebody has to point out when the Emperor has no clothes.

Why do you have a problem with that? What's your objection?

In theory I agree but that's not how those things work.

Here's a link to the commission, note that every member represents some constituency: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/leg...

The two missing constituencies (local government and environmental community) are the two I would think are the most important for an environmental regulatory commission.

If you could somehow ensure that the other 6 people were selected based on their credentials then it makes perfect sense that the 7th should as well but it seems unreasonable to single out that one constituency.

Yes, there are some now. I was at the cusp which is why I'm where I am today. I am a mathematician - I modeled traffic 'on a computer.' Which, to be fair, meant dealing with TB sized data sets in the late 90s. It's still a fairly young industry. I'd expected to remain in academia but was offered a no-bid contract for the State of Massachusetts via way of my advisor while still doing my thesis - well, preparing to defend it. Needless to say, it was *very* lucrative and expansion started almost as soon as I accepted the contract.

I literally had business before I'd even really gotten started on collecting real world data. Eventually, I was offered a sizable chunk of money and sold my business. The new parent company does nothing, pretty much, but fill government contracts in a variety of areas such as logistics, security, information technology, and even food stuffs. That might narrow them down a little. They're almost a household name. Me? I won the lottery, so to speak. No great skills, I guess, just a person at the right place, at the right time, and able to take the risks associated.

I mention that because I've seen some of your other posts. It may be something you can get into - it's not easy but it is lucrative.

Start here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

This might be a little below you but maybe not - it's a good grounding:
http://ashley-transport-modell...
Note: I may be biased, a little, by the author of the above - they do good work. They also excel in being able to describe things without being overly verbose.

Disclosure: I had personal involvement in this project. This is not an answer. This is a good descriptor which you can use to find other answers or, if you want, to learn which questions need asking:
http://web.mit.edu/professiona...

Working our way up a little, this is an easy to read and information-filled paper, I know the authors by reputation and may be tangentially cited IIRC but I'm too lazy to double check:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/v...

I'm not sure how much I can disclose, I'm pretty much forever covered by an NDA and a non-compete. Let's just say that I'm intimately familiar with this program:
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/pla...
That is not an answer or anything but might give you an idea of some of what we did beyond just vehicular traffic models.

We also did pedestrian traffic (think malls, grocery stores, a museum or two, hazard plans for large in-planning-stage buildings, and even outdoor events where traffic might be constricted or at stadiums). That's a whole other bowl of wax. As I was entering, it was just starting to maybe reach a bit of maturity - it still hasn't. It has only really been an idea since the 50s, I guess. It has been done, to some extent, since the 70s. However, I jumped in in the late 1980s and early 90s. The times were changing and compute power, specifically storage and compute cycles as well as RAM, were getting to be more accessible.

My email address works and is real. Once you've digested those, feel free to ping me. If you've a penchant then you may only need cross-training to work as a Traffic Engineer. Traffic Engineers are not the same as modelers but they may also do modeling. In the end, I employed about 200 people in three offices and two skeleton offices. Many of which were considered traffic engineers but were also programmers or the likes. We split into two teams with lots of cross-over. I'm not sure why companies don't train so often today. It's actually a good idea and we had an absurdly low turn-over rate. (Low enough to where I'd expect you to call me a liar if I told

Here is part of your own quote of Florida Law:

... if the person is lawfully arrested for any offense allegedly committed... The chemical or physical breath test must be incidental to a lawful arrest

That means "after you are arrested" with, you know, probable cause and stuff. Here is the Intoxilyzer 8000 that is used by the Florida Department Of Law Enforcement (a.k.a state police): http://www.alcoholtest.com/int...

Here is their web page on their alcohol testing program:
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Co...

I don't know, Bob, that looks like a big machine to me. Although it does have what looks like a handle, I'll give you that. But it is not a breathalyzer. A breathalyzer is not used in BAC tests. A breathalyzer is not a "breath test instrument" as referred to in 316.1932 (1)(a)2. You should also read 316.1932 (1)(f)1. If you refuse to blow into a breathalyzer on the side of the road, you are not "refusing to submit to a BAC test".

Small towns have fewer negros so they don't have the crime problems

What was the last time you were in a small town?

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

http://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/v...

https://www.fdle.state.fl.us/C...

http://www.csg.org/knowledgece...

http://www.gainesville.com/art...

The Republican politicians are paid to do this. If you want the truth don't vote republican.

Interestingly enough the article appears to be false in at least some of its claims. Take this, for example:

Sustainable Initiatives

An official State of Florida web site using the word "sustainable." That isn't supposed to be possible, is it? Makes you wonder how much more of the article is false, distorted, or blown out of proportion.

Oh, and look! Here is one on climate change!

What is Climate Change?

And more on climate change.

Climate Changev/ Water Management Connections (PDF)
Climate Change Action Plan for the Florida Reef System 2010-2015 (PDF)

Look at that, actual plans for action on climate change, not just hot air and alarmism. I thought that wasn't possible?

Now I've got a question: Who paid you to post that?

Where is your "proof" that anybody was paid to do this? I think you're simply a liar, and a slanderer.

If you want the truth you need to look past lying ACs. It''s almost as if getting the truth about Republicans on Slashdot is even harder than getting climate models right.

The Republican politicians are paid to do this. If you want the truth don't vote republican.

Interestingly enough the article appears to be false in at least some of its claims. Take this, for example:

Sustainable Initiatives

An official State of Florida web site using the word "sustainable." That isn't supposed to be possible, is it? Makes you wonder how much more of the article is false, distorted, or blown out of proportion.

Oh, and look! Here is one on climate change!

What is Climate Change?

And more on climate change.

Climate Changev/ Water Management Connections (PDF)
Climate Change Action Plan for the Florida Reef System 2010-2015 (PDF)

Look at that, actual plans for action on climate change, not just hot air and alarmism. I thought that wasn't possible?

Now I've got a question: Who paid you to post that?

Where is your "proof" that anybody was paid to do this? I think you're simply a liar, and a slanderer.

If you want the truth you need to look past lying ACs. It''s almost as if getting the truth about Republicans on Slashdot is even harder than getting climate models right.

The Republican politicians are paid to do this. If you want the truth don't vote republican.

Interestingly enough the article appears to be false in at least some of its claims. Take this, for example:

Sustainable Initiatives

An official State of Florida web site using the word "sustainable." That isn't supposed to be possible, is it? Makes you wonder how much more of the article is false, distorted, or blown out of proportion.

Oh, and look! Here is one on climate change!

What is Climate Change?

And more on climate change.

Climate Changev/ Water Management Connections (PDF)
Climate Change Action Plan for the Florida Reef System 2010-2015 (PDF)

Look at that, actual plans for action on climate change, not just hot air and alarmism. I thought that wasn't possible?

Now I've got a question: Who paid you to post that?

Where is your "proof" that anybody was paid to do this? I think you're simply a liar, and a slanderer.

If you want the truth you need to look past lying ACs. It''s almost as if getting the truth about Republicans on Slashdot is even harder than getting climate models right.

The Republican politicians are paid to do this. If you want the truth don't vote republican.

Interestingly enough the article appears to be false in at least some of its claims. Take this, for example:

Sustainable Initiatives

An official State of Florida web site using the word "sustainable." That isn't supposed to be possible, is it? Makes you wonder how much more of the article is false, distorted, or blown out of proportion.

Oh, and look! Here is one on climate change!

What is Climate Change?

And more on climate change.

Climate Changev/ Water Management Connections (PDF)
Climate Change Action Plan for the Florida Reef System 2010-2015 (PDF)

Look at that, actual plans for action on climate change, not just hot air and alarmism. I thought that wasn't possible?

Now I've got a question: Who paid you to post that?

Where is your "proof" that anybody was paid to do this? I think you're simply a liar, and a slanderer.

If you want the truth you need to look past lying ACs. It''s almost as if getting the truth about Republicans on Slashdot is even harder than getting climate models right.

You might think that, wouldn't you?

Sustainable Initiatives
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems

You might think that, wouldn't you?

Sustainable Initiatives
Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems

The problem is, it looks like they're trying to sell it as a car, when it's really just another glorified golfcarts.

It's funny that you mentioned Florida, since that's where I am at the moment. I'm only quoting parts of the laws, so this doesn't become a huge message. You can follow the links to read the rest of the statute and other relevant statutes if you want.

Golf carts can only drive on roads in certain communities and only in certain circumstances.
See Florida Statute 316.212

316.212 Operation of golf carts on certain roadways.â"The operation of a golf cart upon the public roads or streets of this state is prohibited except as provided herein:

The "Local Motors" vehicles would appear to be classified in Florida as LSV (Low Speed Vehicles). They're covered by Florida Statute 316.2122

316.2122 Operation of a low-speed vehicle or mini truck on certain roadways.â"The operation of a low-speed vehicle as defined in s. 320.01 or a mini truck as defined in s. 320.01 on any road is authorized with the following restrictions:
(1)âfA low-speed vehicle or mini truck may be operated only on streets where the posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour or less. This does not prohibit a low-speed vehicle or mini truck from crossing a road or street at an intersection where the road or street has a posted speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour.
[snip]

The UTV is classified here as an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle), and covered by Florida Statute 316.2074.

316.2074(5) Except as provided in this section, an all-terrain vehicle may not be operated upon the public roads, streets, or highways of this state, except as otherwise permitted by the managing state or federal agency.

That's not to say people don't drive them on the road. I've seen them do it. They're breaking the law, and if the police are so inclined, they will be more than happy to give you a stack of tickets.

I've seen both golfcarts and various designs of ATVs used in a lot of places. A agree, they are popular for both industry and off-road applications. But with them implying it's a car it's a problem.

Honestly, it wouldn't be safe to drive any real distance in most metro areas in Florida, if it is accepted for road use as a LSV.

For example, I can't think of any routes that you could safely use to get from downtown Tampa to downtown St. Petersburg. You can't cross any of the bridges in that car, because they don't go fast enough. It would be virtually impossible to even find a route where you wouldn't be under the speed limit and significantly under the average speed.

Even downtown St. Petersburg to downtown Clearwater would be risky at best.

The problem is, it looks like they're trying to sell it as a car, when it's really just another glorified golfcarts.

It's funny that you mentioned Florida, since that's where I am at the moment. I'm only quoting parts of the laws, so this doesn't become a huge message. You can follow the links to read the rest of the statute and other relevant statutes if you want.

Golf carts can only drive on roads in certain communities and only in certain circumstances.
See Florida Statute 316.212

316.212 Operation of golf carts on certain roadways.â"The operation of a golf cart upon the public roads or streets of this state is prohibited except as provided herein:

The "Local Motors" vehicles would appear to be classified in Florida as LSV (Low Speed Vehicles). They're covered by Florida Statute 316.2122

316.2122 Operation of a low-speed vehicle or mini truck on certain roadways.â"The operation of a low-speed vehicle as defined in s. 320.01 or a mini truck as defined in s. 320.01 on any road is authorized with the following restrictions:
(1)âfA low-speed vehicle or mini truck may be operated only on streets where the posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour or less. This does not prohibit a low-speed vehicle or mini truck from crossing a road or street at an intersection where the road or street has a posted speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour.
[snip]

The UTV is classified here as an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle), and covered by Florida Statute 316.2074.

316.2074(5) Except as provided in this section, an all-terrain vehicle may not be operated upon the public roads, streets, or highways of this state, except as otherwise permitted by the managing state or federal agency.

That's not to say people don't drive them on the road. I've seen them do it. They're breaking the law, and if the police are so inclined, they will be more than happy to give you a stack of tickets.

I've seen both golfcarts and various designs of ATVs used in a lot of places. A agree, they are popular for both industry and off-road applications. But with them implying it's a car it's a problem.

Honestly, it wouldn't be safe to drive any real distance in most metro areas in Florida, if it is accepted for road use as a LSV.

For example, I can't think of any routes that you could safely use to get from downtown Tampa to downtown St. Petersburg. You can't cross any of the bridges in that car, because they don't go fast enough. It would be virtually impossible to even find a route where you wouldn't be under the speed limit and significantly under the average speed.

Even downtown St. Petersburg to downtown Clearwater would be risky at best.

The problem is, it looks like they're trying to sell it as a car, when it's really just another glorified golfcarts.

It's funny that you mentioned Florida, since that's where I am at the moment. I'm only quoting parts of the laws, so this doesn't become a huge message. You can follow the links to read the rest of the statute and other relevant statutes if you want.

Golf carts can only drive on roads in certain communities and only in certain circumstances.
See Florida Statute 316.212

316.212 Operation of golf carts on certain roadways.â"The operation of a golf cart upon the public roads or streets of this state is prohibited except as provided herein:

The "Local Motors" vehicles would appear to be classified in Florida as LSV (Low Speed Vehicles). They're covered by Florida Statute 316.2122

316.2122 Operation of a low-speed vehicle or mini truck on certain roadways.â"The operation of a low-speed vehicle as defined in s. 320.01 or a mini truck as defined in s. 320.01 on any road is authorized with the following restrictions:
(1)âfA low-speed vehicle or mini truck may be operated only on streets where the posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour or less. This does not prohibit a low-speed vehicle or mini truck from crossing a road or street at an intersection where the road or street has a posted speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour.
[snip]

The UTV is classified here as an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle), and covered by Florida Statute 316.2074.

316.2074(5) Except as provided in this section, an all-terrain vehicle may not be operated upon the public roads, streets, or highways of this state, except as otherwise permitted by the managing state or federal agency.

That's not to say people don't drive them on the road. I've seen them do it. They're breaking the law, and if the police are so inclined, they will be more than happy to give you a stack of tickets.

I've seen both golfcarts and various designs of ATVs used in a lot of places. A agree, they are popular for both industry and off-road applications. But with them implying it's a car it's a problem.

Honestly, it wouldn't be safe to drive any real distance in most metro areas in Florida, if it is accepted for road use as a LSV.

For example, I can't think of any routes that you could safely use to get from downtown Tampa to downtown St. Petersburg. You can't cross any of the bridges in that car, because they don't go fast enough. It would be virtually impossible to even find a route where you wouldn't be under the speed limit and significantly under the average speed.

Even downtown St. Petersburg to downtown Clearwater would be risky at best.

I suggest you take a look at Florida's methodology for setting speed limits.

Some key points:
* The 85th percentile rule works almost everywhere, not just on your limited access highways. When people are on smaller streets, they drive slower. Obvious exceptions are around schools, construction sites, blind entrances and blind curves. These need to have the state lower the speed limit below the 85th percentile.

* The biggest cause of accidents is normally listed as "speed", but as Florida's guide points out, it is more specifically *speed differential*. I am sorry you live in a state with a bunch of slow drivers. In order to keep accidents down, ideally the speed limit would be set lower so as to keep the speed differences down.

* Elderly drivers is an entirely separate issue with road safety. Yes, poor older drivers cause a lot of problems, but the solution is not arbitrarily low speed limits to keep everyone safe. Not only do they penalize the majority of the population, the low speed limits are often ignored, causing just as many accidents.

What it boils down to: You accuse the grandparent post of using one specific data point to cover all bases. In fact, the data shows that the 85th percentile works almost everywhere, and your major argument against it is a unique data point extrapolated to the general case. Most states do not have nearly the percentage of elderly drivers as Florida.

Yes, voter records are public information. I believe they list your name, address, DOB, your registered party, precinct information, and date you voted. It's been a while since I've personally seen them, so I may have missed something.

Here's the Florida statement on it. They say pretty much what I said.

http://election.dos.state.fl.u...

I'm interested, in which jurisdiction can you get fined for NOT violating rules ?!

Most states in the U.S. have laws regarding driving too slowly, and being in the passing lane when you're not in fact passing anyone. Where I live, the relevant laws are F.S. 316.183 (5) and F.S. 316.081. Note that 316.081 is missing the "or in compliance with law" language present in 316.183 (5), so even if you're going the speed limit, you can still be ticketed for hanging in the left lane when you're not supposed to be there. It's rarely enforced though, and it's quite common where I live to see a bunch of idiots cruising in the left lane with the right lane vacant for a mile or more.

I'm interested, in which jurisdiction can you get fined for NOT violating rules ?!

Most states in the U.S. have laws regarding driving too slowly, and being in the passing lane when you're not in fact passing anyone. Where I live, the relevant laws are F.S. 316.183 (5) and F.S. 316.081. Note that 316.081 is missing the "or in compliance with law" language present in 316.183 (5), so even if you're going the speed limit, you can still be ticketed for hanging in the left lane when you're not supposed to be there. It's rarely enforced though, and it's quite common where I live to see a bunch of idiots cruising in the left lane with the right lane vacant for a mile or more.

In 1987, the average time-served for 2nd degree murder in Florida was 6.8 years. That is more than five, but that is the average, so many murders served less time.

Yes, nearly 30 years ago many murderers in Florida served less than 6.8 years in jail, that doesn't create a basis for the claim that many murderers spend less than 5 years in jail.

Many murderers spend less than 5 years in jail.

I'm going to have to go ahead and ask for a citation on that one, bro.

In 1987, the average time-served for 2nd degree murder in Florida was 6.8 years. That is more than five, but that is the average, so many murders served less time. Sentences are much more than that, but "time served" is, on average, only 60% of the original sentence, and in many cases, less than half. Plenty of other states have a reputation for more lenient sentencing than Florida, and more lenient parole boards.

Are you sure Americans are anti-gay, and not just a country of a third of a billion people who have a handful of bad apples, a media system faking controversy to generate viewership, a slashdot reader who's forgotten what percentage of the internet is trolling, and a parochial political system pandering to margins to get voted in?

Your point about over-generalization is valid, but to be fair, it's far more than just "a handful of bad apples" when it can be reasonably leveled at, for example, 47% of voting-age people in the state of Florida (2008 election, 61.9% in favor of anti-gay marriage amendment out of 75.2% turnout).

From the article;

and Florida’s anti-money laundering statutes, which prohibit the trade or business in currency of more than $10,000.

This is factually incorrect, The satute does not prohibit the transaction, it just requires reporting. This makes me believe that the dealer was charged under 869.102 which mentions "trade or business". Had it been 869.101 them the source of the money would have come into relevance.
The money laundering statute, Title XLVI Chapter 869 section 102, is about reporting.

All persons engaged in a trade or business, except for those financial institutions that report to the Office of Financial Regulation pursuant to s. 655.50, who receive more than $10,000 in currency, including foreign currency, in one transaction, or who receive this amount through two or more related transactions, must complete and file with the Department of Revenue the information required pursuant to 26 U.S.C. s. 6050I., concerning returns relating to currency received in trade or business.

If the bitcoin seller did not collect enough information to fill out the form and report the transaction so he was arrested. The law does not care if the money came from legal or illegal sources. If you don't report the transaction you have broken the law.

Stalking is when you sit waiting outside someone's house and follow them around everywhere they go.

It's not:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.048.html

That's a good point. Each state has their own laws. Ours is...

FS 316.126(1)(b)

1. Shall vacate the lane closest to the emergency vehicle or wrecker when driving on an interstate highway or other highway with two or more lanes traveling in the direction of the emergency vehicle or wrecker, except when otherwise directed by a law enforcement officer. If such movement cannot be safely accomplished, the driver shall reduce speed as provided in subparagraph 2.

2. Shall slow to a speed that is 20 miles per hour less than the posted speed limit when the posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour or greater; or travel at 5 miles per hour when the posted speed limit is 20 miles per hour or less, when driving on a two-lane road, except when otherwise directed by a law enforcement officer.

That doesn't cover other pesky things like school zones, temporary construction speed limit changes, and other reasons that you can't just go cruising through at the speed limit.

I hope you realise, that simply believing "crazy racist stuff you heard somewhere" (likely, from racists) doesn't make it true. There are (far) more whites than blacks on death row in Florida. http://www.dc.state.fl.us/activeinmates/deathrowroster.asp

Most people executed in Florida have been white. http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/execlist.html

There have been plenty of people executed in Florida for killing blacks and other non-whites:
Richard Henyard
Mark Schwab
David Alan Gore
Manuel Pardo
And many more.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Florida

The ironic thing here is, simply blinding believing that other people are being racist due to a set of circumstances which aren't actually occuring, is highly suggestive of you, in fact, being racist. You're already set in a prejudiced view and don't care about the facts. BTW, George Zimmerman is innocent. Deal with it.

I hope you realise, that simply believing "crazy racist stuff you heard somewhere" (likely, from racists) doesn't make it true. There are (far) more whites than blacks on death row in Florida. http://www.dc.state.fl.us/activeinmates/deathrowroster.asp

Most people executed in Florida have been white. http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/execlist.html

There have been plenty of people executed in Florida for killing blacks and other non-whites:
Richard Henyard
Mark Schwab
David Alan Gore
Manuel Pardo
And many more.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Florida

The ironic thing here is, simply blinding believing that other people are being racist due to a set of circumstances which aren't actually occuring, is highly suggestive of you, in fact, being racist. You're already set in a prejudiced view and don't care about the facts. BTW, George Zimmerman is innocent. Deal with it.

My only knowledge of this subject came from a 45 minute long class I had to take before getting my concealed carry permit. It was a pretty casual overview of Florida law.

Here's the actual relevant Flarda law, and it appears to my non-lawyer eyes that having a posted sign is sufficient grounds for having someone arrested. Your state is likely different, but we are pretty liberal here with regard to guns, so if your state is different, it's probably MORE stringent, not less.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0810/Sections/0810.09.html

"Stand your ground" has nothing to do with this case. It's a pure case of self-defense.

You sure about that? From the Wikipedia article on "Stand Your Ground"....

In the United States of America, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat firs

Though you have been been awarded a +5 "informative" and speak from a point of authority, you seem to have a few facts incorrect.

In fact, what the trial here is about how to interpret "stand your ground". If one initiates a confrontation against and innocent individual who may himself feel threatened, are you standing your ground or are you starting a fight?

"Stand Your Ground" has to do with one not having a duty to retreat first, which they did under the previous wording of the law.

Florida's Justifiable Use of Force law is here.

776.013 (3) is the SYG part

But according to Zimmerman's version, duty to retreat or lack thereof doesn't matter because he was unable to retreat.

776.032 is the immunity part.

That is the part which meant that the police were legally prohibited from arresting him if they could not offer any evidence to disprove his self-defense claim, and to begin with they could not. They were free to keep investigating, which they did.

776.041 deals with the exceptions that allow someone who was the initial aggressor or instigator to still use force in self-defense.

Basically if you're trying to withdraw from the fight and the other person won't let you, and you fear great injury or death, you can use force, including deadly force, to defend yourself against them regardless of who started it.

The only application of SYG here would be if Martin had survived and was being charged with something.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots who refer to the entirety of Fla. 776 as SYG, or the SYG law, and this creates confusion and makes people think Zimmerman was claiming to be "standing his ground" when all he was doing was claiming regular old self defense.

Just googled "average sentence murder". Google says,
http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/timeserv/annual/section2.html#murder
"Offenders who have been sentenced to prison for murder or manslaughter will serve an average of 19.1 years...."

You know what bugs me about slashdot? Just about every third comment makes stuff up in the hope that noone will call them on it, just so they can sound knowledgeable. Scratch that, thats what bothers me about most people who enter into a discussion-- their inability to shut up when they dont know what theyre talking about.

“Destructive device” means any bomb, grenade, mine, rocket, missile, pipebomb, or similar device containing an explosive, incendiary, or poison gas and includes any frangible container filled with an explosive, incendiary, explosive gas, or expanding gas, which is designed or so constructed as to explode by such filler and is capable of causing bodily harm or property damage;

*snip*

“Destructive device” does not include: (a)A device which is not designed, redesigned, used, or intended for use as a weapon;

*snip*

(5)“Explosive” means any chemical compound or mixture that has the property of yielding readily to combustion or oxidation upon application of heat, flame, or shock, including but not limited to dynamite, nitroglycerin, trinitrotoluene, or ammonium nitrate when combined with other ingredients to form an explosive mixture, blasting caps, and detonators; but not including: ... [fireworks, guns, and toy rockets]

So unless this was intended to be a weapon, it is not a "destructive device" under the law. If it did not lead to combustion or oxidation (read fire), then it's not an "explosive" under the law. It may be a "bomb," but only in the same sense as a cherry bomb.

So I'm really curious what felony they think they can charge her with, because it's certainly not one of these. It might be against school policy, but there's no way a felony charge will stick. The DA is foolish to try it.

The state's Department of Environmental Protection has a nice collection of sinkhole resources, including a database of incidents, and a poster with a map.

The state's Department of Environmental Protection has a nice collection of sinkhole resources, including a database of incidents, and a poster with a map.

You re-read the law - ALL OF IT. If I open the front door to my home, and someone I don't know begins punching me in the face, in the eyes of the law I have a reasonable fear of sustaining great bodily harm.

Don't believe me? Read the statute that gives me the benefit of the doubt:

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

Has the U.S. ever assembled a militia?

Florida called out the militia in 1941 to patrol the beaches. [source]

A militia of returned GIs spontaneously formed to prevent a corrupt Tennessee county political machine from stealing an election. [source]

During the 1960s the Deacons for Defense formed armed patrols in response to Klan terror.

In recent times, people formed armed community patrols when law enforcement was overwhelmed by hurricane Katrina. There's quite a long tradition of legitimate militia activity in the United States throughout living memory, and even in recent memory.

If you'll look at the original BTS report, specifically the per passenger mile breakout you'll find that passenger rail is subsidized at a rate higher than that for buses, per passenger mile. And with the experience of the latest light-rail construction in the US (the Seattle Link Light Rail) costing over $176 million per mile to build (approximately 17 times the cost to build a 6 lane highway). Rail can be a good option, but to think it is lower cost than highways - either in deployment or ongoing costs - isn't backed up by reality.

It's because they think they need a nutjob in order to get the Republican "base" out to vote, when what they really need is a moderate to win over the undecided voters (who are the real deciding factor).

If they don't have sufficient appeal to their base, they run the risk of fracturing it through disaffection. To a certain degree your reasoning was correct: "who else were they going to vote for?", and the answer is clearly "not Obama". However, that's insufficient because the answer can also be "no one at all".

Let me put it this way. I live in a safely red state, and two weeks before the election I noticed a Romney/Ryan bumper sticker. What really struck me was that was the first one I had seen. Paul Ryan was a critical choice for the GOP in an attempt to keep their base engaged while their presidential candidate (the perceived moderate) went after the independents. I'm not exaggerating when I say there were more McCain/Palin and W bumper stickers on cars driving around here than Romney ones on the day of the election.

This election was the Republicans' to lose given unemployment, the economy, and the incumbent's name used as an epithet for the most controversial legislation passed in the last fifty years. When you look at all that, you asked how the Republicans could lose. When you looked at the candidates in the primary, you asked how the Republicans could win.

Also, many Ron Paul supporters defected for Libertarian party after the Romney campaign's machinations during the primaries and convention to disenfranchise the Paul delegates despite there never being any plausible threat to Romney's nomination. Why is this relevant? I'm guessing the 0.53% of the vote the Libertarian candidate won in FL, for example, looks rather appealing to the Republicans in retrospect—given they lost by 0.86% of the vote there.

It was untenable. When it comes down to it, effectively no one really liked or was enthusiastic about Romney. He got loads of anti-Obama votes but very few pro-Romney votes.

If you go to the store drunk as hell it is as rude as going there completely baked, and you have a major problem if you do that.

At least in my state (Florida) there are laws against public intoxication. While the law does specifically make it illegal to be actually drinking in public, it does not specifically limit based on substance consumed. Here's a link: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0856/Sections/0856.011.html

856.011Disorderly intoxication.—
(1)No person in the state shall be intoxicated and endanger the safety of another person or property, and no person in the state shall be intoxicated or drink any alcoholic beverage in a public place or in or upon any public conveyance and cause a public disturbance.
(2)Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3)Any person who shall have been convicted or have forfeited collateral under the provisions of subsection (1) three times in the preceding 12 months shall be deemed a habitual offender and may be committed by the court to an appropriate treatment resource for a period of not more than 60 days. Any peace officer, in lieu of incarcerating an intoxicated person for violation of subsection (1), may take or send the intoxicated person to her or his home or to a public or private health facility, and the law enforcement officer may take reasonable measures to ascertain the commercial transportation used for such purposes is paid for by such person in advance. Any law enforcement officers so acting shall be considered as carrying out their official duty.
History.—s. 16A, ch. 71-132; s. 1383, ch. 97-102.

I think it's one of the better laws on the books. It bans a disruptive behavior yet leaves some discretion to handle it in a reasonable manner. Usually when I read a law I say "Wow, that's messed up!" and move on.

This wasn't a borderline case. Here's some news coverage from back in the day:
Drugging The Poor

Angulo and four other Miami-Dade doctors accounted for about $4 million of the $31 million Medicaid spent statewide on the drug [OxyContin] last year, according to the Sun-Sentinel's analysis.

.
Doctor Hit With Pill Ban By State

The department of health order said state investigators found an "extensive and troubling" pattern in which Angulo prescribed OxyContin and other dangerous drugs in "excessive quantities to many of his patients, including multiple members of the same families and to persons of varying ages who shared the same address."

And here's the Florida Dept of Health Emergency Order (PDF) being reported upon in the previous story

These cases are usually extremely clear cut, because the records are already on file.
The good news is that better enforcement is reducing the use of Oxy.
The bad news is that it's being replace on the street with heroin.

In Florida, the burden of proof is on you to prove that you were not driving your car if you get a red light ticket.

The owner of the motor vehicle involved in the violation is responsible and liable for paying the uniform traffic citation [...] when the driver failed to stop at a traffic signal, unless the owner can establish that [...] The motor vehicle was, at the time of the violation, in the care, custody, or control of another person;
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0300-0399/0316/Sections/0316.0083.html

(It's been challenged under the due process clause of the Constitution; I'm not sure of the details. )

Also, parking laws in New York are similar.

Last time I took my wife to the ER was for a bug bite. The bill was $4,150. The Doctor's Hospital in Coral Gables FL. Dr. Edwin Hsu was the physician. He gave my wife an IV drip and a perscription for two antibiotics. That evidently was enough to bump her up into the gunshot victim's billing code. 99284 instead of 99281.

So yeah, sit in a waiting room for two hours before receiving "emergency" treatment and then sit on a gurney for two more hours while waiting for the $80 worth of lab work to come back. Oh, and try getting a itemized bill. We requested one three times before we finally just paid the bill. Then we requested it again. They never sent any record explaining the charges. We also tried to find some government entity that gave a fsck. No luck with that either. And to top it off, the Doctor's Hospital is a non-profit.

Hate to break environmental wackos ideas ,but; some truth, sinkholes are common in nature without coal fires or mines. Florida, has more than most people can count and more every year, other States also. Underground rivers dissolve limestone, then collapse. Here is a link to wise up them that need to be learned. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/geology/geologictopics/sinkhole/florida_sinkhole_poster.pdf Also, old lava tubes/tunnels can collapse causing sinkholes.

Local sales have declined by more then 50%, mainly due to internet sales. That is one tax base that has declined. Business moving operations overseas impacts both corporate income tax. That is another tax base that won't return. People employed at those firms taht are no longer employed and move away reduce both personal income tax revenues and further erode the local sales tax revenues.

Fuel taxes do not rise with the cost of fuel, as they are fixed and set by congress. It was 9 cents in 1983 and is now 18.4 cents, a 100% increase. However, the costof highway contruction and maintenance has trippled over the same period, so those taxes still don't cover all of the new construction. In addition, with very few exceptions, the federal fuel tax cannot be used for maintenance, only constructing new roads. This means the states have to raise additional revenue to maintain the existing roads and as they keep increasing, more and more money is needed (it is approximately $477K to resurface one mile of road: ftp://ftp.dot.state.fl.us/LTS/CO/Estimates/CPM/summary.pdf) Not only has the cost of materials gone up three-fold, but the amount of road surface has doubled also since the federal fuel tax was 9 cents.

By the way, fuel tax/roads were just an example of many things that we take for granted that have been a burden on tax revenues. Everybody thinks of entitlement programs, but infrastructure maintenance plays a big part of it, too. Then, to top all of that off, Congress keeps enacting regulations that shift costs to the staes and local municipalities.

The point of all of this is that it is logical that as tax bases decline, tax rates need to increase just to maintain the status quo. They need to increase even more, if the state or local municipality wants to add additional services. In a perfect world, tax revenues would rise with inflation (at least for those based on a percentage of sales or income). However, with the explosion of internet sales, this has not been the case as they are exempt from sales tax unless they have a presence in the state (Nexus). Amazon doesn't, so its sales are tax free.

Amazon's call for a federal sales tax is a recognition that eventually they are going to have to remit sales tax (stores don't pay sales tax, consumers do). They are lobbying for a federal tax, because it is simpler and cheaper for them than to build a system for each state and municipality (even though Walmart and every other retailer with both store fronts ande internet sales has done). An additional issue is that the federal government will then have to allocate that money back to the states. As with the federal fuel excise tax, it is not allocated proportionately to where the money comes from, but instead where the goverment wants it to go. It then becomes a club to beat the states into submisison to "voluntarily" follow new regs or lose the funding. However, that is a whole different topic.

I assume you are not from the US. In the US, it varies by state. Part of the controversy involved in this case revolves around the fact that the state in which it occurred, Florida, is a 'stand your ground' state, which permits basically unlimited violence in response to being attacked.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

See item 3.

Florida Statute 776.032 expressly prohibits police from arresting someone who had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. Police may investigate, the statute says, "but the agency may not arrest the person" without probable cause.

Thanks for giving an actual reference. Link for convenience:

"A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful."

I can see why police would be fidgety about arguing probable cause in a face of such a law. But I don't think that probable cause is unreasonable in this case - they have witnesses claiming that "Zimmerman shot first", so to speak, is that not good enough?

Anyway, if they keep an eye on him in the meantime, and spend that time investigating so that they can come up with a strong probable cause argument, I guess that's good enough.