Slashdot Mirror

I've already suggest to my local representative that she introduce similar legislation in Indiana..... here's what I wrote:
    I ask that you consider introducing legislation similar to that of the recently pulled HB 1937 of the State of Texas.

    Here's the link to their web site about the bill: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1937

    It would criminalize the types of searches the TSA has been doing, which are in violation of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.

    In introducing this, you would show that you stand for the rights of your fellow Hoosiers. We don't have as much air traffic to worry about, so their is less fallout. You would also show some distance between yourself and the DC beltway crowd, which will probably come in handy soon, as they keep debasing the dollar, leaving the States out to dry.

    Thanks for your time and attention.

Here is your source: Benefit estimator If you plug in the info I gave you, you get:

Based on the following information:

Number in household: 1
            Amount Result
Monthly Net Income $0 Within limits
Assets $0 Within limits
Federal Gross Income $0 Within limits

The estimated monthly SNAP benefit for your income and household size is $200.

Please please, PLEASE! Come to Texas all 50 times!..
. . . .
The problem is that here in Texas religious zealots are pushing to get "intelligent design" taught instead of the Science of evolution; Currently I.D. is being pushed as an alternative, with the hope that teachers can be found that will only want to teach one alternative -- I.D.

The children will not learn without exposure to the scientific information -- I used only MS OSs since MS DOS 3.1 because I did not know about Linux! No one was there to teach me that I had other options than MacOS or Windows.

This is either hysterical nonsense, or a troll. Texas Science education standards require the teaching of evolution.

(b) Introduction.

(1) In Biology, students conduct field and laboratory investigations, use scientific methods during investigations, and make informed decisions using critical-thinking and scientific problem-solving. Students in Biology study a variety of topics that include: structures and functions of cells and viruses; growth and development of organisms; cells, tissues, and organs; nucleic acids and genetics; biological evolution; taxonomy; metabolism and energy transfers in living organisms; living systems; homeostasis; ecosystems; and plants and the environment.

(2) Science is a way of learning about the natural world. Students should know how science has built a vast body of changing and increasing knowledge described by physical, mathematical, and conceptual models, and also should know that science may not answer all questions.

(3) A system is a collection of cycles, structures, and processes that interact. Students should understand a whole in terms of its components and how these components relate to each other and to the whole. All systems have basic properties that can be described in terms of space, time, energy, and matter. Change and constancy occur in systems and can be observed and measured as patterns. These patterns help to predict what will happen next and can change over time.

(4) Investigations are used to learn about the natural world. Students should understand that certain types of questions can be answered by investigations, and that methods, models, and conclusions built from these investigations change as new observations are made. Models of objects and events are tools for understanding the natural world and can show how systems work. They have limitations and based on new discoveries are constantly being modified to more closely reflect the natural world.

(7) Science concepts. The student knows the theory of biological evolution. The student is expected to:

(A) identify evidence of change in species using fossils, DNA sequences, anatomical similarities, physiological similarities, and embryology; and

(B) illustrate the results of natural selection in speciation, diversity, phylogeny, adaptation, behavior, and extinction.

Evolution is being taught in Texas.

There is another bit of nonsense popular on Slashdot - that Christians cannot be scientists, let alone good scientists.

Collins: Why this scientist believes in God

April 03, 2007|By Dr. Francis Collins Special to CNN

I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.

As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.....

Please please, PLEASE! Come to Texas all 50 times!..
. . . .
The problem is that here in Texas religious zealots are pushing to get "intelligent design" taught instead of the Science of evolution; Currently I.D. is being pushed as an alternative, with the hope that teachers can be found that will only want to teach one alternative -- I.D.

The children will not learn without exposure to the scientific information -- I used only MS OSs since MS DOS 3.1 because I did not know about Linux! No one was there to teach me that I had other options than MacOS or Windows.

This is either hysterical nonsense, or a troll. Texas Science education standards require the teaching of evolution.

(b) Introduction.

(1) In Biology, students conduct field and laboratory investigations, use scientific methods during investigations, and make informed decisions using critical-thinking and scientific problem-solving. Students in Biology study a variety of topics that include: structures and functions of cells and viruses; growth and development of organisms; cells, tissues, and organs; nucleic acids and genetics; biological evolution; taxonomy; metabolism and energy transfers in living organisms; living systems; homeostasis; ecosystems; and plants and the environment.

(2) Science is a way of learning about the natural world. Students should know how science has built a vast body of changing and increasing knowledge described by physical, mathematical, and conceptual models, and also should know that science may not answer all questions.

(3) A system is a collection of cycles, structures, and processes that interact. Students should understand a whole in terms of its components and how these components relate to each other and to the whole. All systems have basic properties that can be described in terms of space, time, energy, and matter. Change and constancy occur in systems and can be observed and measured as patterns. These patterns help to predict what will happen next and can change over time.

(4) Investigations are used to learn about the natural world. Students should understand that certain types of questions can be answered by investigations, and that methods, models, and conclusions built from these investigations change as new observations are made. Models of objects and events are tools for understanding the natural world and can show how systems work. They have limitations and based on new discoveries are constantly being modified to more closely reflect the natural world.

(7) Science concepts. The student knows the theory of biological evolution. The student is expected to:

(A) identify evidence of change in species using fossils, DNA sequences, anatomical similarities, physiological similarities, and embryology; and

(B) illustrate the results of natural selection in speciation, diversity, phylogeny, adaptation, behavior, and extinction.

Evolution is being taught in Texas.

There is another bit of nonsense popular on Slashdot - that Christians cannot be scientists, let alone good scientists.

Collins: Why this scientist believes in God

April 03, 2007|By Dr. Francis Collins Special to CNN

I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.

As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.....

Looks like it hasn't been voted on by the house yet. It left committee yesterday. HB1937

Texas Transportation Code 545.404

Incorrect if you live in Texas; it's illegal to leave your keys in an unattended car.

Here's a link from the Texas DMV stating as such: http://www.txdmv.gov/protection/auto_theft/hold_key.htm

Here's a link to the actual statute: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/TN/htm/TN.545.htm#545.404

This .PDF will show that one and some other minor offenses you might not have been aware of. http://www.tmcec.com/public/files/File/The%20Recorder/2003/NL11_03.pdf

TX Transportation Code 545.404

As the AG and the FBI are looking into matters: "Combs has endorsed legislation enhancing information security, including a proposal that each agency designate a chief privacy officer and another to create a state Information Security Council."

Gee Susan, I think the horse has left this burning barn...unless you're looking for ways to spread the blame the next time this happens?

RELIGIOUS TESTS. No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB2454

Er, sorry, Ohio was a mistake as far as "required" but there was a line that made me cringe:
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/constitution.cfm?Part=1&Section=07
Religion, morality, and knowledge, however, being essential to good government...

But as far as states that prohibit, I believe there are 7 (or 8?) that specifically have text concerning "God", "higher power" or "supreme being"

Here are two:

Texas:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm
Sec. 4. RELIGIOUS TESTS. No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

North Carolina:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Legislation/constitution/ncconstitution_whole.html
Sec. 8. Disqualifications for office.
The following persons shall be disqualified for office:
First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God. ...

Now, would these hold up? Not likely. The problem is that nobody has challenged them and nobody likely will. The laws will remain written as they are and not be changed.

"...the right heretofore claimed by the State of Texas to secede from the Union, is hereby distinctly renounced. Passed 15th March, 1866"

Article 1 Section 4 of the Texas constitution states:
"RELIGIOUS TESTS. No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments,"

wait for it, wait for it

"provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

After they started pulling crap 8 months ago, I went out and hired a good Real Estate Attorney. In Texas, we seem to have lots of problems with mortgage fraud and the Texas AG has already gone after one company for similar practice that BoA is trying to pull here. https://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagnews/release.php?id=3458 Frankly, they're destroying the quiet enjoyment of my home and it's truly a shame that you have to literally go after them in court for things that any reasonable person would think are a slam dunk in terms of facts. They are truly a bunch of dumb fucks. I like the angle though, with my luck they'll have copies of the documents but I should give that a try as well.

Even Collins seems to agree with me on "steal" but not with "theft".

That's funny as the State of Texas states "Steal' means to acquire property or service by theft." So they are essentially synonyms.

I honestly have never understood the word to include intent to indefinitely deprive you of that thing. It doesn't even seem to match common theft. If a guy steals your radio, it's not normally a "fuck you, radio owner, now you'll never have this radio" so much as a "sweet, I can sell this for food money".

The intent was not for what you state. When someone takes something permanently (whether because they have some "spite" to deprive you of it specifically, or because they want to sell it for food, which requires depriving you of it permanently, whether or not that is something they consciously think about), they commit theft. When your neighbor doesn't return your rake you lent them, it isn't theft. When they take it and you know they did, even if you didn't give permission, if you think they'd return it if you asked, it isn't theft. Those are torts. You sue him for your loss. You know who took it and why, and if you are wronged, you pursue it in civil court. Interestingly enough, that also makes joyriding not a theft. Though many places put "joyriding" laws in, or change the laws around "grand theft auto" to include joyrides. Because, again, if you aren't going to be deprived of it forever, then you'll get it back and be able to trace who returned it and pursue them for your loss. Involving the criminal system should be a consideration only when other avenues can't be used.

I'm not specifically arguing for or against that line of logic, just explaining it because you seemed to not understand why taking without permission with the intent to return wasn't theft and the other associated corollaries.

It also ignores euthanasia (/me dons flame-retardant panties), which can be classified as a separate category of crime, a homicide, or not a crime depending on jurisdiction and circumstance.

Euthanasia is homicide. Homicide is the act of killing another. It may or may not be a crime. Where I grew up, there was no crime named "homicide." Instead, Texas has a heading of "criminal homicide" encompassing those types of homicide which may be crimes. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.19.htm I use that rather than where I currently am because having lived so long in TX, I've pretty much read all the statutes through at least once, often more. Though the point is homicide is often incorrectly given as a shortened version of "negligent homicide" or such. It isn't. It's each and every case of a human taking the life of another, whether through euthanasia, war, murder, etc.

There's no simple answer, as your stats show.

Personally, I find it interesting that the "small government" party wants capital punishment. When the cost to kill a prisoner is higher than just imprisoning them until they die of old age. It would seem to me that anyone interested in "small government" would want the cheaper solution, not the most expensive one. So whatever the "logical" answer is, I would expect that would be irrelevant to most people's choices. People choose based on the value of life, the need for vengeance, and such, without great care to the actual crime stats.

Yeah, we can all play the time machine game and pretend it's still a big likelihood to get a whole bunch of racists on a jury. The simple fact is that right now, today, potential jurors are disqualified because they are screened as not going to tow the line of a particular counsel or even the judge. And peep this dawg, actual examples! Holy shit!

I know you're playing stupid, but that's what the defense will do too. At least I hope you're playing stupid. Lets follow this through.

AMAZON.COM.KYDC LLC, the owners/operators of the facility in question in Irving, Tx, is a corporation registered in the states of Kentucky and Texas.

KYDC is "Kentucky Distribution Center". If you look for other names of corporations they're using for their distribution centers, you'll see the common theme.

In the state of Texas, you will Find this information

Entity Information: AMAZON.COM.KYDC LLC
PO BOX 81207
SEATTLE, WA 98108-1207

And they list 21 vice presidents as the officers of the company, all PO BOX 81226 SEATTLE , WA 98108

VICE PRESI ALLEN PARKER
VICE PRESI BEN SUMRALL
VICE PRESI BRIAN W CALVIN
VICE PRESI CHRISTOPHER S YETMAN
VICE PRESI DAVE ALPERSON
VICE PRESI DAVE H CLARK
VICE PRESI DAVE NIEKERK
VICE PRESI DAVE SEITELMAN
VICE PRESI GIRISH S LAKSHMAN
VICE PRESI JASON M BRISTOW
TREASURER JASON M BRISTOW
VICE PRESI JAY LITTLEPAGE
VICE PRESI JOHN TAGAWA
VICE PRESI MICHAEL D DEAL
SECRETARY MICHAEL D DEAL
VICE PRESI MICHAEL J PASSALES
PRESIDENT MICHAEL T MCKENNA
VICE PRESI RITESH CHATURBEDI
VICE PRESI ROB ROBINSON
VICE PRESI ROBERT C WEGNER
VICE PRESI ROBERT D COMFORT
ASSISTANT SARAH DODS
VICE PRESI SEAN BOYLE
VICE PRESI TIMOTHY C COLLINS

Allen Parker - VP Finance, WW Operations & Customer Service, Logistics and Supply Chain - Amazon.com
Ben Sumrall - Finance Director - Amazon.com
Brian Calvin - Director- NAFC ACES - Amazon.com
Chris Yetman - VP, Infrastructure Operations - Amazon.com
David Alperson - General Manager - Amazon.com
Dave Clark - VP of North American Operations - Amazon.com
David Niekerk - VP Human Resources for Global Operations and Customer Service - Amazon.com
David Seitelman David - Regional Director of Fulfillment, Director of Manufacturing - Amazon.com
Girish Lakshman - Vice President - Transportation - Amazon.com
Jason Bristow - Vice President & Treasurer - Amazon.com
Jay Littlepage - VP, Infrastructure - Amazon.com (no longer with Amazon)
John Tagawa - General Manager - Amazon.com
Michael Deal - Vice President and Associate General Counsel - Amazon.com
Michael Passales - Regional Director, North American Fulfillment - Amazon.com
Michael McKenna VP Legal at Amazon Europe, Legal Director at Amazon.co.uk
Senior Financial Analyst - Amazon.com
Ritesh Chaturbedi - Operations Manager - Amazon.com
Rob Robinson - General Manager - Amazon.com
Robert Wegner - unknown
Robert Comfort - unknown (AWS engineer?)
Sarah Dods - Attorney - Securities & Corporate Finance - Amazon.com
Sean Boyle - Vice President, Amazon Web Services Finance - Amazon.com
Tim Collins - Director - Amazon.com

Do you see a trend there? 20 of 22 people listed as officers are employees at Amazon. One worked at Amazon, but is no longer employed, but I'd suspect that will be fixed on the corporation listing at the next filing. One is simply unverified.

But lets overlook that, and skip on to the Kentucky company. Surely, if it's just a name resemblance, this one couldn't be remotely similar also. Kentucky actually has 5 corporations listed, 3 of which are active, including the one in question.

AMAZON.COM BABY, INC. 0618308 I-Inactive FCO-Foreign Corporation
AMAZON.COM, LLC 0618515 A-Active - Good FLC-Foreign Limited Liability Company
AMAZON.COM.KYDC LLC 0723455 A-Active - Good FLC-Foreign Limited Liability Company
AMAZON.COM.KYDC, INC. 0475949 I-Inactive FC

Are you sure you're not including your city and/or county sales tax?

Sales tax rate calculation

Note that the percentages shown in exhibit 28-6 are misleading; they only show just how much fossil fuels are burned in the United States. Why does anything need subsidization?

Note that the percentages shown in exhibit 28-6 are misleading; they only show just how much fossil fuels are burned in the United States. Why does anything need subsidization?

I did not say anything about someone targeting your vehicle with the intent of stealing your gun. I was trying to say that leaving a gun in an insecure location is asking for more guns in the hands of criminals. A lock box in a vehicle is not secure as the vehicle may be stolen. A gun safe at home or when the gun is on your person is an acceptable level of security.

It also appears we both may be wrong. Check the Texas Department of Public Safety Concealed Handgun Licensing FAQ http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/chlfaqs.htm .

        If I drive to a shopping mall that does not permit handguns, will I be allowed to park in the parking lot and leave my gun in the car?

Yes. Handguns may be left in cars in parking lots that do not have signs described above posted.

So it looks like you can leave the gun in the car.

Hyperbolic, possibly; but the law is fairly broad and the bar fairly low.

Helios One doesn't "use space lazzors" to generate energy, but contains the control mechanism for the Archimedes II space-based laser weapon.

It's clear from looking at the pictures that Helios One was modelled pretty directly on Solar One and Solar Two.

When in Rome! You have to deal with the laws where you reside.

Absolutely!

In short: Do not do anything in any country if you are not 100% sure that it is legal to do so.

Pffft. Don't believe this "when in rome" crap. Hey, fellow Texan, did you know it's illegal to masturbate, women can't own more than 6 sex toys (intent to distribute obscene devices), and dildos are outright banned in Texas?

Ridiculous laws are ridiculous. Face it: Law does not reflect the actual public opinion or values. Since its hard to remove old laws it's easy for the past to hold us prisoners. This is why we should only pass those laws that we really must have forever.

I agree again (and, yes, I did know). By the way, with my buddies in our government, my relentless comment to them is, "Don't tell me the laws you authored/supported/passed/ect., tell me about the ones you have eliminated."

The problem with the Texas law is that it requires "the average person" to apply their own "standards" (read: right wing christians dictate what's decent; Clearly a loophole bypassing Church/State separation).

You don't know the meaning of Church/State separation, if that is your belief. That is a relatively new *made up* concept that is a twisted version of the government shall not make a state religion provision. And, the concept of "right and left wings" is a great ploy by the ruling class (read as politicians) to distract us. Both "wings" are bad, but they are not separate. Actually, and for the point of illustration and simplicity, I'm to use loose terms of communism and fascism to describe them both. They are both for total government control. I'm an old-fashioned Constitutionalist. Limited government is my preference.

IMO, non enforcement should be grounds for removal. The Swedish law of latter day rape is largely unenforced as well.

If the governments actually actively and aggressively enforced all the laws of the lands, laws like these would be much easier to overturn.

Unfortunately, law making branches are there to make new laws, they can't be bothered to audit the old ones -- If there are no lobbyists against the old laws, they stay on the books.

How to create a Police State:

1. Create laws that no one obeys.
2. Do not enforce said laws.
3. Wait for someone to do something you don't like.
4. Toss them in jail for breaking one of the laws you don't normally enforce.
5. Oppress!

That is certainly one way to do it.

When in Rome! You have to deal with the laws where you reside.

In short: Do not do anything in any country if you are not 100% sure that it is legal to do so.

Pffft. Don't believe this "when in rome" crap. Hey, fellow Texan, did you know it's illegal to masturbate, women can't own more than 6 sex toys (intent to distribute obscene devices), and dildos are outright banned in Texas?

Ridiculous laws are ridiculous. Face it: Law does not reflect the actual public opinion or values. Since its hard to remove old laws it's easy for the past to hold us prisoners. This is why we should only pass those laws that we really must have forever.

The problem with the Texas law is that it requires "the average person" to apply their own "standards" (read: right wing christians dictate what's decent; Clearly a loophole bypassing Church/State separation).

IMO, non enforcement should be grounds for removal. The Swedish law of latter day rape is largely unenforced as well.

If the governments actually actively and aggressively enforced all the laws of the lands, laws like these would be much easier to overturn.

Unfortunately, law making branches are there to make new laws, they can't be bothered to audit the old ones -- If there are no lobbyists against the old laws, they stay on the books.

How to create a Police State:

1. Create laws that no one obeys.
2. Do not enforce said laws.
3. Wait for someone to do something you don't like.
4. Toss them in jail for breaking one of the laws you don't normally enforce.
5. Oppress!

Many states have started to include cell phone use by the driver as one of the checkboxes on their accident report forms. (Google will find these pretty quickly). These are the forms for citizen reports. Police reports are changed more rapidly, and included this information long before there was any cell phone laws.

That cops routinely check the cell phone involvement box is not something that police or government will likely report on their own. However when requesting a police report of their own accident for insurance purposes many people are surprised to see this checked off even when (they claim) they were not on the phone.

So you don't know who to believe, the driver with a clear motive for non-disclosure, the cop who wasn't there at the time of the incident, or the other driver/pedestrian (if any).

Texas is the only state publishing stats for cell phone involvement that I could find. They only had complete year numbers for one year, 2001.

In that year there were 323,958 accidents. Cell phone involvement was recorded in 1032 of these for about 0.31%.
(3 tenths of one percent).

Of accidents with fatalities, it was 2 tenths of one percent), or 7 total accidents out of 3319.

NOW BEFORE YOU RUSH to post some condemnation, I'm all in favor of laws banning cell phoning or texting while driving.

But you have to wonder how many more of the 207,043 Injury accidents in Texas that year would have resulted in deaths if it was impossible to promptly report accidents due to cell phone jamming?

First, we recognize that police power draws from the credo that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Second, while this maxim rings utilitarian and Dickensian (not to mention Vulcan21), it is cabined by something contrarian and Texan: distrust of intrusive government and a belief that police power is justified only by urgency, not expediency. That is, there must exist a societal peril that makes collective action imperative: “The police power is founded in public necessity, and only public necessity can justify its exercise.”22 Third, whether the surrender of constitutional guarantees is necessary is a legislative call in terms of desirability but a judicial one in terms of constitutionality. The political branches decide if laws pass; courts decide if laws pass muster. The Capitol is the center of policymaking gravity, but the Constitution exerts the strongest pull, and police power must bow to constitutional commands: “as broad as [police power] may be, and as comprehensive as some legislation has sought to make it, still it is subsidiary and subordinate to the Constitution.”23 Fourth, because the Constitution claims our highest allegiance, a police-power action that burdens a guarantee like the Retroactivity Clause must make a convincing case.24 Finally, while police power naturally operates to abridge private rights, our Constitution, being inclined to freedom, requires that such encroachments be as slight as possible: “Private rights are never to be sacrificed to a greater extent than necessary.”25

http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2010/oct/060714c2.htm#_ftnref21

Note: "cabined" means limited, contained in a small place

TL;DR: The Vulcan quote was used as an example of evil to be contained, not as a guiding principle.

Refreshingly pompous: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2010/oct/060714c2.htm

This is actually a concurring opinion, and not the main opinion. As such, little can be gleaned from it regarding what the actual case is about. This is the main opinion. Quoting the summary:

The issue we address in this case is whether a statute that limits certain corporations’ successor liability for personal injury claims of asbestos exposure violates the prohibition against retroactive laws contained in article I, section 16 of the Texas Constitution1 as applied to a pending action. We hold that it does, and therefore reverse the judgment of the court of appeals2 and remand the case to the trial court.

So as we can see, it's a rather dull case concerning asbestos.

Refreshingly pompous: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2010/oct/060714c2.htm

This is actually a concurring opinion, and not the main opinion. As such, little can be gleaned from it regarding what the actual case is about. This is the main opinion. Quoting the summary:

The issue we address in this case is whether a statute that limits certain corporations’ successor liability for personal injury claims of asbestos exposure violates the prohibition against retroactive laws contained in article I, section 16 of the Texas Constitution1 as applied to a pending action. We hold that it does, and therefore reverse the judgment of the court of appeals2 and remand the case to the trial court.

So as we can see, it's a rather dull case concerning asbestos.

http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2010/oct/060714c2.htm

Refreshingly pompous: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2010/oct/060714c2.htm

It's unlikely that even if he tried, he could make a disease more lethal than what nature has produced before.

It's not the idea of someone trying to make a disease that worries me. What worries me is the idea of someone moroning it up and accidentally producing something dangerous because they don't know what they're doing. The well-meaning idiot scenario is almost certainly more likely than the evil genius scenario.

Do I hear a case of NIMBY for something other than chemistry or nuclear physics? This is the same sort of arguments that make Erlenmeyer flasks illegal in Texas (Texas Health and Safety Code, Section 481.0621 (b),). Usually in the case of NIMBY the morons are... Well - lets leave that argument alone for right now. The real reason we should object is that some private citizen may wind up with intellectual property rights without a corporation around to claim ownership and assure "ethical" treatment of the resulting patents.

If we want to talk about moronic, here's a list of controlled lab apparatuses in TX(pdf). Oh no! Someone might make drugs (or accidentally teach children about the universe we live in, get them interested in the sciences, which might help them think logically - we can not allow that in our emotion-based voter pool.

A. Condensers B. Distilling apparatus C. Vacuum dryers D. Three-necked flasks E. Distilling flasks F. Tableting machines G. Encapsulating machines H. Filter funnels, buchner funnels, and separatory funnels I. Erlenmyer flasks, two-necked flasks, single neck flasks, round-bottom flasks, Florence flasks, thermometer flasks, and filtering flasks J. Soxhlet extractors K. Transformers L. Flask heaters M. Heating mantles N. Adapter tubes

It greatly depends on what state you are in.

In Texas, for example, if you saw somebody tampering with your car at night you would be justified in using lethal force to stop them in many cases.

Well, I've lived lots of places where you show up at the Wal-Mart and pay your fee and you are then a licensed hunter, on the spot, with no wait, no safety training, no classes. You must have lived in "blue" states. I've only ever lived in "red" states, and they have no such restrictions on hunting.

Many licenses may be purchased for immediate use except where tagging is required, i.e., deer and turkey.

Ha... I don't *try* to avoid jury duty, but I've found that after it becomes apparent that you're not a clueless loser, whichever side is planning on trying to pull a fast one will try to get rid of you...

Last time I was called for jury duty, it was a Deceptive Trade Practices Act lawsuit against Ford for a supposedly defective truck. Several years prior, I was preparing Lemon Law and Deceptive Trade Practices Act action against a different company for an accessible van conversion that didn't work as advertised. Neither the plaintiff nor the defense saw any problem with that. After I disclosed it, the only question I got was "Was the matter resolved to your satisfaction?" to which I answered "yes" and was not asked to clarify (the other party, realizing I was about to sue them, paid me back all my costs, including expenses incurred trying to get it fixed and interest paid on the car loan, and took the vehicle back). I wound up being the odd juror out on a 5 to 1 decision (allowed here in Texas on civil matters) for the defendant. My fellow jurors bizarrely found the truck to not be defective, which let them avoid having to answer the other (5?) questions posed to us in the jury instructions. The only evidence offered about that question was the Texas Lemon Law Complaint which had found the truck to be defective and Ford was required to take it back. The decision came at 3:30 PM on Friday afternoon. The other jurors expressed a desire to get home without getting stuck in rush hour or having to come back on Monday. The other juror who was siding with me changed her vote because "they'll probably appeal it anyway."

I am currently exempt from Texas jury duty because I am the primary caregiver for a child under 10.

P.S. The judge was very clear we couldn't talk about deliberations during the trial, but were free to discuss afterwards. As far as I know, there was no appeal.

References:

Texas Jury Size and Use

Texas Exemptions from Jury Service

Ha... I don't *try* to avoid jury duty, but I've found that after it becomes apparent that you're not a clueless loser, whichever side is planning on trying to pull a fast one will try to get rid of you...

Last time I was called for jury duty, it was a Deceptive Trade Practices Act lawsuit against Ford for a supposedly defective truck. Several years prior, I was preparing Lemon Law and Deceptive Trade Practices Act action against a different company for an accessible van conversion that didn't work as advertised. Neither the plaintiff nor the defense saw any problem with that. After I disclosed it, the only question I got was "Was the matter resolved to your satisfaction?" to which I answered "yes" and was not asked to clarify (the other party, realizing I was about to sue them, paid me back all my costs, including expenses incurred trying to get it fixed and interest paid on the car loan, and took the vehicle back). I wound up being the odd juror out on a 5 to 1 decision (allowed here in Texas on civil matters) for the defendant. My fellow jurors bizarrely found the truck to not be defective, which let them avoid having to answer the other (5?) questions posed to us in the jury instructions. The only evidence offered about that question was the Texas Lemon Law Complaint which had found the truck to be defective and Ford was required to take it back. The decision came at 3:30 PM on Friday afternoon. The other jurors expressed a desire to get home without getting stuck in rush hour or having to come back on Monday. The other juror who was siding with me changed her vote because "they'll probably appeal it anyway."

I am currently exempt from Texas jury duty because I am the primary caregiver for a child under 10.

P.S. The judge was very clear we couldn't talk about deliberations during the trial, but were free to discuss afterwards. As far as I know, there was no appeal.

References:

Texas Jury Size and Use

Texas Exemptions from Jury Service

Yep

80R SB378 (Texas) The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor: (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used: (A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; (B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or (C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;

If the cop is doing something to your car or truck that is legal, then that's ok. You can't shoot them when they show up to execute a search warrant either.

What skill is acquired in an American History class. It's not a skill, it's knowledge.

There are knowledge-based objectives and skills-based objectives. When clearly outlined, they form the basis of a standard against which to measure. Here are the Texas social studies standards for high school: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter113/ch113c.html History, by its nature, has all knowledge-based objectives, but you'll notice that the Geography classes have some skill-based objectives. Many subjects have both.

Who defines the boundary of "has acquired" and "hasn't acquired".

Curriculum developers and standardized test developers.

Who writes the test?

People like me with MAEds in Curriculum.

If it's the state, why should the teacher do anything except teach what is on the test?

Good point. The whole point for a test is to measure if the objectives have been met. If you teach what's on the test, you are assured the objectives will be met. As a matter of fact, if a teacher DOESN'T teach the material that is on the test, then they aren't teaching the right stuff. It's not a bad thing--it's actually part of good curriculum design. Here in Texas, a standardized test is invalid if it has questions that aren't mapped to a specific objective in one of the standards. Teachers have to teach to the standards, and it logically follows that what they teach in class will be on the test.

In your Jefferson example, if a test question asked something like, "what color were Jefferson's eyes", that couldn't be mapped to a (legitimate) objective. But if the question was , "Describe the role Jefferson played in the Declaration of Independence", that would be an easy one to map -- 113.35 United States Government (c) Knowledge and Skills 2B - analyze the contributions of the political philosophies of the Founding Fathers, including John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, on the development of the U.S. government

If it's the teacher that defines the boundary of "has acquired" and "hasn't acquired" then why would we need defined score boundary?

Because the teacher doesn't define the boundaries. That's what the "standardized" part of standardized testing means.

I don't intend to sound mean, it's just public school curriculum and standardized testing isn't as free-range-chicken as most armchair educators think. People can poo-poo an MAEd all they want, but there's a science to education.

4) You waive your right to sue by taking the test

I will hold harmless the Company, its company physician, and any testing laboratory the Company might use, meaning that I will not sue or hold responsible such parties for any alleged harm to me that might result from such testing, including loss of employment or any other kind of adverse job action that might arise as a result of the drug or alcohol test, even if a Company or laboratory representative makes an error in the administration or analysis of the test or the reporting of the results. typical example

BTW, I thought that you might find the geothermal map and natural gas map interesting:
Gas Map and of course older heat map.
This would not benefit everywhere, HOWEVER, the geo-thermal map is an older one and we do not really know how good these things are. Basically, by pushing the approach that I suggest, we may actually find more heat pockets. At the very least, in parts of east texas, and then through the rocket mountain region and California, we will see loads of geo-thermal production.

Even if science isn't illegal by itself, good luck not getting arrested for buying lab glassware, which is illegal in TX

Not quite true...the state requires a permit to purchase certain chemicals and glassware that are commonly used for making certain drugs. The list is on the DPS site. Educate yourself.

Were it not for the risk of being struck repeatedly by Poe's law, a T-shirt with "Guns don't kill people, Science kills people" on the front, and Page 2 of the controlled glassware form on the back would be fairly entertaining...

Wow, it looks like you're right. In Texas it's easier to buy a handgun or rifle than a pyrex flask.

I guess as far as hobbies go, ranchers, factory workers, and the other "real Texans" enjoy shooting more than science. Big surprise there.

The Texas Department of Public Safety - Narcotics Service requires a form to be filled out before one starts a chemistry lab at home (or anywhere else).

ftp://ftp.txdps.state.tx.us/forms/nar-120a.pdf

Texas ranks #25

Those rankings you point to are not really about the quality of education. Look at what they're really ranking.

Texas' own website says the following:

"Texas is #49 in verbal SAT scores in the nation (493) and #46 in average math SAT scores (502)."

Oh, and if you read down a bit, you'll find that in 2005, Texas was the only state in the US to cut education funding.

I think they're bragging about it.

The student is expected to: (A) explain major political ideas in history, including the laws of nature and nature’s God, unalienable rights

What in the world is nature's God?

identify major intellectual, philosophical, political, and religious traditions that informed the American founding, including Judeo-Christian (especially biblical law),

Didn't know that our constitution took roots from the ten commandments

analyze the importance of the First Amendment rights of petition, assembly, speech, and press

I could have sworn there was an establishment clause in the First Amendment... but apparently, I have a misunderstanding of whats in the First Amendment.

The TEKS go out of their way to avoid the slavery issue, barely mentioning it as equal in importance to tariffs, which were largely irrelevant to secession. If you read the actual Texas secession statement, slavery is clearly the central issue. (See http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.html). Texas seceded because Northerners wouldn't let slaves in the territories, or planned to let the people of the territories themselves decide slavery through popular/"squatter" sovereignty. Texas seceded because northern STATES were nullifying the FEDERAL fugitive slave law. Texas seceded because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT wasn't doing enough for them to suppress what they called the "savages," meaning the Comanche, Apache, and others, whose land the Texans had occupied through force and fraud. The treatment in the standards of American economic development is equally irresponsible to the evidence. It completely leaves out any mention of the Whig Party, even though most of the key leaders in the nation's economic development were adherents to that party's program of tariffs, banking, and state-funded internal improvements. It uses the anacronistic term "free enterprise," an expression that didn't even become common in the language until 1840s, some 70 years into American history. Finally, it should tell you something about the politicization of the standards (and the conservative majority's authoritarian tendencies) that they have literally scratched out the word "democracy" everywhere in the document.

but I doubt that you have looked into the details of the matter

Actually, no. You're quite wrong. I've actually looked into the details of the debate. However, its clear from your response that you haven't looked into the details of what the changes are. So if you'd like to educate yourself a bit, you can see the details directly from the Texas State Board of Education's website