The UK banned Chris Brown for life because he pled guilty to a felony domestic battery, which shouldn't have been a felony (she wasn't really badly hurt - but if she goes to the hospital - it's a felony - serious bodily harm) and shouldn't have been a crime - he was defending himself - she was beating on him while he was driving because he allegedly cheated and he fought back. He should've fought the charges! Or so I've heard. He has enough money to have "purchased" an acquittal! Or gotten it down to a misdemeanor.
The UK considers him a serious danger to public safety (WTF?!) and has banned him. Like he was going to just beat on people over there or something. Treating him like he was Osama Bin Laden or something.
Hope Chris Brown don't mind never leaving the US ever again in his life. (well Mexico will probably not ban him, and there is little stopping him crossing in from San Diego)
It is easy to get banned from countries. Doesn't even need to be a felony either. If you are an American and get a DUI here in the US, Canada will ban you from even visiting! Canada will even ban people for offenses they committed while under 18 (and they say they are more progressive than the US... sounds like something we'd do).
How many innocent people will go to prison or even be executed because they aren't liked by the insiders you'd have running the jury system?
It's bad enough for those who oppose or anger the system, but this would make it far worse.
P.S.
What is wrong with this website today? 'It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment' - last time I checked 4 is more than 2 (neither post was anonymous). Is this the new math the credit card companies and banks use?
A driver's license only indicates 2 things: who you are, and that you are qualified to operate a motor vehicle. It does not indicate your citizenship or residency status.
In some places, it doesn't (actually) even indicate either of those facts either.
Nuclear meltdowns. Explosions at nuclear plants (like Chernobyl). Possible nuclear explosion (never been proven impossible). Radiation release due to malfuction or even normal operation (very low level) and exposures to the people and cancers. Nuclear waste transport. Nuclear waste transport accidents. Nuclear waste storage. Nuclear waste storage accidents. Terrorists getting a hold of nuclear fuel or nuclear waste to make a nuclear bomb or dirty bomb. Fusion uses more energy than it generates. Fusion won't work because the reactants escape the magnetic fields.
It's kinda hard to power things with helium, since it is non-reactive and non-combustable.
One could keep it under pressure and have the pressure itself be the energy storage, but regular air or nitrogen would be better for that (cheaper and not a finite supply).
The schools don't and can't educate people in common sense.
The kind of stupidity that makes a person go hiking in the desert with only a 16 oz water bottle is common through all of society, rich and poor, educated and uneducated. Often it is the most educated that have the least common sense.
That should be "...move _to_ a country..." of course. The original suggestion might be quite difficult (although if you could tow Great Britain a few hundred miles further south that would be much appreciated).
Some larger cities also have an income tax. In the case of Philadelphia, they have something called a "wage tax", which they say is not an "income tax" - not sure exactly what the difference is.
I've often wondered who will be able to run for political office in forty or fifty years. People, especially youg people, seem to be so naive about posting things online.
Do what Sharron Angle did, and even make the words that were ON YOUR OWN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE get erased from history!
2. Actually, a lot won't as much have to do with setting any threshold as with covert discrimination. It's nigh impossible to prove that they googled harder for dirt on, say, the black female applicant than for the white guy, and "but we found she got drunk at a party 20 years ago! we don't want that kind of people in our school!" already sounds like a justified reason instead of plain old discrimination.
Trying to do that is just asking for a "disparate impact" lawsuit.
I recognized that as the security clearance criteria.
That is a special case - national security is held to outweigh even fairness to the applicant - since any breach can cause griveous harm to the nation.
Read the mitigating factors under that heading and others in that document (it is all public).
It specifically mentions severity, time since any incidents, etc.
I.e. a minor violation 10 years ago isn't going to be likely to result in denial, whereas just having been convicted to your 8th DUI probably will.
This brings to mind the phrase "The best way to get a an unjust law repealed is its strict enforcement".
As it gets easier and easier to view the digital trails of people's lives, people will get less judgmental, because they'll be more victims of judgment, and also, being strict means you'll end up disqualifying 99 of 100 people for hiring right off that bat. (but if the economy doesn't improve, that might be almost sustainable - but we'll be done as a society then).
In some places you can even look up TRAFFIC court records on the web!
And if the defense attorney isn't paid in full ahead of time, you can bet that someone found guilty and sentenced to many years of prison or a sex offender registry or now a convicted felon isn't going to pay the rest.
Especially since the statute of limitations for debts is 7 years - if the attorney loses the case he or she loses any realistic chance of ever getting paid anything else.
Also, people don't usually like to use attorneys who have a reputation for LOSING. Imagine that!
Our "sex crime" category is much too broad, but that doesn't mean the ideas around it aren't valid in some cases.
In those cases, we (including children) could be more secure, and more free (and not have an infrastructure and laws that can be used to track and control people which can be extended to other groups (*)) by doing something really radical.
*** NOT LETTING THE REAL SICK PERVERTS OUT, EVER. ***
Why do we let child rapists out?
Some (especially tier 3 - a.k.a monsters) "people" should get LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.
Instead we hope they'll obey their restrictions, unlike how they failed to obey the laws they were convicted under and common decency.
Just like gun control supposes someone will obey a gun ownership restriction, even though they are going to MURDER someone ("I'll kill someone, but I won't violate the gun laws". Yeah right - and don't say they can't get guns illegally - you have to be naive beyond belief to think that).
(*) It isn't just sex offenders who can't go or live somewhere. There are parts of Las Vegas where some drug offenders are BANNED from living, or even entering. ("Order out corridor"). The precedent is set - where you live is a REVOKABLE PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT. As opposed to if you aren't in prison, you can live wherever - now we have a gray zone of not in prison - not free to live certain places - this can be expanded.
A monster can WALK or DRIVE from the allowed areas to the disallowed areas - they aren't going to obey that law if they're going to reoffend. And you can't catch a violation fast enough, unless you have GPS and you swoop in and arrest them immediately (within SECONDS, MINUTES AT MOST). And I don't like the idea of having to pay 85% of my income in taxes - which is what it would take to have the level of control.
If they are safe to be allowed free range (i.e. not the predators) - they shouldn't be restricted. If they aren't, then THEY AREN'T FIT TO BE RELEASED. We have a place to restrict people's movements, it is called PRISON (imagine that!) That is what the bars and fences are for - and they don't need voluntary cooperation in the part of the criminals to work!
I believe the people in power don't just lock the monsters away because the fear of the people, and the controlling infrastructures and precedents are more useful to them then the safety and freedom of the people are worth to them.
Another factor, and I hate to have to be so blunt, is that the previous generations are more judgmental, and that we will be more free from being judged too harshly when these people DIE.
In 20 years, society will be more accepting, because a dead bigot has no voice.
If you lawfully possess something, aka, if you were granted possession of it by the rightful owner, it is not illegal to refuse their request that you hand it back.
If a valet refuses to return my car, I'm calling the cops...
Serious people, have you never heard of car repossessers? Why the fuck would they even exist if the banks could just call the sheriff and have you arrested if you didn't hand your car back? They can't do that...they can either go through an amazing hassle of a lawsuit, or just take the car physically from you. (And this is why evictions are such a bitch, as banks essentially have to 'win a lawsuit', although it's a rather specific one made exactly for that purpose.)
In Arizona, refusing to return a car when you are told to because you are in default is a Class 6 felony - 6 to 18 months in prison. I'm surprised car repo companies don't lobby against that law - makes then kinda redundant.
He would've been much better going to a Federal Prison like most computer crime law violators go. He'd almost certainly have gone to a Federal Prison Camp (minimum security - low level criminals, non violent drug offenders, white collar criminals, and the like) given his (lack of a) record and his crime.
Federal Prisons already have a low incidence of rape (Federal PMITA prison jokes notwithstanding), and even a geek would have to really work at being victimized to stand a shot at it happening to them in an FPC.
But he went to state prison, and rape is rampant there.
Here in Las Vegas we had an FPC (now closed) at Nellis that was (in)famous for being a cushy place to go, by prison standards.
5.1 million people who are eligible to vote, but do not, could legally replace the great share of the national, state and local government if they'd only VOTE. It takes far less to swing an election that you'd think, most are not more than 60%-40%
Slashdot Mirror
One could say it is fair turnabout.
The UK banned Chris Brown for life because he pled guilty to a felony domestic battery, which shouldn't have been a felony (she wasn't really badly hurt - but if she goes to the hospital - it's a felony - serious bodily harm) and shouldn't have been a crime - he was defending himself - she was beating on him while he was driving because he allegedly cheated and he fought back. He should've fought the charges! Or so I've heard. He has enough money to have "purchased" an acquittal! Or gotten it down to a misdemeanor.
The UK considers him a serious danger to public safety (WTF?!) and has banned him. Like he was going to just beat on people over there or something. Treating him like he was Osama Bin Laden or something.
Hope Chris Brown don't mind never leaving the US ever again in his life. (well Mexico will probably not ban him, and there is little stopping him crossing in from San Diego)
It is easy to get banned from countries. Doesn't even need to be a felony either. If you are an American and get a DUI here in the US, Canada will ban you from even visiting! Canada will even ban people for offenses they committed while under 18 (and they say they are more progressive than the US... sounds like something we'd do).
Jury duty in my state pays $10 a day. I am self-employed and when billing, normally make that much in about 8 and a half minutes.
U make that legally?
Keep thinking you're safe. They know your IP address and where you live and who you are.
Your proposal is terrifying.
How many innocent people will go to prison or even be executed because they aren't liked by the insiders you'd have running the jury system?
It's bad enough for those who oppose or anger the system, but this would make it far worse.
P.S.
What is wrong with this website today? 'It's been 4 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment' - last time I checked 4 is more than 2 (neither post was anonymous). Is this the new math the credit card companies and banks use?
A driver's license only indicates 2 things: who you are, and that you are qualified to operate a motor vehicle. It does not indicate your citizenship or residency status.
In some places, it doesn't (actually) even indicate either of those facts either.
What's wrong with nuclear as an energy source?
Nuclear meltdowns.
Explosions at nuclear plants (like Chernobyl).
Possible nuclear explosion (never been proven impossible).
Radiation release due to malfuction or even normal operation (very low level) and exposures to the people and cancers.
Nuclear waste transport.
Nuclear waste transport accidents.
Nuclear waste storage.
Nuclear waste storage accidents.
Terrorists getting a hold of nuclear fuel or nuclear waste to make a nuclear bomb or dirty bomb.
Fusion uses more energy than it generates.
Fusion won't work because the reactants escape the magnetic fields.
It's kinda hard to power things with helium, since it is non-reactive and non-combustable.
One could keep it under pressure and have the pressure itself be the energy storage, but regular air or nitrogen would be better for that (cheaper and not a finite supply).
That works with hydrogen too. Xenon is far funnier though.
And funnier still when the anesthetic effects occur.
The schools don't and can't educate people in common sense.
The kind of stupidity that makes a person go hiking in the desert with only a 16 oz water bottle is common through all of society, rich and poor, educated and uneducated. Often it is the most educated that have the least common sense.
That should be "...move _to_ a country..." of course. The original suggestion might be quite difficult (although if you could tow Great Britain a few hundred miles further south that would be much appreciated).
Global warming will have almost the same effect.
Some larger cities also have an income tax. In the case of Philadelphia, they have something called a "wage tax", which they say is not an "income tax" - not sure exactly what the difference is.
The IRS says wages are income.
I've often wondered who will be able to run for political office in forty or fifty years. People, especially youg people, seem to be so naive about posting things online.
Do what Sharron Angle did, and even make the words that were ON YOUR OWN CAMPAIGN WEBSITE get erased from history!
2. Actually, a lot won't as much have to do with setting any threshold as with covert discrimination. It's nigh impossible to prove that they googled harder for dirt on, say, the black female applicant than for the white guy, and "but we found she got drunk at a party 20 years ago! we don't want that kind of people in our school!" already sounds like a justified reason instead of plain old discrimination.
Trying to do that is just asking for a "disparate impact" lawsuit.
I recognized that as the security clearance criteria.
That is a special case - national security is held to outweigh even fairness to the applicant - since any breach can cause griveous harm to the nation.
Read the mitigating factors under that heading and others in that document (it is all public).
It specifically mentions severity, time since any incidents, etc.
I.e. a minor violation 10 years ago isn't going to be likely to result in denial, whereas just having been convicted to your 8th DUI probably will.
This brings to mind the phrase "The best way to get a an unjust law repealed is its strict enforcement".
As it gets easier and easier to view the digital trails of people's lives, people will get less judgmental, because they'll be more victims of judgment, and also, being strict means you'll end up disqualifying 99 of 100 people for hiring right off that bat. (but if the economy doesn't improve, that might be almost sustainable - but we'll be done as a society then).
In some places you can even look up TRAFFIC court records on the web!
And if the defense attorney isn't paid in full ahead of time, you can bet that someone found guilty and sentenced to many years of prison or a sex offender registry or now a convicted felon isn't going to pay the rest.
Especially since the statute of limitations for debts is 7 years - if the attorney loses the case he or she loses any realistic chance of ever getting paid anything else.
Also, people don't usually like to use attorneys who have a reputation for LOSING. Imagine that!
Our "sex crime" category is much too broad, but that doesn't mean the ideas around it aren't valid in some cases.
In those cases, we (including children) could be more secure, and more free (and not have an infrastructure and laws that can be used to track and control people which can be extended to other groups (*)) by doing something really radical.
*** NOT LETTING THE REAL SICK PERVERTS OUT, EVER. ***
Why do we let child rapists out?
Some (especially tier 3 - a.k.a monsters) "people" should get LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.
Instead we hope they'll obey their restrictions, unlike how they failed to obey the laws they were convicted under and common decency.
Just like gun control supposes someone will obey a gun ownership restriction, even though they are going to MURDER someone ("I'll kill someone, but I won't violate the gun laws". Yeah right - and don't say they can't get guns illegally - you have to be naive beyond belief to think that).
(*) It isn't just sex offenders who can't go or live somewhere. There are parts of Las Vegas where some drug offenders are BANNED from living, or even entering. ("Order out corridor"). The precedent is set - where you live is a REVOKABLE PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT. As opposed to if you aren't in prison, you can live wherever - now we have a gray zone of not in prison - not free to live certain places - this can be expanded.
A monster can WALK or DRIVE from the allowed areas to the disallowed areas - they aren't going to obey that law if they're going to reoffend. And you can't catch a violation fast enough, unless you have GPS and you swoop in and arrest them immediately (within SECONDS, MINUTES AT MOST). And I don't like the idea of having to pay 85% of my income in taxes - which is what it would take to have the level of control.
If they are safe to be allowed free range (i.e. not the predators) - they shouldn't be restricted.
If they aren't, then THEY AREN'T FIT TO BE RELEASED. We have a place to restrict people's movements, it is called PRISON (imagine that!) That is what the bars and fences are for - and they don't need voluntary cooperation in the part of the criminals to work!
I believe the people in power don't just lock the monsters away because the fear of the people, and the controlling infrastructures and precedents are more useful to them then the safety and freedom of the people are worth to them.
Another factor, and I hate to have to be so blunt, is that the previous generations are more judgmental, and that we will be more free from being judged too harshly when these people DIE.
In 20 years, society will be more accepting, because a dead bigot has no voice.
Yea, moving from California to some place in Scandinavia, pretty much a lateral move, climate wise....
After global warming, it will be!
I haven't seen a system yet that can't be reset to factory defaults and access regained.
Laptop BIOS passwords.
Hard drive security passwords.
Cisco router main passwords.
If you lawfully possess something, aka, if you were granted possession of it by the rightful owner, it is not illegal to refuse their request that you hand it back.
If a valet refuses to return my car, I'm calling the cops...
Serious people, have you never heard of car repossessers? Why the fuck would they even exist if the banks could just call the sheriff and have you arrested if you didn't hand your car back? They can't do that...they can either go through an amazing hassle of a lawsuit, or just take the car physically from you. (And this is why evictions are such a bitch, as banks essentially have to 'win a lawsuit', although it's a rather specific one made exactly for that purpose.)
In Arizona, refusing to return a car when you are told to because you are in default is a Class 6 felony - 6 to 18 months in prison. I'm surprised car repo companies don't lobby against that law - makes then kinda redundant.
Miranda warnings are only needed for SELF INCRIMATING statementes, lying to officials can still be prosecuted without it.
He would've been much better going to a Federal Prison like most computer crime law violators go. He'd almost certainly have gone to a Federal Prison Camp (minimum security - low level criminals, non violent drug offenders, white collar criminals, and the like) given his (lack of a) record and his crime.
Federal Prisons already have a low incidence of rape (Federal PMITA prison jokes notwithstanding), and even a geek would have to really work at being victimized to stand a shot at it happening to them in an FPC.
But he went to state prison, and rape is rampant there.
Here in Las Vegas we had an FPC (now closed) at Nellis that was (in)famous for being a cushy place to go, by prison standards.
5.1 million people who are eligible to vote, but do not, could legally replace the great share of the national, state and local government if they'd only VOTE. It takes far less to swing an election that you'd think, most are not more than 60%-40%
No revolution, less people, and no violence.
Where the CCTV camera and satellites can see you.