Good points. Juries can reach verdicts based on their definition of justice in the specific case and their general verdict has to be respected; but they should not just disregard the law because they don't like it. There can be a number of reasons juries return not-guilty verdicts despite what the facts appear to support; in one case where I was on a jury we could not figure out exactly what a person had to do to violate the law because the law was confusing and thus we could not determine if in fact the defendant violated it and thus returned a not guilty verdict on the charge.
The challenge is what powers do judges have to remove a juror who is determined to render a not guilty verdict simply because they want to ignore the law? It appears tehy can do that but have to be certain the reason is the juror wants to ignore the law.
Continued trials with the same equipment and circumstances aren't independent. The certainty from the Breathalyzer tests was not much over 75%.
Except,as I have pointed out, it was not using any equipment, but rather a series of roadside tests such as walk 17 steps in a straight line while counting them, then turn around and walk back... extend arms and touch nose with eyes closed... VGN and HGN, etc. The only thing in common was the condition of the driver and in some cases relating the same test after failing it previously. This wasn't a case where some piece of external equipment was not properly calibrated and failing in the same manner repeatedly; but failures of different tests. Had it been repeated breathalyzer tests then the argument may have been valid. Even if you take out the repeated tests that were failed (repeatedly) the probably of all being false positives and thus him being sober is.00098, small enough not to constitute reasonable doubt in our minds.
The real question, for me, was why would an attorney chose, as the one point they want jurors to focus on to acquit, is clearly mathematically invalid AND put people on the jury that understand the underlying math? If she was going to make that argument offer something besides math as a reason for a false positive, such as a health or physical condition that generated the results while sober enough to drive. That is especially true when you know the video is going to be played in court and your client seems to think 15 is the number after 12, forgets the directions halfway through the test, and pokes himself in the forehead trying to touch his nose, as some examples of what we saw. The failures weren't borderline.
No politician wants to risk being Willy Horton'd because of such a program
Mike Dukakis deserved to be Horton'd. Furloughs are a good idea to keep petty offenders socialized, and to help inmates nearing release to start reintegrating into society.
But giving furloughs to murderers serving life sentences, with a long history of violent offenses? Willie had robbed and murdered a man by stabbing him 19 times. Giving this guy a weekend pass was insane.
True, but that won’t stop someone from running ads about “DANGEROUS CRIMINALS” no matter what is the reality; and the other person is forced to defend themselves. As a result, reform is a bipartisan issue, both sides agree it won’t happen.
But if anyone who's likely to be called to jury duty on the case is reading this, some advice:
nullify.
Nullify.
NULLIFY.
Not that it's likely to get that far in a juvie case, but still... remember that it's always your right to judge the law as well as the case.
Yes, in the US SCOTUS affirmed that right; but most judges will not inform the jury of that high and instruct them their duty is to decide on the facts presented; and if a lawyer brought it up the judge would no doubt be upset. The beauty (and danger) of nullification is there is no remedy to change the outcome, whether it is a desirable one in terms of justice or one that results in a miscarriage of justice. In some states, the state constitution specifically gives juries the right to decide the law as well. A quick Google search revealed a case http://www.peachtreenorml.org/... of nullification and the state's constitution state's In criminal cases, the defendant shall have a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury; and the jury shall be the judges of the law and the facts.
Not really, the kid was smart enough to good grades and chose a life of crime instead. What is worse, ruining his life by proscecuting him or instead sweeping it under the rug and giving him detention (where you have to go to school Saturday school and Sunday school) instead of ruining his life. So once the collages see what he was doing, he will have brains and no way to use them except in crime.
Since when does phishing mean someone is some sort of smart hacker? He didn't exhibit any technical prowess beyond some minor social engineering; and teh proceeded to simply log on to the schools grading system. Per TFA, he also lowered some students grades, which, if you want to propose alternative punishment, would be a good case for some simple locker room justice. In addition, teachers there would have to recheck all the grades just to be sure tehy are correct. The only skill he demonstrated was that he could be a real PITA as well as being stupid.
Where there is not a public safety concern, inmates should be given the occasional day pass to visit friends and family outside the prison, and return afterward. Likewise, they should be allowed to hold jobs outside the prison. Whenever possible and with no requirements on time served, they should be transitioned to parole in so far as the public safety risk is assessed to allow such transition. Parole fees must be abolished.
It's a political problem. No politician wants to risk being Willy Horton'd because of such a program; no matter how much sense reforms such as those might make. Even if the program ran smoothly they'd still fear the "(Insert politicians name and bad B&W photo) released thousands of convicted criminals into your neighbor hoods." ads.
2016 and 2017 MacBook Pros have faulty and unreliable keyboards. It's about time for Apple to 1. Admit it, 2. Fix it. When it happened to me, the quite humorously took me through a reset procedure. It did not clear the dust jamming my B key in case you were wondering.
As long as he wasn't convicted on the basis of bad math, I'm only mildly unhappy about it. I still don't like bad math, being a bit of a math addict.
No. It wasn't bad math since each was an independent event, just a bad argument by the lawyer. I had no doubt he was guilty, based on all the facts brought up at trial. It almost seemed as if the cop was giving him a chance to prove he was sober by retesting him repeatedly but the guy kept failing them. I was amazed the lawyer made that argument when she let people on the jury who thought math was fun and would see the fallacy in her argument. Perhaps she hoped she could sway one jury member and get them to hold out; that didn't happen. The good news was it took us a long time to agree on a verdict, no one simply wanted to get it over with but took their responsibility seriously. I later found out from the prosecutor that this wasn't his first time found guilty of DUI either, they just can't bring that up in court.
Bad figuring. You're only talking about 0.25^8 if the trials are truly independent. If they were all on one breathalyzer, it's reasonably likely that the breathalyzer was bad.
Road side sobriety - the walk the line, close eyes touch nose, horizontal and vertical gazing nystagmus, etc. so they were independent tests.
Sigh, I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse or simply fail to understand simple economics and prefer to ignore facts that don't fit your narrative.
Let me state it again clearly: at $60000/year, a high school teacher makes an hourly salary of $40, while a regular industry worker makes an hourly salary of $32, for the simple reason that the high school teacher is contracted to work far fewer hours. On top of that are massive benefits that workers in private industry don't get.
Sigh. The average teacher working time in the US per year is 1900 hours per the OECD; which yields an hourly rate of $32. Facts are a pesky thing.
The Brookings study goes out of its way to push a political agenda, and it is a testament to lying with statistics. Their main argument is based on a comparison between teachers and "similarly educated workers". But if you have an education degree, you are not "similarly educated" to people with other degrees; an education degree is the bottom of the barrel degree that people with the lowest test scores and lowest IQs go into. And like you, we have to assume that Brookings erroneously uses annual salary data instead of hourly or monthly data in their comparisons and neglects benefits.
Fortunately, Americans are getting tired to pay for people like you and are starting to see you for what you are: underperforming, greedy, and mendacious. That is why we need to privatize large portions of our education system and move to vouchers and charter schools. And it is going to happen, whether you want to or not.
Oh, and that cushy retirement plan you think you have? Don't count on getting it.
If you bothered to read you'd realize I am not, nor have been, a teacher, but feel free to continue your ad-hominem attacks as I find them amusing. I think charter schools are a good idea, provided they must adhere to the same admission and educational requirements, such as providing access to all students on a non-preferential basis.
I'm sorry you feel your and your family's education degree is a "bottom of the barrel;" and must concur with your statement that you and your family have "the lowest test scores and lowest IQs." I can see why you are bitter.
You seem to be unable to understand the simple economic concept that teachers are only paid for the actual time worked (typically 10 months) and do not get paid summer vacations
Teachers also don't get unpaid summer vacations; what teachers get is several months where they can sell their labor to anybody who wants to hire them, often taking advantage of the status, security, and education that their government job confers upon them. That's a sweet deal that almost nobody else gets. At a minimum, you need to add another 25% of salary on top of the teacher's salary to make it comparable to other salaries just to account for the smaller amount of time they work (185 contracted work days vs about 230 for private sector employees). And that's not even taking into account benefits like health insurance and retirement, which keep accruing.
If you look at the OECD, US teachers are paid below the OECD average
That's simply not true even if you look at nominal salaries (the analysis in HuffPo is bogus, just look at their numbers). But HuffPo doesn't tell you the whole picture: you need to add another 25% because of the shorter work year, and then another 25% on top of that for the nice benefits teachers receive. And on top of that, taxes in the US are much lower than elsewhere, and teachers also receive benefits like 403(b) plans that are not available to teachers in other countries. Just the fact that teachers don't have to pay into social security is a huge benefit by itself.
Take it from someone who has known teachers in both the US and several other countries: US teacher are being rewarded lavishly.
Sigh, I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse or simply fail to understand simple economics and prefer to ignore facts that don't fit your narrative. At least you admit to being a former teacher and thus no longer miseducating anyone. HAND.
Having served on a jury for a drunk driving case, I would not convict on breathalyzer alone. In the case, the guy failed around 8-10 roadside sobriety tests in spectacular fashion and was obviously impaired by his speech. (We had a body cam video). The lawyer’s argument was the roadside tests have a 25% false positive rate so there was a 1 in 4 chance his tests were false positive. Unfortunately, she put an engineer and economist on the jury and we pointed out that.25 to the eight is infitessmally small and thus her arguement was bogus. Ultimately, the video did him in, along with his admission to having a few drinks. Moral of the story: Get a good lawyer, don’t argue bogus math if you let on the jury people who understand math and never admit anything during a stop.
You: Except teachers don't have an option of working summers
Me: Plenty of teachers take other jobs during the summer.
You: Which is irrelevant to how teachers are paid.
Do you even think before you post?
I'm sorry if you and your family are the underperforming and overpaid teachers you reference.
Heh, do you even understand what I said? You seem to be unable to understand the simple economic concept that teachers are only paid for the actual time worked (typically 10 months) and do not get paid summer vacations; and insist on bringing up irrelevant arguments to how teachers (or anyone, for that manner) are paid.
You misunderstood: I'm an immigrant. I'm comparing the high pay and poor performance of American public school teachers to the low pay and better performance of teachers abroad.
Interestingly enough, some countries with lower salaries than the US do worse, some do better. One challenge with the data is the sheer size of the US and variations in pay and test results by regions or states makes overall averages misleading, a better comparison would be by states or regions to other countries.
If you look at the OECD, US teachers are paid below the OECD average yet student scores are above the OECD average in science and reading, but below in math. Korea seems to get high results for high pay, poor Luxembourg pays well for poor results, and Slovakia gets poor results but pays poorly.
Good points. It's interesting to see how technological solutions prior to the development of computers and OS impact and influence decision made in the new technology, sometimes minor and other times having greater impact.
You want the carriage to return and the paper moved up by one line, not print over the last line (CR only) or continue at the current position one line down (LF only). Imagine that, Microsoft doing something correctly.
It's a holdover from the old mechanical printer / typewriter days. Since the LF and CR were handled by separate mechanisms separate commands allowed controlling them independently when needed.
While in general you wanted a CR and LF, they also had utility themselves. A LF allowed advancing paper without activating the CR mechanism if a CR was not needed, while a CR allows you to over print and blackout text, such as a password.
Basically to LEO's everyone is a potential suspect. They view due process, privacy rights, the 5th amendment etc as obstacles to doing their job; catching bad guys. But these obstacles are there specifically to keep police honest..
I've worked with a number of LEOs, including senior people, and their view of due process, search limits, etc, were positive. They want to arrest bad guys but as one put it "those same protections protect me as a private citizen a well and I don't want them to be trampled in the search for a bad guy."
Extra territorial enforcement of laws is perfectly okay, but the enforcement of those laws will be limited by the enforcement options available to each foreign government. Some enforcement options may be granted by treaty or other agreement. Some may be granted by control they have other the payment methods used by their citizens.
I am not a big fan of extra-territeriol enforcement, for a variety of reasons. It means companies can be forced to turn over data even if they tie to the country enforcing the laws is simply that the data is held by a company with major business in the country seeking to enforce the laws; businesses will decide what to do based on the economic clout of a country (See Taiwan vs. PRC); or being fined or sued because even if the complied with the laws for data in the enforcing country the may not be in compliance for data stored elsewhere or how their site operates. I doubt a small EU company would be happy to be dragged into a US court because of a technical violation of the ADA simply because their website is accessible to someone in the US.
I run a website with worldwide audience. I've also never been to Europe. Tell me why I should comply or face fines to a jurisdiction I've never been to?
You are servicing their citizens while they reside in their country, so you should follow their laws. Just because the Internet makes it so easy to reach those customers doesn't mean you should be able to ignore their laws.
fair enough. So the US Government should be given access to any data if it ever passed through a US server since they were serviced in the US and thus are subject to their laws. (Change US with any other country if you want) You are essentially saying extra territorial enforcement of laws is OK.
That canard again. IP address logging for the purposes of site operation has never fallen under EU privacy guidelines, unless that data is kept for longer than its intended purpose and used for data mining.
Which is exactly the point of the GDPR: it says 'Don't do that and you'll be fine'. If you look at the FAQ you see that the GDPR does not cover this use of data.
It comes down to the tradeoff of lost revenue vs. potential compliance costs and / or fines of unknown magnitude. It's simply easier to say "EU nationals not welcome here" if yo are located outside of the EU than comply if the revenue hit is small.
Of course, there is the whole extra territorial issue: if an EU national vests my non-EU located site I should not be expected to follow EU rules. If you think that I should then you have to allow the US government to tell companies to hand over data held anywhere in the world if there is even teh slightest nexus, as well or face fines.
gun purchase records are purged after a short period.
Citation needed. I didn't think gun purchases records were ever purged in the US.
You're right. Federal firearms licensed dealers are required to keep records indefinitely; state laws vary though the feds trump state laws. I mean to say background check records are deleted.
Slashdot Mirror
When everyone finally gets there, they're, and their; and it's and its, correct; then, and only then, will I agree with you.
Uh, those are grammar errors, not spelling.
i use Seamonkey suite, it is a browser & email client, and a basic bare bones WYSIWYG html editor and IRC client, (the emacs of the browser world)
Are you saying it's a crappy editor?
Good points. Juries can reach verdicts based on their definition of justice in the specific case and their general verdict has to be respected; but they should not just disregard the law because they don't like it. There can be a number of reasons juries return not-guilty verdicts despite what the facts appear to support; in one case where I was on a jury we could not figure out exactly what a person had to do to violate the law because the law was confusing and thus we could not determine if in fact the defendant violated it and thus returned a not guilty verdict on the charge.
The challenge is what powers do judges have to remove a juror who is determined to render a not guilty verdict simply because they want to ignore the law? It appears tehy can do that but have to be certain the reason is the juror wants to ignore the law.
Continued trials with the same equipment and circumstances aren't independent. The certainty from the Breathalyzer tests was not much over 75%.
Except,as I have pointed out, it was not using any equipment, but rather a series of roadside tests such as walk 17 steps in a straight line while counting them, then turn around and walk back... extend arms and touch nose with eyes closed... VGN and HGN, etc. The only thing in common was the condition of the driver and in some cases relating the same test after failing it previously. This wasn't a case where some piece of external equipment was not properly calibrated and failing in the same manner repeatedly; but failures of different tests. Had it been repeated breathalyzer tests then the argument may have been valid. Even if you take out the repeated tests that were failed (repeatedly) the probably of all being false positives and thus him being sober is .00098, small enough not to constitute reasonable doubt in our minds.
The real question, for me, was why would an attorney chose, as the one point they want jurors to focus on to acquit, is clearly mathematically invalid AND put people on the jury that understand the underlying math? If she was going to make that argument offer something besides math as a reason for a false positive, such as a health or physical condition that generated the results while sober enough to drive. That is especially true when you know the video is going to be played in court and your client seems to think 15 is the number after 12, forgets the directions halfway through the test, and pokes himself in the forehead trying to touch his nose, as some examples of what we saw. The failures weren't borderline.
No politician wants to risk being Willy Horton'd because of such a program
Mike Dukakis deserved to be Horton'd. Furloughs are a good idea to keep petty offenders socialized, and to help inmates nearing release to start reintegrating into society.
But giving furloughs to murderers serving life sentences, with a long history of violent offenses? Willie had robbed and murdered a man by stabbing him 19 times. Giving this guy a weekend pass was insane.
True, but that won’t stop someone from running ads about “DANGEROUS CRIMINALS” no matter what is the reality; and the other person is forced to defend themselves. As a result, reform is a bipartisan issue, both sides agree it won’t happen.
But if anyone who's likely to be called to jury duty on the case is reading this, some advice:
nullify. Nullify. NULLIFY.
Not that it's likely to get that far in a juvie case, but still ... remember that it's always your right to judge the law as well as the case.
Yes, in the US SCOTUS affirmed that right; but most judges will not inform the jury of that high and instruct them their duty is to decide on the facts presented; and if a lawyer brought it up the judge would no doubt be upset. The beauty (and danger) of nullification is there is no remedy to change the outcome, whether it is a desirable one in terms of justice or one that results in a miscarriage of justice. In some states, the state constitution specifically gives juries the right to decide the law as well. A quick Google search revealed a case http://www.peachtreenorml.org/... of nullification and the state's constitution state's In criminal cases, the defendant shall have a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury; and the jury shall be the judges of the law and the facts.
Not really, the kid was smart enough to good grades and chose a life of crime instead. What is worse, ruining his life by proscecuting him or instead sweeping it under the rug and giving him detention (where you have to go to school Saturday school and Sunday school) instead of ruining his life. So once the collages see what he was doing, he will have brains and no way to use them except in crime.
Since when does phishing mean someone is some sort of smart hacker? He didn't exhibit any technical prowess beyond some minor social engineering; and teh proceeded to simply log on to the schools grading system. Per TFA, he also lowered some students grades, which, if you want to propose alternative punishment, would be a good case for some simple locker room justice. In addition, teachers there would have to recheck all the grades just to be sure tehy are correct. The only skill he demonstrated was that he could be a real PITA as well as being stupid.
Where there is not a public safety concern, inmates should be given the occasional day pass to visit friends and family outside the prison, and return afterward. Likewise, they should be allowed to hold jobs outside the prison. Whenever possible and with no requirements on time served, they should be transitioned to parole in so far as the public safety risk is assessed to allow such transition. Parole fees must be abolished.
It's a political problem. No politician wants to risk being Willy Horton'd because of such a program; no matter how much sense reforms such as those might make. Even if the program ran smoothly they'd still fear the "(Insert politicians name and bad B&W photo) released thousands of convicted criminals into your neighbor hoods." ads.
2016 and 2017 MacBook Pros have faulty and unreliable keyboards. It's about time for Apple to 1. Admit it, 2. Fix it. When it happened to me, the quite humorously took me through a reset procedure. It did not clear the dust jamming my B key in case you were wondering.
You're pressing it wrong...
As long as he wasn't convicted on the basis of bad math, I'm only mildly unhappy about it. I still don't like bad math, being a bit of a math addict.
No. It wasn't bad math since each was an independent event, just a bad argument by the lawyer. I had no doubt he was guilty, based on all the facts brought up at trial. It almost seemed as if the cop was giving him a chance to prove he was sober by retesting him repeatedly but the guy kept failing them. I was amazed the lawyer made that argument when she let people on the jury who thought math was fun and would see the fallacy in her argument. Perhaps she hoped she could sway one jury member and get them to hold out; that didn't happen. The good news was it took us a long time to agree on a verdict, no one simply wanted to get it over with but took their responsibility seriously. I later found out from the prosecutor that this wasn't his first time found guilty of DUI either, they just can't bring that up in court.
Freedom comes with responsibility to not ruin freedom for others.
Freedom comes with responsibility to tolerate the sensibilities of others.
As well as not be overly sensitive and easily insulted...
Bad figuring. You're only talking about 0.25^8 if the trials are truly independent. If they were all on one breathalyzer, it's reasonably likely that the breathalyzer was bad.
Road side sobriety - the walk the line, close eyes touch nose, horizontal and vertical gazing nystagmus, etc. so they were independent tests.
Let me state it again clearly: at $60000/year, a high school teacher makes an hourly salary of $40, while a regular industry worker makes an hourly salary of $32, for the simple reason that the high school teacher is contracted to work far fewer hours. On top of that are massive benefits that workers in private industry don't get.
Sigh. The average teacher working time in the US per year is 1900 hours per the OECD; which yields an hourly rate of $32. Facts are a pesky thing.
Fortunately, Americans are getting tired to pay for people like you and are starting to see you for what you are: underperforming, greedy, and mendacious. That is why we need to privatize large portions of our education system and move to vouchers and charter schools. And it is going to happen, whether you want to or not.
Oh, and that cushy retirement plan you think you have? Don't count on getting it.
If you bothered to read you'd realize I am not, nor have been, a teacher, but feel free to continue your ad-hominem attacks as I find them amusing. I think charter schools are a good idea, provided they must adhere to the same admission and educational requirements, such as providing access to all students on a non-preferential basis.
I'm sorry you feel your and your family's education degree is a "bottom of the barrel;" and must concur with your statement that you and your family have "the lowest test scores and lowest IQs." I can see why you are bitter.
Teachers also don't get unpaid summer vacations; what teachers get is several months where they can sell their labor to anybody who wants to hire them, often taking advantage of the status, security, and education that their government job confers upon them. That's a sweet deal that almost nobody else gets. At a minimum, you need to add another 25% of salary on top of the teacher's salary to make it comparable to other salaries just to account for the smaller amount of time they work (185 contracted work days vs about 230 for private sector employees). And that's not even taking into account benefits like health insurance and retirement, which keep accruing.
That's simply not true even if you look at nominal salaries (the analysis in HuffPo is bogus, just look at their numbers). But HuffPo doesn't tell you the whole picture: you need to add another 25% because of the shorter work year, and then another 25% on top of that for the nice benefits teachers receive. And on top of that, taxes in the US are much lower than elsewhere, and teachers also receive benefits like 403(b) plans that are not available to teachers in other countries. Just the fact that teachers don't have to pay into social security is a huge benefit by itself.
Take it from someone who has known teachers in both the US and several other countries: US teacher are being rewarded lavishly.
Sigh, I don't know if you are deliberately being obtuse or simply fail to understand simple economics and prefer to ignore facts that don't fit your narrative. At least you admit to being a former teacher and thus no longer miseducating anyone. HAND.
FYI: Brookings Institute https://www.brookings.edu/blog...
Having served on a jury for a drunk driving case, I would not convict on breathalyzer alone. In the case, the guy failed around 8-10 roadside sobriety tests in spectacular fashion and was obviously impaired by his speech. (We had a body cam video). The lawyer’s argument was the roadside tests have a 25% false positive rate so there was a 1 in 4 chance his tests were false positive. Unfortunately, she put an engineer and economist on the jury and we pointed out that .25 to the eight is infitessmally small and thus her arguement was bogus. Ultimately, the video did him in, along with his admission to having a few drinks. Moral of the story: Get a good lawyer, don’t argue bogus math if you let on the jury people who understand math and never admit anything during a stop.
Do you even think before you post?
Heh, do you even understand what I said? You seem to be unable to understand the simple economic concept that teachers are only paid for the actual time worked (typically 10 months) and do not get paid summer vacations; and insist on bringing up irrelevant arguments to how teachers (or anyone, for that manner) are paid.
Interestingly enough, some countries with lower salaries than the US do worse, some do better. One challenge with the data is the sheer size of the US and variations in pay and test results by regions or states makes overall averages misleading, a better comparison would be by states or regions to other countries.
If you look at the OECD, US teachers are paid below the OECD average yet student scores are above the OECD average in science and reading, but below in math. Korea seems to get high results for high pay, poor Luxembourg pays well for poor results, and Slovakia gets poor results but pays poorly.
EA Still Believes in extracting as much cash from their customers as possible, Will 'Push Forward' With Their Plans
Good points. It's interesting to see how technological solutions prior to the development of computers and OS impact and influence decision made in the new technology, sometimes minor and other times having greater impact.
You want the carriage to return and the paper moved up by one line, not print over the last line (CR only) or continue at the current position one line down (LF only). Imagine that, Microsoft doing something correctly.
It's a holdover from the old mechanical printer / typewriter days. Since the LF and CR were handled by separate mechanisms separate commands allowed controlling them independently when needed.
While in general you wanted a CR and LF, they also had utility themselves. A LF allowed advancing paper without activating the CR mechanism if a CR was not needed, while a CR allows you to over print and blackout text, such as a password.
I'm just going to put this here because I know where this topics going go.
First words out of your mouth when talking to law enforcement are as follows, "I want my lawyer."
Then you shut the fuck up till he gets there.
Good advice. Every cop I know gives the same advice.
Basically to LEO's everyone is a potential suspect. They view due process, privacy rights, the 5th amendment etc as obstacles to doing their job; catching bad guys. But these obstacles are there specifically to keep police honest..
I've worked with a number of LEOs, including senior people, and their view of due process, search limits, etc, were positive. They want to arrest bad guys but as one put it "those same protections protect me as a private citizen a well and I don't want them to be trampled in the search for a bad guy."
Extra territorial enforcement of laws is perfectly okay, but the enforcement of those laws will be limited by the enforcement options available to each foreign government. Some enforcement options may be granted by treaty or other agreement. Some may be granted by control they have other the payment methods used by their citizens.
I am not a big fan of extra-territeriol enforcement, for a variety of reasons. It means companies can be forced to turn over data even if they tie to the country enforcing the laws is simply that the data is held by a company with major business in the country seeking to enforce the laws; businesses will decide what to do based on the economic clout of a country (See Taiwan vs. PRC); or being fined or sued because even if the complied with the laws for data in the enforcing country the may not be in compliance for data stored elsewhere or how their site operates. I doubt a small EU company would be happy to be dragged into a US court because of a technical violation of the ADA simply because their website is accessible to someone in the US.
I run a website with worldwide audience. I've also never been to Europe. Tell me why I should comply or face fines to a jurisdiction I've never been to?
You are servicing their citizens while they reside in their country, so you should follow their laws. Just because the Internet makes it so easy to reach those customers doesn't mean you should be able to ignore their laws.
fair enough. So the US Government should be given access to any data if it ever passed through a US server since they were serviced in the US and thus are subject to their laws. (Change US with any other country if you want) You are essentially saying extra territorial enforcement of laws is OK.
That canard again. IP address logging for the purposes of site operation has never fallen under EU privacy guidelines, unless that data is kept for longer than its intended purpose and used for data mining.
Which is exactly the point of the GDPR: it says 'Don't do that and you'll be fine'. If you look at the FAQ you see that the GDPR does not cover this use of data.
It comes down to the tradeoff of lost revenue vs. potential compliance costs and / or fines of unknown magnitude. It's simply easier to say "EU nationals not welcome here" if yo are located outside of the EU than comply if the revenue hit is small.
Of course, there is the whole extra territorial issue: if an EU national vests my non-EU located site I should not be expected to follow EU rules. If you think that I should then you have to allow the US government to tell companies to hand over data held anywhere in the world if there is even teh slightest nexus, as well or face fines.
You're right. Federal firearms licensed dealers are required to keep records indefinitely; state laws vary though the feds trump state laws. I mean to say background check records are deleted.