Also, I believe that a judge is immune to prosecution for actions undertaken as a judge.
Not if they've abused their discretion, IIRC. That's very hard to establish, but certainly not impossible, and pretty clearly demonstrated in this case.
Also, these fuckwit judges are facing a couple Federal charges for their actions, tax evasion among them. That's how they got Al Capone, remember. They'll be very, very lucky to avoid time in Federal PMITA prison. Not because the justice system itself would demand it, but because the presiding judge in the case would be run out of office by the community if he let them go free.
It would be better for all of us if you were motivated to proactively protect the innocent.
Oh, don't you worry, I am. My goal is to have DAs (and judges with this type of attitude) shit themselves when they see my name listed as defense counsel.
However, when proactive protection of the innocent fails, crucifying judges like these is the next best thing.
(And yes, I do think they should be, literally, crucified. Saltire style. In front of Independence Hall. On national television.)
These two scumbags are in my state. And I'm in law school, so they also represent my profession. I've of course been following this story on the local media.
I am too. This, in a nutshell, is why people like you and me need to stick it out, pass the bar, and begin practicing; so worthless pricks like this get swiftly and brutally brought to justice.
Admittedly I didn't RTFA, but is this specific to just painful memories? I mean, I'd love to delete some memories I have, but I wouldn't want to run the risk of overwriting, say, my acceptance to law school, or memories of particularly good sex, for example. (Yes, strangely enough for a Slashdotter, I have had some.)
How can the drug possibly discriminate between good and bad memories, or for that matter, any memories at all?
Sure, they'll be charged criminally, but when Daddy shows up at the courthouse and explains to the DA who they are, the DA will quietly drop the charges, issue an official apology, and cut them a check so they don't sue for false imprisonment.
You can also smoke without getting to the point of being absolutely baked. There are varying degrees of marijuana intoxication, just like there are varying degrees of alcohol intoxication.
Example:
I burn one bowl. I am pleasantly buzzed. I have deep thoughts and giggle occasionally.
I burn a joint. I am stoned, but still able to function. I think things are funny that really are not. I get better at Quake.
I take bong hits. I am quite baked and probably unable to move. I get worse at Quake.
I eat space brownies. I pass out and have interesting dreams.
That's not actually that uncommon. New York (hardly a red state full of religious types) does something similiar. New York also prohibits grocery stores from selling wine/spirits (they can sell beer though) and liquor stores from selling beer (they sell wine/spirits).
I agree that that is stupid, but that's not what the GP was referring to. In Utah, the maximum alcohol content of beer, ANY beer, is capped at 3.2%, which New York (thank the Gods) does not do. For example, I was able to pick up a bottle of Le Terrible (10.5%) at Wegmans last night. I would not have been able to do that in Utah.
Hey, where's the roadside test for vicodin? Prescription codeine or morphine? Dextromethorphan? (emphasis mine)
Judging from my own experiences with DXM, I wouldn't have been able to drive, and I knew that. Nor would I have remotely wanted to. That stuff is fuckin' crazy.
Quoth RingDev: In any case, take it to the principal, if you make no head way there, the school board, and if you still get nothing, the local media.
As you've noted, the laws are really, really in favor of the school, and I'll bet the principal knows this. However, the court of public opinion may not be so forgiving.
Do you know that David Ogden personally supports the position of the RIAA or do you just presume that because you happen to know he worked for them?
I think that can be safely assumed. Nobody put a gun to his head and forced him to represent the RIAA. Lawyers are free to refuse cases if they can't reconcile the need for zealous representation with their own personal code of ethics. (Except public defenders, but that's a whole different ball game, and beside the point here.)
So yes, Mr. Ogden probably does support the position of the RIAA.
Ditch the cake-eaters at Semester at Sea. Then apply to the Sea Education Association's Woods Hole Sea Semester. The former program is aboard a modified cruise ship. The latter, a fraking brigantine. Sailing, science, and some sex to boot.
Also, SEA's not dumb enough to sail their ships in the Gulf of Alaska in February, a mistake SAS will fortunately never make again after their ship got bitch-slapped by a 50' rogue wave.
(Why yes, I am an SEA alumnus, how did you guess?)
Quoth the AC: "But no, the defense here was to say "words matter" and to try to silence the people making the claims."
You mean "try to illegally silence the people making the claims."
Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution reads, in relevant part:
"[Representatives and Senators] shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place."
Not that the Constitution really matters to the Gestapo, but I just thought I'd point that out... and probably make myself a criminal in the process. Who do you think you are, sexybomber, going and pointing out the unconstitutionality of governmental actions? You must be a TERRORIST!
I believe most critics of the RIAA would be a little more sympathetic to their position if they were pursuing misdemeanor charges for stealing $0.99 songs.
I wouldn't be, for reasons I'll explain below.
You seem to have fallen for the RIAA line that "ZOMG PIRACY IS THEFT". It isn't. In order for something to constitute theft, somebody has to be permanently deprived of property. Not profits, not the possibility of profits. When somebody's deprived of profits, that's not theft, that's copyright infringement.
Theft is a criminal matter, punishable by possible jail time. Copyright infringement is a civil matter, punishable only by monetary damages. If you steal something, then yeah, I'm all for misdemeanor charges. Felony charges, even, if the value of the stolen goods is high enough. But I'm very, very wary of pursuing criminal charges for civil infractions, and you should be too. Would you have Tracy Thomas thrown in jail for a couple years, or perhaps longer, if the RIAA got their way? That's what could happen if you make a criminal case out of a civil dispute. Down that road lies fascism, my friend, and none of us want to go there.
Usually you're right, the Eighth Circuit doesn't have to follow the Ninth Circuit's decisions (for example) and vice versa, but in this case, The Honorable Judge Davis does have to abide by that decision, since Minnesota's in the Eighth Circuit.
What "actual dissemination" actually is, though... that's an open question, and I think that's what they're trying to figure out.
I have no idea if I got that right, it's late and I'm on break. (And hence trying not to think about all things legal:-D )
Yeah, but China's natural environment is, to quote Zero Wing, "on the way to destruction." If a country takes absolutely zero environmental precautions (like China is doing currently,) then that country is going to get fucked six ways from Sunday eventually.
Nature has a way of squaring any debt you might have with her.
I'm pretty sure the police wouldn't stop the President even if they could.
That whole "enforce the laws" part of the separation of powers could theoretically be extended to make the nation's police forces directly answerable to the President.
Of course, then the President would have, essentially, a standing army stationed in the United States... which violates several more laws.
Is BitTorrent an appropriate protocol for file distribution in the business sector?
Sure! BitTorrent, remember, is only a protocol, it's just become demonized due to the types of files being shared using it. But if you're sharing perfectly legitimate data, then what's wrong with using a protocol that's already been extensively tested and developed?
Just because it's been used to pirate everything under the sun doesn't make it inappropriate in other arenas.
Slashdot Mirror
Two OSes, One Phone.
I'd be lying if I said that wasn't the first thing I thought of when I read the headline.
Not if they've abused their discretion, IIRC. That's very hard to establish, but certainly not impossible, and pretty clearly demonstrated in this case.
Also, these fuckwit judges are facing a couple Federal charges for their actions, tax evasion among them. That's how they got Al Capone, remember. They'll be very, very lucky to avoid time in Federal PMITA prison. Not because the justice system itself would demand it, but because the presiding judge in the case would be run out of office by the community if he let them go free.
Oh, don't you worry, I am. My goal is to have DAs (and judges with this type of attitude) shit themselves when they see my name listed as defense counsel.
However, when proactive protection of the innocent fails, crucifying judges like these is the next best thing.
(And yes, I do think they should be, literally, crucified. Saltire style. In front of Independence Hall. On national television.)
I am too. This, in a nutshell, is why people like you and me need to stick it out, pass the bar, and begin practicing; so worthless pricks like this get swiftly and brutally brought to justice.
Ahhhh, of course, of course, I should have realized that, considering it's white powder, contained in a white pill, packaged in white packaging.
Admittedly I didn't RTFA, but is this specific to just painful memories? I mean, I'd love to delete some memories I have, but I wouldn't want to run the risk of overwriting, say, my acceptance to law school, or memories of particularly good sex, for example. (Yes, strangely enough for a Slashdotter, I have had some.)
How can the drug possibly discriminate between good and bad memories, or for that matter, any memories at all?
And the Sixteenth Amendment.
It's "take effect", not "take affect" as the summary puts it. Sorry, pet peeve.
MORTAL KOMBAT!
15cm of snow? That's just shy of six inches. Here in Buffalo we call that "Tuesday morning".
Sure, they'll be charged criminally, but when Daddy shows up at the courthouse and explains to the DA who they are, the DA will quietly drop the charges, issue an official apology, and cut them a check so they don't sue for false imprisonment.
Same end result.
You can also smoke without getting to the point of being absolutely baked. There are varying degrees of marijuana intoxication, just like there are varying degrees of alcohol intoxication.
Example:
I agree that that is stupid, but that's not what the GP was referring to. In Utah, the maximum alcohol content of beer, ANY beer, is capped at 3.2%, which New York (thank the Gods) does not do. For example, I was able to pick up a bottle of Le Terrible (10.5%) at Wegmans last night. I would not have been able to do that in Utah.
Hey, where's the roadside test for vicodin? Prescription codeine or morphine? Dextromethorphan? (emphasis mine)
Judging from my own experiences with DXM, I wouldn't have been able to drive, and I knew that. Nor would I have remotely wanted to. That stuff is fuckin' crazy.
Quoth RingDev:
In any case, take it to the principal, if you make no head way there, the school board, and if you still get nothing, the local media.
As you've noted, the laws are really, really in favor of the school, and I'll bet the principal knows this. However, the court of public opinion may not be so forgiving.
Go to the media first. They'll get crucified.
I think that can be safely assumed. Nobody put a gun to his head and forced him to represent the RIAA. Lawyers are free to refuse cases if they can't reconcile the need for zealous representation with their own personal code of ethics. (Except public defenders, but that's a whole different ball game, and beside the point here.)
So yes, Mr. Ogden probably does support the position of the RIAA.
Ditch the cake-eaters at Semester at Sea. Then apply to the Sea Education Association's Woods Hole Sea Semester. The former program is aboard a modified cruise ship. The latter, a fraking brigantine. Sailing, science, and some sex to boot.
Also, SEA's not dumb enough to sail their ships in the Gulf of Alaska in February, a mistake SAS will fortunately never make again after their ship got bitch-slapped by a 50' rogue wave.
(Why yes, I am an SEA alumnus, how did you guess?)
Quoth the AC: "But no, the defense here was to say "words matter" and to try to silence the people making the claims."
You mean "try to illegally silence the people making the claims."
Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution reads, in relevant part:
"[Representatives and Senators] shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place."
Not that the Constitution really matters to the Gestapo, but I just thought I'd point that out... and probably make myself a criminal in the process. Who do you think you are, sexybomber, going and pointing out the unconstitutionality of governmental actions? You must be a TERRORIST!
The sound of ZDNet's Hardware 2.0 writers blowing their loads over this is deafening.
I believe most critics of the RIAA would be a little more sympathetic to their position if they were pursuing misdemeanor charges for stealing $0.99 songs.
I wouldn't be, for reasons I'll explain below.
You seem to have fallen for the RIAA line that "ZOMG PIRACY IS THEFT". It isn't. In order for something to constitute theft, somebody has to be permanently deprived of property. Not profits, not the possibility of profits. When somebody's deprived of profits, that's not theft, that's copyright infringement.
Theft is a criminal matter, punishable by possible jail time. Copyright infringement is a civil matter, punishable only by monetary damages. If you steal something, then yeah, I'm all for misdemeanor charges. Felony charges, even, if the value of the stolen goods is high enough. But I'm very, very wary of pursuing criminal charges for civil infractions, and you should be too. Would you have Tracy Thomas thrown in jail for a couple years, or perhaps longer, if the RIAA got their way? That's what could happen if you make a criminal case out of a civil dispute. Down that road lies fascism, my friend, and none of us want to go there.
Disclaimer: IANYetAL, but I'm a law student.
Usually you're right, the Eighth Circuit doesn't have to follow the Ninth Circuit's decisions (for example) and vice versa, but in this case, The Honorable Judge Davis does have to abide by that decision, since Minnesota's in the Eighth Circuit.
What "actual dissemination" actually is, though... that's an open question, and I think that's what they're trying to figure out.
I have no idea if I got that right, it's late and I'm on break. (And hence trying not to think about all things legal :-D )
Yeah, but China's natural environment is, to quote Zero Wing, "on the way to destruction." If a country takes absolutely zero environmental precautions (like China is doing currently,) then that country is going to get fucked six ways from Sunday eventually.
Nature has a way of squaring any debt you might have with her.
I'm pretty sure the police wouldn't stop the President even if they could.
That whole "enforce the laws" part of the separation of powers could theoretically be extended to make the nation's police forces directly answerable to the President.
Of course, then the President would have, essentially, a standing army stationed in the United States... which violates several more laws.
Sure! BitTorrent, remember, is only a protocol, it's just become demonized due to the types of files being shared using it. But if you're sharing perfectly legitimate data, then what's wrong with using a protocol that's already been extensively tested and developed?
Just because it's been used to pirate everything under the sun doesn't make it inappropriate in other arenas.
In other words, the Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol?