Did you look at the link I provided? They have an integrated Eclipse RAD tool for those so inclined. As far as my research into web frameworks Echo2 is the most comprehensive both in supporting architecture and development tools.
While I agree that JavaScript is not the ideal candidate for developing any system, much less a web app it is what we are limited to. Java Applets et. al. are DOA, unsupported or don't fit within the model of web application development. For better or worse those are the breaks.
I differ with you on the presumption that AJAX is irrelevant, as recently as a few months ago I would have concurred with this notion and would have agreed that it was a new spin on some simple technologies. That was until I found the Echo2 framework, it is an Open Source Java framework built on top of the servlet API it is the first comprehensive Ajax framework that I have found and the component model is both flexible and intuitive. It is the first framework where I have not felt the restrictions of the web metaphor creeping into design decisions. It has changed my idea of what Ajax web apps are capable of in terms of usability, speed, code reuse and overall system design.
Wow they cover their ass faster than the new guy on D-Block.
frameworks not language are the key
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
I think it is less about the language and more about the framework. JSP / JSF et. al., are just too bloated with configuration and XML files that leave the new developers scratching their head. If you look at other frameworks such as Echo2 , you can have a developer developing in no time given a familiarity with Java. Frameworks such as Echo have very little configuration to get up and running and provide a very code centric way to deploy web applications they allow a programmer to stay in their domain of expertise and allow for faster production. Lighter frameworks are the key not new languages.
I was 30 minutes south of the cape on the treasure coast. I was standing pretty much as close to under the location as possible as it was due east of my location over the ocean when it exploded. I saw it unfold right above me. Watching the planes hit the towers is the only thing that has ever reproduced the feeling I felt that day.
Some countries have adopted laws prohibiting software that enables users
to escape from Digital Restrictions Management. DRM is fundamentally
incompatible with the purpose of the GPL, which is to protect users'
freedom; therefore, the GPL ensures that the software it covers will
neither be subject to, nor subject other works to, digital restrictions
from which escape is forbidden.
Right there hidden in plain sight. I never said Linux is being re-licensed to GPL3, I said it is my estimation that Stallman has hopes of this happening.
I am not saying I support the decision I was just giving my interpretation of what I read in the article and the license. With Stallman, we are talking about a man grounded in ideology here not a person that looks at the practicality of a decision. You analogy about using a DVD player is flawed though it does not state that consumers of DRM technology will be affected it is specifically focused at producers of DRM software. I would agree that the studios will most likely drop GPL 3 software but I imagine the intent is to make DRM a costly mistake for the studios.
From my understanding it is a simple as if you produce or support DRM in a product that your company or a subsidiary produces said company loose their license to any GPL 3 software. Linux included if it moves to GPL 3.
Actually the way it is written is that if a company produces DRM software they instantly violate all GPL 3 licenses. They are doing this because many of the movie studios that product the movies that are DRM'ed rely heavily on GPL software for production of the movies. Many of the rendering farms now run on Linux clusters. If Linux is upgraded to 3.0 then they pretty much have the studios by the balls well at least legally. It was a pretty good play on the FSF part.
No the provision boiled down is that if you build DRM software open or closed you loose you right to all GPL 3 software you use. So even an unrelated Linux box used in the movies production becomes a violation. It is not just the software that contains the DRM its all GPL 3 code inside your organization that becomes a violation. Being that many production studios now use Linux I would imagine that they are banking on Linux moving to 3 and therefore violating all movie studios if they upgrade.
After Hurricane Katrina, Saudi Arabia admitted that it simply could not increase production to make up for the loss of Gulf of Mexico oil rigs. It was widely speculated that a final oil crisis has or had begun, in which the amount of oil available world-wide will enter a gradual yet terminal decline.
Most people take Saudi Arabia's response to the request of increased production after Katrina to be indicative of this fact. They flat out said they could not make up for the offset created by the damage to the gulf rigs. That pretty much was an admission of full capacity.
We're finding that MOST of what geophysicists warned us about 10 years ago isn't true -- we keep finding more to consumer, not less.
I don't remember them saying that we would run out, I remember Hubbert saying that the demand would outweigh the rate of new discovery and that it would create a scenario where we have not run out, but that we cannot get it out of the ground and refine it as fast as it is being used. We are seeing this happen now with slight occurrences disrupting the supply chain. He forecasted the peak of American capacity in the 70's and it looks as his forecast for global supply is following the model he outlined. He formulations never said that the actually resource would run out. People just use that slippery sloop argument from either side to support their claims. For further reading look here .
That is the folly of man not the technology. It does not take huge mental leaps to comprehend that if the only weapon on the world was toilet paper the incidents of toilet paper related deaths would skyrocket. Man will always find something to kill man with; he just prefers the most efficient means. That does not negate a technologies positive factors it merely means we are closer to monkeys than we believe.
Agreed but that does not highlight the benefits of a corporation rather it highlights a problem with our legal system. If CEO's where held personally responsible for their actions you can bet allot of the crap we deal with by corporations would be negated. Granted it protects the small business owner from abuse but it also enables the large business owner to abuse. This is not a win, win situation. A loser pays legal system would address this shortfall of our system better than the corporation. If you loose the lawsuit for your company's actions then you need to be personally responsible, you wronged someone and folding up shop while keeping your 2 million dollar home and boat is not fair. If it is a frivolous law suit then it should be exposed in court, I know some slip through but again a fault of the legal system and not a reason to justify corporations with no responsibility. Put simply if you wronged someone you should be held personally accountable. That is pretty cut and dry.
Your government puts the needs of the people behind the needs of corporations. That is not how I would like to see the internet run.
Absolutely agreed Hamilton should be dug up and shot again for conceiving of the corporation and limited liability for a fictitious entity. Most of the other founding fathers saw this as a sure fire way to create an empire building government. Further Lincoln helped this along by further limiting the liability of corporations and changing laws to please his financial backers in his pursuit of the war against the south. In saying all that though, Americans designed and built the Internet with American tax payers' money as a defense network. The core layers of the internet where bought with our dollars and therefore I do not want my government wholesale giving away my money to the discression's of the likes of China and Brazil. No matter your gripe or how valid it is, with America we built it and we should be allowed, not even allowed, we maintain the right to control our DNS system. If other countries want control, the technology is there. Talk to Microsoft, talk to Linus and have them point the DNS systems to international servers. Developers have a right to make choices for their systems and I would imagine that you would get an open ear from the free software community, but to say that we need to give up something that we built and paid for is ludicrous at best.
No, the stupidity is in not thinking through your purchasing decision and entering a mega-corporation that has systematically destroyed wages, values and law to meet there ends, hiding behind the veil of corporate liability. Hamilton, the idiot, created a monster when he championed the corporation as an entity with no personal liability. Intelligence would be thinking beyond the one dimension of impulsive and primitive nature of greed to reason that your support for these companies in the end devalues you. Seeing the chain of events and patterns of actions is more of an indicator of intelligence then saving a buck to satisfy the primitive instinct of greed that even a dog possesses.
And those who support "real painkillers" have obviously never been addicted to them or seen the horror of a loved one who has been addicted to them and had to go through withdrawal.
Many people withdraw everyday from substances other than pain killers that the medical community prescribes as if they are the safest things on earth. Take a look on the message boards for SSRI withdraws and more specifically Paxil withdraws and you will see that the cure is far more damaging that the cause. This is the drug that was to reduce addiction and provide relief to those chronically depressed. If you want to see true horror, watch someone withdraw from this stuff. It makes pain killer addiction look like a 24 hour flu. I have been addicted to this very substance and would much rather go through the withdraws of demoral that I did when I was a teenager and had to have extensive bone surgery over several months. Let me tell you that was a walk in the park compared to Paxil. I contemplated suicide almost daily after the first month and I have never been a suicidal person. So yes I have been addicted to both and I would have to say that opiates where far more effective in warding off the depression of being immobile to bone surgery than the Paxil ever was for low level generalized depression.
Not to mention the wastoids that go out and score prescriptions for minor pain so they can sit on a couch stoned all day.
Those waistoids are going to get it whether it is legal or not and if they cannot get it they are more than happy to snort or shoot heroin which is easier than booze to acquire. Hell people will bring it to you. Cant you see that the only people you are hurting by you flippant logic are the people who truly need it but do not fit the rigid requirements to get it as defined by some non-medical governmental agency that scares any doctor away from prescribing anything that is not cut and dry on label use. You are no longer getting a doctors educated opinion on a subject but rather a doctor's educated opinion that has been dictated by a governmental agency under threat of revoking the doctor's license. Criminalization does not work plain and simple the partiers get what they want and everyone else suffers. No matter how you slice it those are the facts. You may live in a middle-class shell where you do not see it but trust me stuff far stronger than the pharmacy carries is but a phone call away.By supporting criminalization you are not keeping out of the peoples hands you intend to deny access.
While others are simply using narcotics to treat their psychological pain
And how is using narcotics to ease ones psychological pain any different than using highly addictive products like Paxil. It seems to me that people hate the though of people using something that actually brings them pleasure. They want to provide a drug that eliminates the problem, without the pleasurable side effects that the greater medical community accepts as being the root cause of addiction. Before the advent of these so called psychological wonder drugs, there was a single tool in a psychiatrist belt to combat depression and that tool was opium, the clinical diagnosis was called melancholy. The self appointed guardian of our morals aka the medical community saw it fit to replace these treatments with less effective and far more dangerous substances like tricyclic, SSRI's and god forbid MAOI's all to reduce what is deemed as addiction but what is addiction, I spent 2 months of living hell withdrawing from Paxil, is that addiction or is it the pleasure derived from these drugs. I classify addiction as physical withdraws from a drug in which case Paxil ranks highest in additive properties. The medical community likes to call people that use these off label products to ease their psychological pain self medicators, which I agree is an accurate term due to the fact that the licensed medicators have utterly failed them in pushing products that actually increase the chance of suicide on to them.
I don't think drug legalization is the answer
No you don't because you work in the medical community and have bought into the problem. You along with every other medical staff personnel look at and treat anyone who looks for an alternative solution as rubbish and cannot hurry enough to get them out the door or in a rehab. I have heard all the arguments time and time again, that opiates will kill you, but yet I see old Afghan, Indian, and Chinese men living well past the octogenarian years and in good health and yet they smoke opium daily. This all without the help of you're so called modern western medicine. I am not saying that western medicine has no merit, it clearly does, but western medicine has let religion and false morals cloud its judgment when it comes to psychiatric medicine. Further, it has been shown that most self medicators plateau at a certain dose and rarely die from overdose. I also love the argument that you are just masking the psychological pain, yes the argument is absolutely correct but also applies to all other psychological drugs like Paxil, opiates change the chemicals in your brain, they all mask the symptoms.
Unfortunately because the medical community has mastered the human body people naturally assume that they have master the human mind which they have not. A medical doctor in my opinion has not place dispensing mental health advice unless they are trained in mental health unfortunately medical doctors and personnel will tell you that they are a doctor and they know but the sad truth is that they don't. They have no clue of the effects of drugs on the opioid, serotonin and GABA systems of the brain. That is why the hand out Paxil like candy and lock up the opiates. While I was withdrawing from Paxil my friend was getting off heroin he was sick for 12 days. I was deathly ill for 2 months and the effects lingered for 4 months. So you can stand on your pillar and say that you do not believe that legalization works and I will stand down here, along with the other voices of experience and laugh at your pontification about you medical knowledge with no clue of the human mind or the havoc your reek on peoples life's for being morally better then them and allowing them to deal with there psychological pain in its full rage and unbridled horror. There truly are some fates worse than death. Think about that next time someone comes into your moral temple of medicine withdrawing and screaming about events that transpired 10 years ago that caused that poor soul mind to shatter. Expl
That is why juries should decide punishment as well. So we don't get little demi-god complex judges. When I was in high school I had a buddy get rail-roaded by a judge just to set an example. The basics of the case where another buddy of mine was watching my buddy's apartment and threw a party. Which included bongs, beer and paraphernalia but even the pot had already been smoked. Anyway my friend came home and the cops showed up almost instantly arrested him and no one else and he went to court. Before I complete the story let me give you some background on my high school click, we where not the most regarded group in high school we where the skateboarders and punk rockers and this was right when Nirvana broke onto the scene so all thing alternative suddenly where the coolest thing ever. All of the sudden we had become the center of society and attracted the attention of the high school cheerleaders which the administration did not like so well. Anyway, the cops upon entering the premises started asking my friend where all of the drugs where and that they know he was dealing drugs, specifically acid. In my po-dunk town you where lucky if you could get pot much less acid. Anyway, he went to court and they presented two pieces of evidence an empty 12-pack container and a bong that was all they had. My other buddy took the stand and said both where his and that he and not my other friend had threw the party without his permission. Anyway, the judge found him guilty and sentenced him to 1 year in jail. Yeah, read that again 1 year. All because the judge decided that this drug dealer needed to be made an example of. Those where his exact words. He had neither been charged with nor convicted of any form of drug dealing just possession of paraphernalia. After his lawyer reviewed the existing laws he found that the maximum sentence for possession of paraphernalia was 6-months and the ACLU was almost called in to get the judge to reduce the sentence to 6-months. God complex.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you look at the link I provided? They have an integrated Eclipse RAD tool for those so inclined. As far as my research into web frameworks Echo2 is the most comprehensive both in supporting architecture and development tools.
Well, the AJAX wars have started, and M$ maybe just got off the first shot.
Microsoft did not fire the first shot Next App has had a mature Open Source Java Servlet / AJAX framework called echo2 and eclipse plugin for quite some time now.
While I agree that JavaScript is not the ideal candidate for developing any system, much less a web app it is what we are limited to. Java Applets et. al. are DOA, unsupported or don't fit within the model of web application development. For better or worse those are the breaks.
I differ with you on the presumption that AJAX is irrelevant, as recently as a few months ago I would have concurred with this notion and would have agreed that it was a new spin on some simple technologies. That was until I found the Echo2 framework, it is an Open Source Java framework built on top of the servlet API it is the first comprehensive Ajax framework that I have found and the component model is both flexible and intuitive. It is the first framework where I have not felt the restrictions of the web metaphor creeping into design decisions. It has changed my idea of what Ajax web apps are capable of in terms of usability, speed, code reuse and overall system design.
Wow they cover their ass faster than the new guy on D-Block.
I think it is less about the language and more about the framework. JSP / JSF et. al., are just too bloated with configuration and XML files that leave the new developers scratching their head. If you look at other frameworks such as Echo2 , you can have a developer developing in no time given a familiarity with Java. Frameworks such as Echo have very little configuration to get up and running and provide a very code centric way to deploy web applications they allow a programmer to stay in their domain of expertise and allow for faster production. Lighter frameworks are the key not new languages.
I was 30 minutes south of the cape on the treasure coast. I was standing pretty much as close to under the location as possible as it was due east of my location over the ocean when it exploded. I saw it unfold right above me. Watching the planes hit the towers is the only thing that has ever reproduced the feeling I felt that day.
Some countries have adopted laws prohibiting software that enables users to escape from Digital Restrictions Management. DRM is fundamentally incompatible with the purpose of the GPL, which is to protect users' freedom; therefore, the GPL ensures that the software it covers will neither be subject to, nor subject other works to, digital restrictions from which escape is forbidden.
Right there hidden in plain sight. I never said Linux is being re-licensed to GPL3, I said it is my estimation that Stallman has hopes of this happening.
I am not saying I support the decision I was just giving my interpretation of what I read in the article and the license. With Stallman, we are talking about a man grounded in ideology here not a person that looks at the practicality of a decision. You analogy about using a DVD player is flawed though it does not state that consumers of DRM technology will be affected it is specifically focused at producers of DRM software. I would agree that the studios will most likely drop GPL 3 software but I imagine the intent is to make DRM a costly mistake for the studios.
From my understanding it is a simple as if you produce or support DRM in a product that your company or a subsidiary produces said company loose their license to any GPL 3 software. Linux included if it moves to GPL 3.
Read the article before your posting. Oh yeah and the licence.
Actually the way it is written is that if a company produces DRM software they instantly violate all GPL 3 licenses. They are doing this because many of the movie studios that product the movies that are DRM'ed rely heavily on GPL software for production of the movies. Many of the rendering farms now run on Linux clusters. If Linux is upgraded to 3.0 then they pretty much have the studios by the balls well at least legally. It was a pretty good play on the FSF part.
No the provision boiled down is that if you build DRM software open or closed you loose you right to all GPL 3 software you use. So even an unrelated Linux box used in the movies production becomes a violation. It is not just the software that contains the DRM its all GPL 3 code inside your organization that becomes a violation. Being that many production studios now use Linux I would imagine that they are banking on Linux moving to 3 and therefore violating all movie studios if they upgrade.
You have both the timing and the facts wrong.
Oh I do????
After Hurricane Katrina, Saudi Arabia admitted that it simply could not increase production to make up for the loss of Gulf of Mexico oil rigs. It was widely speculated that a final oil crisis has or had begun, in which the amount of oil available world-wide will enter a gradual yet terminal decline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil
I pay over US$1000 a year for certain newsletters and I can't openly share some of the information. You should do infomercials.
Most people take Saudi Arabia's response to the request of increased production after Katrina to be indicative of this fact. They flat out said they could not make up for the offset created by the damage to the gulf rigs. That pretty much was an admission of full capacity.
We're finding that MOST of what geophysicists warned us about 10 years ago isn't true -- we keep finding more to consumer, not less.
I don't remember them saying that we would run out, I remember Hubbert saying that the demand would outweigh the rate of new discovery and that it would create a scenario where we have not run out, but that we cannot get it out of the ground and refine it as fast as it is being used. We are seeing this happen now with slight occurrences disrupting the supply chain. He forecasted the peak of American capacity in the 70's and it looks as his forecast for global supply is following the model he outlined. He formulations never said that the actually resource would run out. People just use that slippery sloop argument from either side to support their claims. For further reading look here .
I see your point, sorry for the tirade.
That is the folly of man not the technology. It does not take huge mental leaps to comprehend that if the only weapon on the world was toilet paper the incidents of toilet paper related deaths would skyrocket. Man will always find something to kill man with; he just prefers the most efficient means. That does not negate a technologies positive factors it merely means we are closer to monkeys than we believe.
You guys do have some funky teeth.
Agreed but that does not highlight the benefits of a corporation rather it highlights a problem with our legal system. If CEO's where held personally responsible for their actions you can bet allot of the crap we deal with by corporations would be negated. Granted it protects the small business owner from abuse but it also enables the large business owner to abuse. This is not a win, win situation. A loser pays legal system would address this shortfall of our system better than the corporation. If you loose the lawsuit for your company's actions then you need to be personally responsible, you wronged someone and folding up shop while keeping your 2 million dollar home and boat is not fair. If it is a frivolous law suit then it should be exposed in court, I know some slip through but again a fault of the legal system and not a reason to justify corporations with no responsibility. Put simply if you wronged someone you should be held personally accountable. That is pretty cut and dry.
Your government puts the needs of the people behind the needs of corporations. That is not how I would like to see the internet run.
Absolutely agreed Hamilton should be dug up and shot again for conceiving of the corporation and limited liability for a fictitious entity. Most of the other founding fathers saw this as a sure fire way to create an empire building government. Further Lincoln helped this along by further limiting the liability of corporations and changing laws to please his financial backers in his pursuit of the war against the south. In saying all that though, Americans designed and built the Internet with American tax payers' money as a defense network. The core layers of the internet where bought with our dollars and therefore I do not want my government wholesale giving away my money to the discression's of the likes of China and Brazil. No matter your gripe or how valid it is, with America we built it and we should be allowed, not even allowed, we maintain the right to control our DNS system. If other countries want control, the technology is there. Talk to Microsoft, talk to Linus and have them point the DNS systems to international servers. Developers have a right to make choices for their systems and I would imagine that you would get an open ear from the free software community, but to say that we need to give up something that we built and paid for is ludicrous at best.
No, the stupidity is in not thinking through your purchasing decision and entering a mega-corporation that has systematically destroyed wages, values and law to meet there ends, hiding behind the veil of corporate liability. Hamilton, the idiot, created a monster when he championed the corporation as an entity with no personal liability. Intelligence would be thinking beyond the one dimension of impulsive and primitive nature of greed to reason that your support for these companies in the end devalues you. Seeing the chain of events and patterns of actions is more of an indicator of intelligence then saving a buck to satisfy the primitive instinct of greed that even a dog possesses.
And those who support "real painkillers" have obviously never been addicted to them or seen the horror of a loved one who has been addicted to them and had to go through withdrawal.
Many people withdraw everyday from substances other than pain killers that the medical community prescribes as if they are the safest things on earth. Take a look on the message boards for SSRI withdraws and more specifically Paxil withdraws and you will see that the cure is far more damaging that the cause. This is the drug that was to reduce addiction and provide relief to those chronically depressed. If you want to see true horror, watch someone withdraw from this stuff. It makes pain killer addiction look like a 24 hour flu. I have been addicted to this very substance and would much rather go through the withdraws of demoral that I did when I was a teenager and had to have extensive bone surgery over several months. Let me tell you that was a walk in the park compared to Paxil. I contemplated suicide almost daily after the first month and I have never been a suicidal person. So yes I have been addicted to both and I would have to say that opiates where far more effective in warding off the depression of being immobile to bone surgery than the Paxil ever was for low level generalized depression.
Not to mention the wastoids that go out and score prescriptions for minor pain so they can sit on a couch stoned all day.
Those waistoids are going to get it whether it is legal or not and if they cannot get it they are more than happy to snort or shoot heroin which is easier than booze to acquire. Hell people will bring it to you. Cant you see that the only people you are hurting by you flippant logic are the people who truly need it but do not fit the rigid requirements to get it as defined by some non-medical governmental agency that scares any doctor away from prescribing anything that is not cut and dry on label use. You are no longer getting a doctors educated opinion on a subject but rather a doctor's educated opinion that has been dictated by a governmental agency under threat of revoking the doctor's license. Criminalization does not work plain and simple the partiers get what they want and everyone else suffers. No matter how you slice it those are the facts. You may live in a middle-class shell where you do not see it but trust me stuff far stronger than the pharmacy carries is but a phone call away.By supporting criminalization you are not keeping out of the peoples hands you intend to deny access.
While others are simply using narcotics to treat their psychological pain
And how is using narcotics to ease ones psychological pain any different than using highly addictive products like Paxil. It seems to me that people hate the though of people using something that actually brings them pleasure. They want to provide a drug that eliminates the problem, without the pleasurable side effects that the greater medical community accepts as being the root cause of addiction. Before the advent of these so called psychological wonder drugs, there was a single tool in a psychiatrist belt to combat depression and that tool was opium, the clinical diagnosis was called melancholy. The self appointed guardian of our morals aka the medical community saw it fit to replace these treatments with less effective and far more dangerous substances like tricyclic, SSRI's and god forbid MAOI's all to reduce what is deemed as addiction but what is addiction, I spent 2 months of living hell withdrawing from Paxil, is that addiction or is it the pleasure derived from these drugs. I classify addiction as physical withdraws from a drug in which case Paxil ranks highest in additive properties. The medical community likes to call people that use these off label products to ease their psychological pain self medicators, which I agree is an accurate term due to the fact that the licensed medicators have utterly failed them in pushing products that actually increase the chance of suicide on to them.
I don't think drug legalization is the answer
No you don't because you work in the medical community and have bought into the problem. You along with every other medical staff personnel look at and treat anyone who looks for an alternative solution as rubbish and cannot hurry enough to get them out the door or in a rehab. I have heard all the arguments time and time again, that opiates will kill you, but yet I see old Afghan, Indian, and Chinese men living well past the octogenarian years and in good health and yet they smoke opium daily. This all without the help of you're so called modern western medicine. I am not saying that western medicine has no merit, it clearly does, but western medicine has let religion and false morals cloud its judgment when it comes to psychiatric medicine. Further, it has been shown that most self medicators plateau at a certain dose and rarely die from overdose. I also love the argument that you are just masking the psychological pain, yes the argument is absolutely correct but also applies to all other psychological drugs like Paxil, opiates change the chemicals in your brain, they all mask the symptoms.
Unfortunately because the medical community has mastered the human body people naturally assume that they have master the human mind which they have not. A medical doctor in my opinion has not place dispensing mental health advice unless they are trained in mental health unfortunately medical doctors and personnel will tell you that they are a doctor and they know but the sad truth is that they don't. They have no clue of the effects of drugs on the opioid, serotonin and GABA systems of the brain. That is why the hand out Paxil like candy and lock up the opiates. While I was withdrawing from Paxil my friend was getting off heroin he was sick for 12 days. I was deathly ill for 2 months and the effects lingered for 4 months. So you can stand on your pillar and say that you do not believe that legalization works and I will stand down here, along with the other voices of experience and laugh at your pontification about you medical knowledge with no clue of the human mind or the havoc your reek on peoples life's for being morally better then them and allowing them to deal with there psychological pain in its full rage and unbridled horror. There truly are some fates worse than death. Think about that next time someone comes into your moral temple of medicine withdrawing and screaming about events that transpired 10 years ago that caused that poor soul mind to shatter. Expl
That is why juries should decide punishment as well. So we don't get little demi-god complex judges. When I was in high school I had a buddy get rail-roaded by a judge just to set an example. The basics of the case where another buddy of mine was watching my buddy's apartment and threw a party. Which included bongs, beer and paraphernalia but even the pot had already been smoked. Anyway my friend came home and the cops showed up almost instantly arrested him and no one else and he went to court. Before I complete the story let me give you some background on my high school click, we where not the most regarded group in high school we where the skateboarders and punk rockers and this was right when Nirvana broke onto the scene so all thing alternative suddenly where the coolest thing ever. All of the sudden we had become the center of society and attracted the attention of the high school cheerleaders which the administration did not like so well. Anyway, the cops upon entering the premises started asking my friend where all of the drugs where and that they know he was dealing drugs, specifically acid. In my po-dunk town you where lucky if you could get pot much less acid. Anyway, he went to court and they presented two pieces of evidence an empty 12-pack container and a bong that was all they had. My other buddy took the stand and said both where his and that he and not my other friend had threw the party without his permission. Anyway, the judge found him guilty and sentenced him to 1 year in jail. Yeah, read that again 1 year. All because the judge decided that this drug dealer needed to be made an example of. Those where his exact words. He had neither been charged with nor convicted of any form of drug dealing just possession of paraphernalia. After his lawyer reviewed the existing laws he found that the maximum sentence for possession of paraphernalia was 6-months and the ACLU was almost called in to get the judge to reduce the sentence to 6-months. God complex.