Police function? Where do you live? Where I live they're just another street gang with semi-good press.
Then why could I be held until I provide proof of innocence? Perhaps I'm naive but I prefer a system where I can only be held when there's proof of guilt.
Honest cops, I used to believe they existed. But I've been terry stopped when obviously not up to no good. Unless you count walking home down a well lit street wearing jeans and a tee-shirt as reasonable suspicion for anything. Cops aren't there to prevent crime, they're there to make arrests after a crime so yes they can sit there with their hands in their pockets.
And what is a good reason to believe you're in the country illegally? The same standard for Terry stop? None since they can say anything and there's no way to refute their claim?
There's no law requiring me to carry ID, so why would I want to hand it over to cops? The burden of proof is on them, not me. Why should I be expected to roll over and prove myself to every cop who happens to pass by and decide they have nothing better to do than harass me?
Demands based on suspicion just won't work. There's no practical way to deal with abuse and you know full well that if you have humans, you have abuse. At the very least we need to use a probable cause standard.
SCOTUS did hold that they couldn't mirror the federal laws so that's settled at least for today. The papers please part is what I'm, as you say, flailing Kermit arms about. I'm a US citizen on US soil, the police can go to hell unless they have an arrest warrant or proof I committed a crime. I'm going to speak out against any law or ruling that says otherwise.
As far as I can tell, you don't have a problem with that position. So why are we arguing?
My problem is with any law that allows me to be taken into custody for not proving my identity on demand while I'm on US soil. In a free country you don't make me prove anything, you prove I've done something wrong or you leave me the hell alone. This isn't about immigration, it is about ME. This is about the right to arrest me even though I have no legal obligation to prove my identity just to travel though public spaces.
In Arizona I am presumed guilty of violating the law. Forgive me if I'm not amused.
They'd just be lazy and vote to readopt the code as a whole every xx years. What you need is first automatic repeal of any provisions that are found unconstitutional after the appeals process, some municipalities have this, it would be best if all did along with all states and the federal government. Kansas still has consensual sodomy on the books, what the hell? Second all governments should have a rotating member committee for updating one section of their legal code per session so the whole thing would go through cleanup over every XX years, in a city it might be traffic laws one year, zoning laws the next year, for a state it might be hunting regulations one year, violent crimes the next year but always picking one chunk that can be reviewed, amended and put up for a vote per year.
It'd still require some judicious neglect though, someone who jaywalks in heavy traffic is creating a danger, someone who does it on a low traffic residential street it just saving time. Enforce the latter you're just being an ass. I don't care for the law is the law argument. I'm a firm believer in no harm no foul.
I didn't ask what you wanted. I don't care what you want any more than you care what I want. Cheap food is a benefit. You may not like it, you may see other problems, that's not MY problem. Undocumented workers do provide a benefit.
Enforcing every law, aside from somehow knowing them all, would grind the system to a halt. Discretion has been around for a long time. Could you imagine what would happen if every jaywalker got hauled into court? If everyone who went over the speed limit got a ticket?
Another way to say rocket that will take you to the moon is ICBM. Every time you launch a spacecraft you're showing that you can put something big and heavy (like cold war era nukes) into space and drop them anywhere on the planet.
Its not just those two, Webber has only got me steamed a couple of times and I'm a pretty hardcore liberal but if you look to the bench, some of their C team can be downright offensive. I have a personal rule for Baen, Google the author's name and see who they've pissed off. I don't tend to do that for Ave and Tor becuase I've found far few political anvils being dropped there. Those two seem to want a wide appeal in the genre while Baen is happy to let authors be a niche in a niche.
In the end its all a matter of personal taste but good to know what you're getting yourself into.
Hardcovers, except in the cases with a paperback only release are priced higher because they're trying to make back the costs of producing the book, author advance, editing, typesetting, printing etc. With success they move on to paperback, since the book is already a winner and the outlay is only typesetting and printing they have less to make back.
In some genres paperback is the norm especially for the authors who aren't at the top tier and the hardcover comes later. The first Dresden files book was a paperback release, The Deed of Paksenarrion was paperback and then trade paperback omnibus.
Baen has a reputation for REALLY bad covers. They also have a reputation for certain political views, off-putting to some but one can with a little research find books they publish with either no political anvils to drop or ones to suit your particular alignment.
On the plus side they don't do DRM and have a reasonable pricing structure.
Why is that so many people jump in, guns blazing, when they see an inflammatory one-liner, without bothering to get any context, background information or - dare I say it - facts?
A lot of people have posted things on this thread to/about Elizabeth Moon that are offensive, insulting and hurtful to her and her family. Why? Because the person who started this thread came up with a provocative one-liner, provided a couple of links that don't give casual surfers any context, and sat back with popcorn to enjoy the show.
Now I'll grant you, the BBC did much the same with that mini-article hyping the radio broadcast. Their intent was to "hook" people into going and listening to the full-length podcast. Unfortunately, they seem to have assumed that most of their listeners would already be familiar enough with the radio show to know that the "60 second idea" portion (which is what has everyone's shorts in a bundle) isn't necessarily intended to be serious. Clearly, that was an invalid assumption.
For anyone actually interested in learning the truth, M. Moon has posted an account of the whole experience - including the unexpected reactions, and the minor detail that she doesn't actually believe that everyone should be chipped - on her blog. It can be seen here:
http://e-moon60.livejournal.com/442811.html
As you can see, this outburst of unpleasantness against Ms. Moon is completely unjustified and ill-informed. It's the job of a SF writer to put ideas out there which are thought provoking, which make us stop and question our existence and the world around us. The good ones really stir things up and leave a lasting impression. They should NOT be subjected to an outpouring of abuse for doing a good job.
C'mon people, exercise a few brain cells, here. And maybe take the time to apologize to the woman you abused so unfairly.
Mod parent up, people really need to do more than just read the headline and comment. This is Slashdot not Huffington post, you people know better.
You might be interested to discover that she wasn't actually advocating chipping people. She was asked for wild ideas, not good ideas.
It was discussed on her blog when I, myself took her seriously and called her out.
http://www.paksworld.com/blog/?p=1574#comments
Except it is more than that. Murdering someone based on the color of their skin or perceived membership in some other group you simply don't like takes it beyond murder and into terrorism. You're sending a message that some people will not be allowed their place in society and you'll kill to make sure of it. The result of the crime extends to otherwise unaffiliated strangers.
They had artillery back then and found it quite useful. Though I'll admit making an operating a cannon doesn't take the same level of expertise as a recoil-less rifle.
Slashdot Mirror
Police function? Where do you live? Where I live they're just another street gang with semi-good press.
Then why could I be held until I provide proof of innocence? Perhaps I'm naive but I prefer a system where I can only be held when there's proof of guilt.
Where to start....
Honest cops, I used to believe they existed. But I've been terry stopped when obviously not up to no good. Unless you count walking home down a well lit street wearing jeans and a tee-shirt as reasonable suspicion for anything. Cops aren't there to prevent crime, they're there to make arrests after a crime so yes they can sit there with their hands in their pockets.
And what is a good reason to believe you're in the country illegally? The same standard for Terry stop? None since they can say anything and there's no way to refute their claim?
There's no law requiring me to carry ID, so why would I want to hand it over to cops? The burden of proof is on them, not me. Why should I be expected to roll over and prove myself to every cop who happens to pass by and decide they have nothing better to do than harass me?
Demands based on suspicion just won't work. There's no practical way to deal with abuse and you know full well that if you have humans, you have abuse. At the very least we need to use a probable cause standard.
SCOTUS did hold that they couldn't mirror the federal laws so that's settled at least for today. The papers please part is what I'm, as you say, flailing Kermit arms about. I'm a US citizen on US soil, the police can go to hell unless they have an arrest warrant or proof I committed a crime. I'm going to speak out against any law or ruling that says otherwise.
As far as I can tell, you don't have a problem with that position. So why are we arguing?
Find me one, we'll find out.
Why yes, yes I do have a problem with Terry v Ohio. Being on the receiving end of a couple of Terry stops does tend make a person... unhappy.
When have you ever known cops to be reasonable?
My problem is with any law that allows me to be taken into custody for not proving my identity on demand while I'm on US soil. In a free country you don't make me prove anything, you prove I've done something wrong or you leave me the hell alone. This isn't about immigration, it is about ME. This is about the right to arrest me even though I have no legal obligation to prove my identity just to travel though public spaces.
In Arizona I am presumed guilty of violating the law. Forgive me if I'm not amused.
They'd just be lazy and vote to readopt the code as a whole every xx years. What you need is first automatic repeal of any provisions that are found unconstitutional after the appeals process, some municipalities have this, it would be best if all did along with all states and the federal government. Kansas still has consensual sodomy on the books, what the hell? Second all governments should have a rotating member committee for updating one section of their legal code per session so the whole thing would go through cleanup over every XX years, in a city it might be traffic laws one year, zoning laws the next year, for a state it might be hunting regulations one year, violent crimes the next year but always picking one chunk that can be reviewed, amended and put up for a vote per year.
It'd still require some judicious neglect though, someone who jaywalks in heavy traffic is creating a danger, someone who does it on a low traffic residential street it just saving time. Enforce the latter you're just being an ass. I don't care for the law is the law argument. I'm a firm believer in no harm no foul.
I didn't ask what you wanted. I don't care what you want any more than you care what I want. Cheap food is a benefit. You may not like it, you may see other problems, that's not MY problem. Undocumented workers do provide a benefit.
Demanding papers? You must be German. Show me your papers please.
I have. Cops suck.
Papers please citizen.
Enforcing every law, aside from somehow knowing them all, would grind the system to a halt. Discretion has been around for a long time. Could you imagine what would happen if every jaywalker got hauled into court? If everyone who went over the speed limit got a ticket?
We gain cheap food. When immigrant workers harvest crops for pocket change we get cheap food.
Another way to say rocket that will take you to the moon is ICBM. Every time you launch a spacecraft you're showing that you can put something big and heavy (like cold war era nukes) into space and drop them anywhere on the planet.
coconut milk gives you the runs, you lose more water than you gain.
In the end its all a matter of personal taste but good to know what you're getting yourself into.
Hardcovers, except in the cases with a paperback only release are priced higher because they're trying to make back the costs of producing the book, author advance, editing, typesetting, printing etc. With success they move on to paperback, since the book is already a winner and the outlay is only typesetting and printing they have less to make back.
In some genres paperback is the norm especially for the authors who aren't at the top tier and the hardcover comes later. The first Dresden files book was a paperback release, The Deed of Paksenarrion was paperback and then trade paperback omnibus.
On the plus side they don't do DRM and have a reasonable pricing structure.
Why is that so many people jump in, guns blazing, when they see an inflammatory one-liner, without bothering to get any context, background information or - dare I say it - facts?
A lot of people have posted things on this thread to/about Elizabeth Moon that are offensive, insulting and hurtful to her and her family. Why? Because the person who started this thread came up with a provocative one-liner, provided a couple of links that don't give casual surfers any context, and sat back with popcorn to enjoy the show.
Now I'll grant you, the BBC did much the same with that mini-article hyping the radio broadcast. Their intent was to "hook" people into going and listening to the full-length podcast. Unfortunately, they seem to have assumed that most of their listeners would already be familiar enough with the radio show to know that the "60 second idea" portion (which is what has everyone's shorts in a bundle) isn't necessarily intended to be serious. Clearly, that was an invalid assumption.
For anyone actually interested in learning the truth, M. Moon has posted an account of the whole experience - including the unexpected reactions, and the minor detail that she doesn't actually believe that everyone should be chipped - on her blog. It can be seen here: http://e-moon60.livejournal.com/442811.html As you can see, this outburst of unpleasantness against Ms. Moon is completely unjustified and ill-informed. It's the job of a SF writer to put ideas out there which are thought provoking, which make us stop and question our existence and the world around us. The good ones really stir things up and leave a lasting impression. They should NOT be subjected to an outpouring of abuse for doing a good job.
C'mon people, exercise a few brain cells, here. And maybe take the time to apologize to the woman you abused so unfairly.
Mod parent up, people really need to do more than just read the headline and comment. This is Slashdot not Huffington post, you people know better.
Godwin, it isn't just a good idea, its the law.
You might be interested to discover that she wasn't actually advocating chipping people. She was asked for wild ideas, not good ideas. It was discussed on her blog when I, myself took her seriously and called her out. http://www.paksworld.com/blog/?p=1574#comments
Except it is more than that. Murdering someone based on the color of their skin or perceived membership in some other group you simply don't like takes it beyond murder and into terrorism. You're sending a message that some people will not be allowed their place in society and you'll kill to make sure of it. The result of the crime extends to otherwise unaffiliated strangers.
They had artillery back then and found it quite useful. Though I'll admit making an operating a cannon doesn't take the same level of expertise as a recoil-less rifle.