User Panel
A bit of a different story as a relief from all the gun-grabbing stories from the states.
Maryland: Saber Saw Sex Toy Incident: DIY Gone Very, Very Wrong A 27-year old woman was rushed to the hospital after a kinky encounter with her partner resulted in injuries that I would rather not contemplate. Sufficed to say, dildos and saber saws don't mix.
Amazingly enough, these DIYers fitted the sex toy right over the blade. Yup...it was still attached. And no, this didn't happen in Germany. It happened in Maryland where the woman was medevaced to Prince George's County Hospital. The good news is that the woman has been released from the hospital and is recovering at home from her injuries. Let that be a lesson to you—HGTV is a good place to pick up ideas for the bedroom, but not for the bedroom. You know what I'm saying LEXINGTON PARK, Md. –– Some sexual experimentation landed a southern Maryland woman in a hospital with injuries tough to imagine and even more difficult to forget.
Maryland State Police airlifted the 27-year-old woman to Prince George's County Hospital Center early Sunday morning after she was injured in an incident involving a sex toy attached to a saber saw blade, TheBayNet.com first reported. The man who called 911 about the incident admitted attaching the sex toy to the saw and then using the high-powered, homemade device on his partner, according to the St. Mary's County Sheriff's Office. The saw cut through the plastic toy and wounded the woman, according to TheBayNet.com. The injuries were severe enough for medevac, but the woman was released from the hospital Monday and is recovering from her unusual injuries. Investigators talked to the woman, who told them she suffered the injuries during a consensual act and that she and her partner were trying something new and no crime was committed, the sheriff's office said. Freaky |
|
Minnesota: End to Private Sales and Register All Firearms
State Senator Yvonne Prettner Solon (DFL-7) introduced Senate File 1165, in yet another attempt to end private firearm transfers in Minnesota. SF 1165 is the companion bill to House File 953, previously introduced by State Representative Michael Paymar (DFL-64B). SF 1165, like HF 953, was designed to not only regulate the sale of firearms at gun shows, but to regulate the sale of firearms between all law-abiding persons, all across Minnesota. SF 1165 only affects law-abiding gun owners, and will in no way keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Also contained in SF 1165, is a de facto registration system created by requiring the records of all transfers to be maintained by the state, which would be made available to all authorities, including for use in "civil" cases. SF 1165 would also remove the permit holder exemption from a background check and even increase the waiting period from five to seven days. SF 1165 is a direct attack on Minnesotans' Second Amendment rights.
|
|
Albany New York: Ammo Restrictions
Legislators Phillip Steck (D), Douglas Bullock (D) and Wanda Willingham (D) introduced Local Law “A”, a proposal that would regulate the purchase of ammunition in Albany County.
Local Law “A” would require that a valid firearms license be shown when purchasing ammunition. The law would also mandate that retailers keep a record of ammunition sales, including the type, caliber, and quantity of the ammunition, make, model and serial number of the firearm it is for, as well as the purchaser’s name and address. As if that is not enough, Local Law “A” would also create a secondary method of gun registration for both long guns and handguns. Local Law “A” has been sent to the Law Committee. Congress has tried ammunition registration in the past, only to discover that it was not only ineffective for law enforcement, but also completely unmanageable due to the sheer volume of transactions. Ammunition registration creates huge record keeping requirements and provides no useful benefits for law enforcement; which is why it was repealed under the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. A valid firearms license ... what the hell is that. |
|
Fort Pierce Florida again ... what do they put in the water there?
Florida: Fort Pierce woman calls 911 three times when McNuggets run out FORT PIERCE — Told McDonald’s was out of Chicken McNuggets after paying for a 10-piece meal, a local woman called 911.
Three times. “This is an emergency, If I would have known they didn’t have McNuggets, I wouldn’t have given my money, and now she wants to give me a McDouble, but I don’t want one,” Latreasa L. Goodman told police. “This is an emergency.” The McNugget meltdown happened last week at a McDonald’s in the 600 block of North U.S. 1 and ended with Goodman, 27, getting a notice to appear in court on a misuse of 911 charge, according to a recently released police report. Goodman told investigators she tried to get a refund for the 10-piece McNuggets, but the cashier told her all sales are final. “I called 911 because I couldn’t get a refund, and I wanted my McNuggets,” Goodman told police. The cashier told police she offered Goodman, of the 2400 block of South 25th Street, a larger portion of food for the same price to make up for it, but said Goodman got “irate,” the report states. Goodman reportedly yelled, “I don’t want a McDouble and small fry,” the cashier told investigators. Dispatchers for 911 told police Goodman called the emergency number three times and on each occasion was told an officer was en route. “Goodman maintained the attitude ‘this is an emergency, my McNuggets are an emergency,’” the report states. This city bares watching. |
|
|
Texas town's police seize valuables from black motorists
TENAHA - You can drive into this dusty fleck of a town near the Texas-Louisiana border if you’re African-American, but you might not be able to drive out of it — at least not with your car, your cash, your jewelry or other valuables. That’s because the police here have allegedly found a way to strip motorists, many of them black, of their property without ever charging them with a crime. Instead, they offer out-of-towners a grim choice: voluntarily sign over your belongings to the town or face felony charges of money laundering or other serious crimes. More than 140 people reluctantly accepted that deal from June 2006 to June 2008, according to court records. Among them were a black grandmother from Akron, Ohio, who surrendered $4,000 in cash after Tenaha police pulled her over, and an interracial couple from Houston, who gave up more than $6,000 after police threatened to seize their children and put them into foster care, the court documents show. Neither the grandmother nor the couple were charged with or convicted of any crime. The process apparently is so routine in Tenaha that Guillory discovered presigned and prenotarized police affidavits with blank spaces left for an officer to fill in a description of the property being seized. Texas is a free state. http://www.star-telegram.com/804/story/1255818.html |
|
Well this is from California but it's not going to be very popular with the outsiders.
California: Law Proposed to Drug Test Welfare Recipients Introduced. Many are familiar with RJ’s Law that State Senator John J. Benoit introduced last year. RJ is a teen who was born to a mother on welfare who was a drug addict and alcoholic. RJ’s resulting health issues have cost the state millions of dollars, not to mention that RJ was denied a fair chance at a normal childhood. RJ actually gave him the answer – drug test welfare recipients. Benoit has recently reintroduced RJ’s Law.
Here's some more news that's going to be missed. The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin recently weighed in on legislation aimed at pressuring the federal government to fully-reimburse California for the high costs of incarcerating illegal immigrant prisoners, as they are required to do: State Sen. John Benoit amusingly calls his Senate Bill 125 a "stimulus measure" - which it certainly would be for California if it accomplishes its objective.
The bill seeks to pressure the federal government to reimburse California for the full cost of incarcerating criminal illegal immigrants. It's not a new idea, but it's still a good one. Benoit, who represents Norco, Corona and much of the rest of Riverside County, pegs the state's annual cost of housing illegal immigrant prisoners at nearly a billion dollars, for which the state is reimbursed a relative pittance… … It's grimly ironic that federal justices are demanding that California spend billions of dollars to relieve overcrowding in its state prisons when, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, nearly 26,000 illegal immigrants are incarcerated in California. That's about 15 percent of the state's prison population. Those incarcerated illegal immigrants should be a federal responsibility because only the federal government can enforce immigration law. And, of course, if those 26,000 somehow were removed from state prisons and sent to federal penitentiaries, California's prison system would not be nearly so overcrowded… The ant burners think that the states (as long as it's not theirs) should bare the cost of housing the illegals that the federal government allows to violate our laws. |
|
New York: NYPD give out over 9,000 “driving while using a cell phone” tickets during one-day campaign
In an effort to drive home the point that you are not allowed to talk on a cell phone while driving in New York, the NYPD recently held a one-day event that gave tickets to 9,016 motorists.
Not bad for a one day event, but this goes to show that many people simply are not following the law. In the past, the NYPD had issued 195,579 tickets during 2008. That, of course, could also be a little bit of good news in terms of revenue though, each ticket comes with a fine of $120, which all-in-all means a little over a million dollars in fines could be collected. And with a little bit of irony, it seems that no one was immune to getting ticketed that day, the NY Daily News had a journalist out covering the event who was ticketed while he was on his way to cover the story. Bottom line, talking on the phone can be distracting, just put it down until you arrive where you are going, or at the very least buy (and use) a headset. More from AR15.com's most invisible state. Heck I thought we were the only state in the nation with cell phone laws. I knew we were the only one who voted for Obama or had gun laws. |
|
Florida Student, 15, Suspended For Passing Gas
Boy's Father Says Punishment Too Steep LAKELAND, Fla. –– A Polk County teenage student has been suspended from school because he intentionally passed gas, according to school officials. The Lakeland Ledger reported that 15-year-old Jonathon Locke Jr. was suspended from Bill Duncan Opportunity School under a school district rule against disruptive behavior. School officials said the teen repeatedly passed gas to make other children laugh. They said the smell also made it difficult to breathe. Locke's father said his son isn't perfect and they're appealing the suspension, saying the district went too far with its punishment. IIRC, there was another recent suspension of a Florida student for farting in class. Yep, theres definitely something in the water there. |
|
California: More Gun Legislation!
To add to Assembly Bill 357 sponsored by Assembly Member Steve Knight (R-36), which would create a "shall issue" concealed handgun permit system in California we have a second news worth bill. I've been waiting since its introduction for someone to post it but it got missed. Our resident hater is slipping. Assembly Bill 1167, introduced by Assembly Member Jim Nielsen (R-2), would require that the California Department of Justice enter into reciprocity agreements with other states so that permit holders in California can exercise their self-defense rights while traveling and permit holders from recognized states can carry while in California.
|
|
Pennsylvania: Teenage Child Pornographers
When a high school cheerleader in northeastern Pennsylvania learned that she might face criminal charges after investigators reported finding a nude photo of her on someone else’s cellphone, she was more confused than frightened at being caught up in a case of “sexting”: the increasingly popular phenomenon of nude or seminude photos sent over wireless phones.
“They said they had a full-bodied naked picture of me, but I knew I’d never had any naked picture taken of me,” the student, Marissa Miller, 15, recalled of the Feb. 10 telephone call to her mother as the two were having lunch together at Tunkhannock Area High School. Marissa is a freshman at the school, where her mother, MaryJo, works with special education students. The picture that investigators from the office of District Attorney George P. Skumanick of Wyoming County had was taken two years earlier at a slumber party. It showed Marissa and a friend from the waist up. Both were wearing bras. Mr. Skumanick said he considered the photo “provocative” enough to tell Marissa and the friend, Grace Kelly, that if they did not attend a 10-hour class dealing with pornography and sexual violence, he was considering filing a charge of sexual abuse of a minor against both girls. If convicted, they could serve time in prison and would probably have to register as sex offenders. It was the same deal that 17 other students — 13 girls and 4 boys — accepted by the end of February. All of them either been caught with a cellphone containing pictures of nude or seminude students, or were identified in one or more such photos. But three students, Marissa, Grace and a third girl who appeared in another photo, along with their mothers, felt the deal was unfair and illegal. On Wednesday, they filed a lawsuit in federal court in Scranton, Pa., against Mr. Skumanick. They asked the court to stop the district attorney from filing charges against them, contending that his threat to do so was “retaliation” for the families asserting their First and Fourth Amendment rights to oppose his deal. “Prosecutors should not be using a nuclear-weapon-type charge like child pornography against kids who have no criminal intent and are merely doing stupid things,” said Witold J. Walczak, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, which represents the families. Stupid possibly but charged as child pornographers what are they thinking in Pennsylvania? Prison time and being labled as a sexual abuser? I guess they don't have too many beaches there because if they looked closely many of the children there are wearing bikinis and showing a bunch more right out there in public for God and everyone to see. Here's a link to the story. The picture of Marissa Miller is there ... ... and it's work safe. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/us/26sextext.html?_r=2&ref=us |
|
Wisconsin: Man cited for shooting arrow in church
SHEBOYGAN FALLS, Wis. (AP) - A pastor and parishioner have been cited by police for shooting an arrow during a church service. The pastor asked to have the arrow shot across the front of the church during a recent service at Pentecostals of Sheboygan County as a 'teaching tool.'
As the parishioner prepared to shoot the arrow with his bow, one man stood up and objected, telling the pastor it was unsafe and illegal. Parishioners said the pastor told the man to be quiet and sit down. When the man objected a second time, the pastor asked him to leave. He did and called police. The parishioner was cited for using a missile indoors and the pastor was cited for aiding and abetting. Both were fined $109. What they don't have guns in Wisconsin? |
|
Connecticut: Teacher made boy eat from garbage can
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (AP) - A kindergarten teacher in a Bridgeport school has been arrested for allegedly forcing a 5-year-old boy to eat his lunch from a garbage can.
Sixty-seven-year-old Anne O'Donnell of Fairfield, a teacher at Park City Magnet School, was arrested Tuesday on a charge of risk of injury to a minor. School officials say the charge stems from an incident last week when the boy apparently tossed out his lunch of chicken nuggets and a banana from the school cafeteria. The teacher is accused of retrieving the items from the garbage can and forcing the boy to eat them in front of her. O'Donnell has been released on a promise to appear in court. |
|
Taking Aim At Assault Weapon Ban In South FloridaDade Commissioners In February '09 Passed A Resolution To Tighten Gun Control Laws
|
|
Seeing as how the blog-o-sphere and General Discussion are all torn up over the CARB's proposals to mandate 20% reflective car colors and to require maintenance shops to check your air pressure in your tires I'm surprised this MASSIVE change in the nationwide fuel standards missed the news mark. This is going to be signed and is going to have a whole lot bigger effect on the nation than forcing free tire pressure changes.
Just to update the ban on black cars event Stanley Young, the spokesman for the Air Resources Board, said that the ban was "completely fallacious" and that "at no time was it mention, comtemplated or proposed that we would ban or restrict any color." http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/darkcars.asp But I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that somehow this Snopes story will not make the General Discussion. Obama: Nationwide Ban on SUVs. Yesterday, President Barack Obama's new plan for raising fuel economy standards leaked to the press. This mark the first time in over two decades that the standard has been raised for passenger cars.
The new standards call for passenger cars to meet a 30.2 mpg average by 2011, which represents a 2 mpg increase. Trucks will have to meet a 24.1 mpg average. The changes are President Obama's first steps towards fulfilling his promise of 4 percent annual increases until 2022. President Obama wants the fleet of cars and trucks sold nationwide to reach a 40 mpg average by 2022. Such a plan would have cost the auto industry an estimated $50B USD in sales, as they would be forced to stop selling certain SUV models and make other changes. With President Obama taking a personal commitment to trying to right the course of the troubled domestic auto industry, he wanted a set of increases that would not sink the already flooding ship. When these requirements roll in you're not going to be worried about buying a black car or one with lower air tire air - you're going to be driving a 4- or may be a 6-cylinder mini-SUV at best. I can't see them giving a by-pass to the big 1-ton and 3/4-ton pick-ups either. Can you even fit a rifle rack in the back of a mini-van? |
|
Texas: Evolution Needs More Study, Religious Beliefs to Alter Nations Textbooks Nationwide.
In Austin, creationists have managed to include several amendments aimed at casting doubt on the theory of evolution. The amendments may affect the content in science textbooks across the country.
While the creationist groups did not manage to get the bulk of their agenda included in the State Board of Education's legislation, they did pass a few amendments casting doubt on the theory of evolution. Some tricky language, like an amendment requiring students to "analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning any data on sudden appearance and stasis and the sequential groups in the fossil record," is more insidious than it seems. When new textbooks come up for review in 2012, the board can reject books that they feel do not adequately address the issue, a key creationist talking point. And as Texas is a major buyer, textbook publishers may be forced to alter their products so as to avoid conflict with the self-proclaimed creationists on the Texas Board of Education, which could affect the rest of the country as well. It remains to be seen if these new amendments will indeed affect science textbooks, and hopefully they'll make no difference at all. Texas continues to be very aggressive on what knowledge is put in the books for sale there ... March 28, 2009 | In Austin, Texas, this week, scientists and creationists battled over whether to include the words "strengths and weaknesses" in the state's official statement about evolution. The words would influence how evolution is taught in Texas classrooms and would be immortalized in Lone Star textbooks. As the largest textbook market in the country, the decision could pressure other high school textbook publishers to conform to Texas standards.
Dan McLeroy, the Texas State Board of Education chairman, a dentist and self-described creationist, led the charge to mandate teaching the "strengths and weaknesses" of the theory of evolution. After three days of high-pitched argument on both sides, the 15-member board, by a vote of 8-7, rejected the language, relieving textbook authors and publishers of the pressure to insert what opponents called "junk science" into their pages. But in a compromise that alarms and dismays many science education advocates, the board did adopt language that attempts to cast a shadow of doubt over the validity of the central evolutionary concepts of natural selection and common ancestry. Proponents of the theory of intelligent design, and other brands of neo-creationism, argue that evolution is inadequate to the job of explaining the diversity and history of life on earth. If they can cast doubts about evolution's validity, they have a chance to fill the authority vacuum with the tenets of creationism. But since late 2005, when a federal judge in Dover, Pa., ruled that intelligent design was a form of creationism, and that its introduction into public high school curricula was unconstitutional, advocates of teaching neo-creationism have been forced to seek other ways into public science classrooms. Enter the "strengths and weaknesses" strategy, crafted by the Seattle-based, pro-intelligent-design think thank, Discovery Institute. One amendment calls for students to "analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning any data on sudden appearance and stasis and the sequential groups in the fossil record." The key words are "sudden appearance" and "stasis." McLeroy argues that "the sudden appearance" of forms in the Cambrian period, when there was a rapid multiplication and diversification of species, and the persistence of forms over long periods of time (stasis) are evidence against evolution. And thus for creationism. Not that science makes sense to a creationist like McLeroy. "Scientific consensus means nothing," he tells Salon. "All it takes is one fact to overthrow consensus. Evolution has a status that it simply doesn't deserve. People say it's vital to understanding biology. But it's genetics that's the foundation for biology. A biologist once said that nothing in biology makes sense without evolution. Well, that's not true. You go into the top biology labs, and it makes no difference if evolution is true or false to what they're doing and studying. It makes no difference." It makes all the difference in the world, says Miller, who notes the irony of McLeroy quoting Dobzhansky, one of the fathers of the modern evolutionary synthesis. Adds Miller: McLeroy's "fundamental misunderstanding of the way genetics and evolution have produced a unified science of biology is nothing short of breathtaking." Breathtaking indeed. |
|
Quoted: Just to update the ban on black cars event Stanley Young, the spokesman for the Air Resources Board, said that the ban was "completely fallacious" and that "at no time was it mention, comtemplated or proposed that we would ban or restrict any color." http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/darkcars.asp But I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that somehow this Snopes story will not make the General Discussion. That story originated in blogs, not from legitimate news sources. The OP got it from autoblog.com. It spread like wildfire from one blog to another and was posted and reposted in internet forums. Of course nobody questioned whether it's true or not. Everyone assumed it to be just another tale of California craziness. I've seen this kind of duplicity before, such as an obscure blog in an eastern state posting a headline, "Fast food banned in California" "California bans home schooling" or "L.A. city council bans murder" and it spreads in the blogs and special interest websites and makes its way to General Discussion. The headline is a lie, but that's what people remember. Some guy posted in GD just a few days ago that L.A. had banned murder. People are way too willing to believe everything they read, especially bad or crazy things about California. Add that to the fact that bloggers are often propagandists promoting their own agendas and you get sheep, bleating unthinking whiners willing to be hooked and used for their loud-mouthed protests and pitchforks. Consider the source, I always say. But even legitimate news sources are often guilty of yellow journalism. Bottom line is, too often people will believe what they want to believe. One guy even posted in the thread in GD that this story was false and he was completely ignored. |
|
Quoted:
Bottom line is, too often people will believe what they want to believe. One guy even posted in the thread in GD that this story was false and he was completely ignored. The best example I saw of this in the General Discussion was some thread late last year with the question something like "Which state has the most military members in it?" and there were about 10 guesses of Texas, Georgia, Ohio, and Virgina and such before someone actually Googled the answer (what the hell do they teach in school these days anyway) and came up with an authoritative answer from some source like Military.com listing out base-by-base totals resulting in California having the largest military. Yet ... yet after that post several dozen fools continued to argue back and forth about other states. I sense a bigoted bias in folks don't ya' think? Wonder why that is? I figure they blame us for taking all the good looking womenz. |
|
Texas: No Vista OS for state
AUSTIN — It could be “Hasta la vista, baby” to state agency purchases of Microsoft’s Windows Vista information technology under a proposed state budget provision. Sen. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen, added the provision in committee and said it’s meant to block purchases of the technology, which has been targeted by criticism: “Don’t buy it, because it’s not worth it.” Hinojosa, Senate Finance Committee vice chairman, said, “We have a lot of problems with the Vista program. It had a lot of bugs. It takes up a lot of memory. It’s not compatible with other equipment, and it’s supposed to be an upgrade from the XP program that is being used by state agencies, and it’s not.” Tech journalist Ed Bott, who specializes in Windows, said it’s not unusual for an information technology (IT) department to decide to hold off on buying a new technology, but he said it’s unusual for lawmakers to decree it: “I don’t think it makes any sense for any kind of legislative body to be making IT decisions. That’s what you hire your professional staff to do. That’s a level of micromanagement that is breathtaking to me.” Apple? |
|
Texas: Bill would add meth-lab disclosure to leases
Along with the language about security deposits and 30 days' notice, landlords may soon have to add a disclosure clause to rental agreements if their property has ever been used as a meth lab.
The bill calls for landlords to reveal, before a prospective tenant signs a lease, if they know that the property was previously used to manufacture methamphetamine and whether the landlord cleaned up the place. If the landlord doesn't tell, the bill states, the tenant can terminate the lease and get a refund of all the rent. That's a bit open-ended for landlords, said David Mintz, a lobbyist for the Texas Apartment Association. Under the bill's current wording, the landlord would be forever required to tell future tenants that it once was a meth lab, he said. More micromanagement. |
|
Indian: Porn Sting Goes To The Dogs
MARCH 18––Meet Michelle Owen. Concerned that an ex-boyfriend had used her laptop to search for child pornography, the Indiana woman asked police to search the computer for illegal images, but had her plan backfire when cops discovered two videos of her engaged in illicit acts with a dog. Owen, 24, was charged last week with two felony bestiality counts in connection with the video files, which a detective found in the laptop's "recycle bin." At the time Owen asked cops to search the computer, she was locked up in the Johnson County Jail on a public intoxication charge (which violated the terms of her release in a prior drunk driving case). According to a police affidavit, a copy of which you'll find here, a cop told Owen that he had found videos of her on the laptop and asked if she "knew what those files might be." Owen, pictured in the below mug shot, replied, "The one with the dog." Cops believe that the dog in question, Toby, is a beagle. After asking if she was "going to be charged with this," Owen said that the videos "were just something she did when she was drunk and barely remembers it," adding that she tried to "delete them the next day when she was sober."
Woof. |
|
Florida Woman to 911: Help! I'm locked inside my carA 911 dispatcher had to tell a woman how to unlock her car on Sunday. A woman called Kissimmee police to say she was locked inside her car at the Walgreen's on John Young Parkway near Poinciana. "My car will not start. I'm locked inside my car," the unidentified woman said. "Nothing electrical works. And it's getting very hot in here, and I'm not feeling well." The dispatcher asked the woman if she was able to manually pull the lock up on the door. The woman said she would try, and then, she said, "Yes, I got the door open." |
|
Iowa: Marriage no longer limited to one man, one woman
The Iowa Supreme Court this morning upheld a Polk County judge’s 2007 ruling that marriage should not be limited to one man and one woman.
The ruling, viewed nationally and at home as a victory for the gay rights movement and a setback for social conservatives, means Iowa’s 5,800 gay couples can legally marry in Iowa beginning April 24. There are no residency rules for marriage in Iowa, so the rule would apply to any couple who wanted to travel to Iowa. Advertisement Shelly Wolfe and Melisa Keeton, who waited for word of the ruling outside the Polk County Recorder’s Office, immediately called their pastor anyway to make plans. “We’re going to make it legal,” Keeton, 31, of Des Moines said. Wolfe, 38, and Keeton, who is 21 weeks pregnant, went through a commitment ceremony two years ago. Their marriage certificate was among the 26 that were put on hold when Polk County Judge Robert Hanson’s decision to open the door for gay marriage was delayed until the high court could weigh in. Third state to allow same-sex marriages Today’s decision makes Iowa the first Midwestern state, and the third in the country, to allow same-sex marriages. Lambda Legal, a gay rights group, financed the court battle and represented six couples who challenged Iowa’s 10-year-old ban on gay marriage. Supreme Court Justice Mark Cady, who wrote the unanimous decision, at one point invoked the court’s first-ever decision, in 1839, which struck down slavery laws 17 years before the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of a slave owner to treat a person as property. Iowa’s gay marriage ban “is unconstitutional, because the county has been unable to identify a constitutionally adequate justification for excluding plaintiffs from the institution of civil marriage,” Cady wrote in the 69-page opinion that seemed to dismiss the concept of civil unions as an option for gay couples. “A new distinction based on sexual orientation would be equally suspect and difficult to square with the fundamental principles of equal protection embodied in our constitution,” Cady wrote. The ruling, however, also addressed what it called the “religious undercurrent propelling the same-sex marriage debate,” and said judges must remain outside the fray. Some Iowa religions are strongly opposed to same-sex marriages, the justices noted, while some support the notion. “Our constitution does not permit any branch of government to resolve these types of religious debates and entrusts to courts the task of ensuring that government avoids them,” the opinion says. The ruling explicitly does not affect “the freedom of a religious organization to define marriage it solemnizes as unions between a man and a woman,” the justices stressed. The case, Varnum vs. Brien, involved couples who sued Polk County Recorder Timothy Brien in 2005 after his office denied them marriage licenses. Hanson sided with the couples last year but then suspended his decision pending a high court ruling. “We won! It is unanimous!” Camilla Taylor of Lambda Legal exclaimed when the ruling was announced. “Today the dream becomes reality … and Iowa constitution’s promise of equality is fulfilled. Iowans have never waited for others to do the right thing. Iowa took its place in the vanguard of the civil rights struggle, and we couldn’t be more proud to be part of this.” Gov. Chet Culver e-mailed a response to reporters that said: “The decision released this morning by Supreme Court addresses a complicated and emotional issue, one on which Iowans have strong views and opinions on both sides. The next responsible step is to thoroughly review this decision, which I am doing with my legal counsel and the attorney general, before reacting to what it means for Iowa.” Richard Socarides, a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton on gay civil rights, said today’s decision could mean as much to gay couples outside Iowa. “I think it’s significant because Iowa is considered a Midwest state in the mainstream of American thought,” Socarides, a senior political assistant for Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin in the early 1990s, said Thursday. “Unlike states on the coasts, there’s nothing more American than Iowa. As they say during the presidential caucuses, ‘As Iowa goes, so goes the nation.’” Opponents, supporters react Opponents have long argued that allowing gay marriage would erode the institution. Some Iowa lawmakers, mostly Republicans, attempted last year to launch a constitutional amendment to specifically prohibit same-sex marriage. Such a change would require approval in consecutive legislative sessions and a public vote, which means a ban could not be imposed until at least 2012, unless lawmakers take up the issue in the next few weeks. Leaders this week said they had no plans to do so. Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley, R-Chariton, nonetheless called for an immediate move to amend the constitution. “The decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court today to allow gay marriage in Iowa is disappointing on many levels,” he said. I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman, and I am confident the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state. “Though the court has made their decision, I believe every Iowan should have a voice on this matter and that is why the Iowa Legislature should immediately act to pass a constitutional amendment that protects traditional marriage, keeps it as a sacred bond only between one man and one woman and gives every Iowan a chance to have their say through a vote of the people.” State Rep. Dave Heaton, R-Mount Pleasant, said he would support a constitutional amendment. However, he also believes lawmakers would have to work on parallel legislation that would grant civil unions or some sort of way to grant legal rights to same-sex couples. “I firmly believe marriage should be between a man and a women but at the same time, I believe we should address these issues,” Heaton said. “I would rather recognize a civil union than to have same-sex marriage.” Diane Thacker’s eyes filled with tears as the ruling were read to an crowd opposed to gay marriage that had gathered on the north side of the judicial building. “Sadness,” she whispered.. “But I’m prayerful and hopeful that God’s word will stand.” Thacker said she joined to group “because I believe in the marriage vow. I can’t see it any other way.” Democratic State Sen. Matt McCoy of Des Moines, saw the decision a different way. “I’m off the wall. I’m very pleased to be an Iowan,” said McCoy, who is openly gay. Voices from outside the state quickly took sides. The Iowa Supreme Court’s Web site was deluged with more than 1.5 million visitors as of 11 a.m., court spokesman Steve Davis said.. Doug Napier, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund in Arizona, said the Iowa Supreme Court “stepped out of its proper role in interpreting the law.” Napier said the legislature should place a constitutional amendment on a statewide ballot to let Iowans decide. The Defense of Marriage Act “was simple, it was settled, and overwhelming supported by Iowans,” Napier said. “There was simply no legitimate reason for the court to redefine marriage.” Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, a New Jersey group, said “once again, the most undemocratic branch of government is being used to advance an agenda the majority of Americans reject.” “Marriage means a husband and wife. That’s not discrimination, that’s common sense,” she said in a press release. “Even in states like Vermont, where they are pushing this issue through legislatures, gay marriage advocates are totally unwilling to let the people decide these issues directly.” Mark Kende, a constitutional law professor at Drake University, described the ruling as narrowly written and “very well reasoned,” and predicted it will have national, possibly international, influence. But it also could create new, inter-state legal battles, he said. Couples who flock to Iowa to marry may not have their marriage recognized in other states that prohibit same-sex marriage, he said. The decision also is limited to civil marriages performed in county buildings, he said. Meanwhile, Kate and Trish Varnum, whose surname will forever be attached to the historic decision, called it “a great day for Iowa.” At a press conference this morning, Kate Varnum said: “Good morning… and I’d like to introduce you to my fiancé. Today I am proud to be a lifelong Iowan.” Trish Varnum added: “It’s been a wonderful adventure, and we’re looking forward to the next wonderful adventure — as a married couple in Iowa.” A Des Moines Register poll in 2008 of Iowa lawmakers showed that a majority of Iowa’s lawmakers —123 of 150 — said they believed marriage should only be between a man and a woman. It was unclear whether those lawmakers had enough votes to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Iowans have mixed feelings on the issue An Iowa Poll in February 2008 showed that most Iowans believed marriage should be only between one man and one woman. However, the poll also showed that a majority of Iowa adults supported the creation of civil unions that would grant benefits to gay couples similar to those offered to heterosexuals in marriage. In the poll, 62 percent of Iowans said they believed marriage should be only between a man and a woman. Thirty-two percent said they believed same-sex marriages should be allowed, while 6 percent were unsure. Iowans were split, however, on whether the state constitution should be changed to ban gay marriages. More than half of Iowans who responded to the poll supported civil unions for same-sex couples. About four in 10 Iowans opposed civil unions, and 4 percent were unsure. More reaction from elected officials, religious leaders Harkin, a Democrat, issued a written statement today that said: “my personal view has been that marriage is between a man and a woman, and I have voted in support of that concept. But I also fundamentally believe that same sex couples in a civil union should be entitled to all the basic legal protections and benefits of marriage.” “I know that this decision will be very hard for many to accept,” he added. “But I also know that it will provide many committed same sex couples and families important rights, as well as an important sense of recognition and belonging.” Religious leaders who support gay-marriage rights praised the ruling as an affirmation of equal rights for all Iowans. “The court’s ruling shows Iowa is a place that celebrates fairness and equality for all Iowans,” said Connie Ryan Terrell, executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. “It upholds the spirit of Iowa’s constitution, which clearly states each of us has the right to equal protection and recognition under the law.” The Rev. Mark Stringer said he cried when he heard of the decision. Stringer performed the only legal same-sex marriage in Iowa when he officiated a ceremony for Sean Fritz and Tim McQuillan in 2007. “It was such a sense of relief to me as someone who has cared about marriage equality,” Stringer said, adding that he is happy gay couple will have the same rights as he and his wife. “It’s really an astounding moment under our history,” he said. “What really excites me is that Iowa is the first in our area of the country. We are being a leader in civil rights, which will be part of our state’s history.” Polk County Attorney John Sarcone, whose office represented Brien, said has no plan to seek a new hearing on the case or appeal to the federal courts. Sarcone said the case involved “a substantial time and monetary commitment” for the county, although he did not know the dollar amount. Assistant County Attorney Roger Kuhle, who argued the case to the high court, traveled to England and Canada at county expense to take sworn statements, he said. “This was never anything personal,” Sarcone said. “We have a responsibility to defend the recorder. We defended the statute, and we had a fair and full hearing in the district court and the supreme court. Everything was done with dignity.” In Iowa? |
|
Pennsylvania: Police issue traffic ticket for over $37,000
BETHLEHEM, Pa. (AP) - A police captain in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley said it's the highest fine he's ever seen on a traffic ticket: $37,554.54. Bethlehem Police Capt. David Kravatz said the major violation was not getting the "super load" permit that was needed because the truck was hauling a 213,000-pound steel cylinder. Police cited the driver and truck owner.
Kravatz said the truck sat idle for almost three weeks after it tipped on March 12 because a new route, proper permits and a police escort took so long to plan. It was removed Wednesday. |
|
Nebraska: Man sentenced for firing crossbow at neighbor
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) - A 49-year-old man was sentenced to two -to four years in prison for firing a crossbow after a dispute about the breed of a neighbor's dog last June. The neighbor said it was a pit bull; Carlos Lupercio said a labrador. Lupercio went home, returned with a crossbow pistol and fired at his neighbor, just missing.
Police said alcohol fueled the incident. Lupercio had pleaded no contest to terroristic threats and animal neglect. The judge credited him for 282 days of jail time. Must not have guns in Nebraska? |
|
Quoted:
Iowa: Marriage no longer limited to one man, one woman The Iowa Supreme Court this morning upheld a Polk County judge’s 2007 ruling that marriage should not be limited to one man and one woman.
The ruling, viewed nationally and at home as a victory for the gay rights movement and a setback for social conservatives, means Iowa’s 5,800 gay couples can legally marry in Iowa beginning April 24. There are no residency rules for marriage in Iowa, so the rule would apply to any couple who wanted to travel to Iowa. Advertisement Shelly Wolfe and Melisa Keeton, who waited for word of the ruling outside the Polk County Recorder’s Office, immediately called their pastor anyway to make plans. “We’re going to make it legal,” Keeton, 31, of Des Moines said. Wolfe, 38, and Keeton, who is 21 weeks pregnant, went through a commitment ceremony two years ago. Their marriage certificate was among the 26 that were put on hold when Polk County Judge Robert Hanson’s decision to open the door for gay marriage was delayed until the high court could weigh in. Third state to allow same-sex marriages Today’s decision makes Iowa the first Midwestern state, and the third in the country, to allow same-sex marriages. Lambda Legal, a gay rights group, financed the court battle and represented six couples who challenged Iowa’s 10-year-old ban on gay marriage. Supreme Court Justice Mark Cady, who wrote the unanimous decision, at one point invoked the court’s first-ever decision, in 1839, which struck down slavery laws 17 years before the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of a slave owner to treat a person as property. Iowa’s gay marriage ban “is unconstitutional, because the county has been unable to identify a constitutionally adequate justification for excluding plaintiffs from the institution of civil marriage,” Cady wrote in the 69-page opinion that seemed to dismiss the concept of civil unions as an option for gay couples. “A new distinction based on sexual orientation would be equally suspect and difficult to square with the fundamental principles of equal protection embodied in our constitution,” Cady wrote. The ruling, however, also addressed what it called the “religious undercurrent propelling the same-sex marriage debate,” and said judges must remain outside the fray. Some Iowa religions are strongly opposed to same-sex marriages, the justices noted, while some support the notion. “Our constitution does not permit any branch of government to resolve these types of religious debates and entrusts to courts the task of ensuring that government avoids them,” the opinion says. The ruling explicitly does not affect “the freedom of a religious organization to define marriage it solemnizes as unions between a man and a woman,” the justices stressed. The case, Varnum vs. Brien, involved couples who sued Polk County Recorder Timothy Brien in 2005 after his office denied them marriage licenses. Hanson sided with the couples last year but then suspended his decision pending a high court ruling. “We won! It is unanimous!” Camilla Taylor of Lambda Legal exclaimed when the ruling was announced. “Today the dream becomes reality … and Iowa constitution’s promise of equality is fulfilled. Iowans have never waited for others to do the right thing. Iowa took its place in the vanguard of the civil rights struggle, and we couldn’t be more proud to be part of this.” Gov. Chet Culver e-mailed a response to reporters that said: “The decision released this morning by Supreme Court addresses a complicated and emotional issue, one on which Iowans have strong views and opinions on both sides. The next responsible step is to thoroughly review this decision, which I am doing with my legal counsel and the attorney general, before reacting to what it means for Iowa.” Richard Socarides, a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton on gay civil rights, said today’s decision could mean as much to gay couples outside Iowa. “I think it’s significant because Iowa is considered a Midwest state in the mainstream of American thought,” Socarides, a senior political assistant for Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin in the early 1990s, said Thursday. “Unlike states on the coasts, there’s nothing more American than Iowa. As they say during the presidential caucuses, ‘As Iowa goes, so goes the nation.’” Opponents, supporters react Opponents have long argued that allowing gay marriage would erode the institution. Some Iowa lawmakers, mostly Republicans, attempted last year to launch a constitutional amendment to specifically prohibit same-sex marriage. Such a change would require approval in consecutive legislative sessions and a public vote, which means a ban could not be imposed until at least 2012, unless lawmakers take up the issue in the next few weeks. Leaders this week said they had no plans to do so. Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley, R-Chariton, nonetheless called for an immediate move to amend the constitution. “The decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court today to allow gay marriage in Iowa is disappointing on many levels,” he said. I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman, and I am confident the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state. “Though the court has made their decision, I believe every Iowan should have a voice on this matter and that is why the Iowa Legislature should immediately act to pass a constitutional amendment that protects traditional marriage, keeps it as a sacred bond only between one man and one woman and gives every Iowan a chance to have their say through a vote of the people.” State Rep. Dave Heaton, R-Mount Pleasant, said he would support a constitutional amendment. However, he also believes lawmakers would have to work on parallel legislation that would grant civil unions or some sort of way to grant legal rights to same-sex couples. “I firmly believe marriage should be between a man and a women but at the same time, I believe we should address these issues,” Heaton said. “I would rather recognize a civil union than to have same-sex marriage.” Diane Thacker’s eyes filled with tears as the ruling were read to an crowd opposed to gay marriage that had gathered on the north side of the judicial building. “Sadness,” she whispered.. “But I’m prayerful and hopeful that God’s word will stand.” Thacker said she joined to group “because I believe in the marriage vow. I can’t see it any other way.” Democratic State Sen. Matt McCoy of Des Moines, saw the decision a different way. “I’m off the wall. I’m very pleased to be an Iowan,” said McCoy, who is openly gay. Voices from outside the state quickly took sides. The Iowa Supreme Court’s Web site was deluged with more than 1.5 million visitors as of 11 a.m., court spokesman Steve Davis said.. Doug Napier, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund in Arizona, said the Iowa Supreme Court “stepped out of its proper role in interpreting the law.” Napier said the legislature should place a constitutional amendment on a statewide ballot to let Iowans decide. The Defense of Marriage Act “was simple, it was settled, and overwhelming supported by Iowans,” Napier said. “There was simply no legitimate reason for the court to redefine marriage.” Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, a New Jersey group, said “once again, the most undemocratic branch of government is being used to advance an agenda the majority of Americans reject.” “Marriage means a husband and wife. That’s not discrimination, that’s common sense,” she said in a press release. “Even in states like Vermont, where they are pushing this issue through legislatures, gay marriage advocates are totally unwilling to let the people decide these issues directly.” Mark Kende, a constitutional law professor at Drake University, described the ruling as narrowly written and “very well reasoned,” and predicted it will have national, possibly international, influence. But it also could create new, inter-state legal battles, he said. Couples who flock to Iowa to marry may not have their marriage recognized in other states that prohibit same-sex marriage, he said. The decision also is limited to civil marriages performed in county buildings, he said. Meanwhile, Kate and Trish Varnum, whose surname will forever be attached to the historic decision, called it “a great day for Iowa.” At a press conference this morning, Kate Varnum said: “Good morning… and I’d like to introduce you to my fiancé. Today I am proud to be a lifelong Iowan.” Trish Varnum added: “It’s been a wonderful adventure, and we’re looking forward to the next wonderful adventure — as a married couple in Iowa.” A Des Moines Register poll in 2008 of Iowa lawmakers showed that a majority of Iowa’s lawmakers —123 of 150 — said they believed marriage should only be between a man and a woman. It was unclear whether those lawmakers had enough votes to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Iowans have mixed feelings on the issue An Iowa Poll in February 2008 showed that most Iowans believed marriage should be only between one man and one woman. However, the poll also showed that a majority of Iowa adults supported the creation of civil unions that would grant benefits to gay couples similar to those offered to heterosexuals in marriage. In the poll, 62 percent of Iowans said they believed marriage should be only between a man and a woman. Thirty-two percent said they believed same-sex marriages should be allowed, while 6 percent were unsure. Iowans were split, however, on whether the state constitution should be changed to ban gay marriages. More than half of Iowans who responded to the poll supported civil unions for same-sex couples. About four in 10 Iowans opposed civil unions, and 4 percent were unsure. More reaction from elected officials, religious leaders Harkin, a Democrat, issued a written statement today that said: “my personal view has been that marriage is between a man and a woman, and I have voted in support of that concept. But I also fundamentally believe that same sex couples in a civil union should be entitled to all the basic legal protections and benefits of marriage.” “I know that this decision will be very hard for many to accept,” he added. “But I also know that it will provide many committed same sex couples and families important rights, as well as an important sense of recognition and belonging.” Religious leaders who support gay-marriage rights praised the ruling as an affirmation of equal rights for all Iowans. “The court’s ruling shows Iowa is a place that celebrates fairness and equality for all Iowans,” said Connie Ryan Terrell, executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa. “It upholds the spirit of Iowa’s constitution, which clearly states each of us has the right to equal protection and recognition under the law.” The Rev. Mark Stringer said he cried when he heard of the decision. Stringer performed the only legal same-sex marriage in Iowa when he officiated a ceremony for Sean Fritz and Tim McQuillan in 2007. “It was such a sense of relief to me as someone who has cared about marriage equality,” Stringer said, adding that he is happy gay couple will have the same rights as he and his wife. “It’s really an astounding moment under our history,” he said. “What really excites me is that Iowa is the first in our area of the country. We are being a leader in civil rights, which will be part of our state’s history.” Polk County Attorney John Sarcone, whose office represented Brien, said has no plan to seek a new hearing on the case or appeal to the federal courts. Sarcone said the case involved “a substantial time and monetary commitment” for the county, although he did not know the dollar amount. Assistant County Attorney Roger Kuhle, who argued the case to the high court, traveled to England and Canada at county expense to take sworn statements, he said. “This was never anything personal,” Sarcone said. “We have a responsibility to defend the recorder. We defended the statute, and we had a fair and full hearing in the district court and the supreme court. Everything was done with dignity.” In Iowa? corncobs?? |
|
MPORTANT NOTICE: We cannot send this item to the following states:
Colorado––This item is prohibited under Colorado 18-12-109, Paragraph 7. Texas–– This item is prohibited under Texas 46, Penal Code Paragraphs Sec 46.01 and 46.08. Florida––This item is prohibited under Florida Statute 790.165 http://www.gggaz.com/index.php?id=237 |
|
I like the Iowa thread in GD. No one is calling for death,earthquakes,asteroids, pictures of dogs shitting on a map of Iowa.
Everyones just calmly discussing the pros and cons to gay marriage. No outrage at the influence that Iowa has on all the "free" states. |
|
Arizona: Man found guilty of assisting terrorist
A former U.S. Navy sailor stationed in the Middle East was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison on Friday for spying and providing material support to a terrorist organization.
Hassan Abujihaad, 33, was convicted last year by a federal jury in Connecticut of providing classified information to Azzam Publications in London, knowing that it would be used in a conspiracy to kill U.S. citizens. Abujihaad, formerly known as Paul Hall, was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona, on March 7, 2007. Prosecutors accused Azzam Publications of engaging in a conspiracy to provide material support and communications links to people involved in terrorism, including the disclosure of a U.S. Navy battle group's movements in 2001. Prosecutors said the spying occurred months after suicide bombers attacked the U.S.S. Cole, an American warship, during a refueling stop in Yemen in October 2000, killing 17 sailors and injuring dozens. Charges were brought in Connecticut because Azzam websites were hosted for a time on servers in the state. Prosecutors said Abujihaad sent e-mails to members of Azzam while he was on active duty in the Middle East and stationed aboard the U.S.S. Benfold, a ship in the battle group whose movements were disclosed. The e-mails were recovered in December 2003 when British police searched the London home of Babar Ahmad, a British citizen linked to Azzam. Aside from details of the warships' movements, a document Abujihaad is accused of leaking went on to discuss the group's perceived vulnerability to terrorist attack, prosecutors said. The e-mails were said to include discussions of videos Abujihaad ordered from Azzam that promoted violent holy war, or jihad, and a small donation he made to the organization. At the trial, prosecutors submitted evidence that Abujihaad's Navy e-mail account was saved in an Azzam online address book and also produced court-authorized wiretap recordings in which Abujihaad was accused of speaking in code to refer to jihad. Abujihaad described a force-protection briefing given aboard his ship, "voiced enmity" toward America and praised al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, prosecutors said. One e-mail lauded the Cole attack, which Abujihaad described as a "martyrdom operation" and advised Azzam that such tactics were working and taking their toll. Authorities said Azzam responded with an e-mail encouraging Abujihaad to "keep up ... the psychological warfare." Abujihaad was discharged from active duty from the U.S. Navy in January 2002, authorities said. |
|
Oregon: Gun Control: It's time for Oregon to Take the Lead
I doubt we'll ever see any change on gun control at the federal level, but is there anything that can be done statewide?
If so, I encourage a discussion of gun control legislation that could be passed by our State. Let's continue to be leaders in this country, let's make it 100 times harder for someone to buy a gun, and bullets, while we're at it. Oregon Legislature, there's still time left. Go ahead, make my day! In honor of our troll's rather short visit. |
|
Well this is news from California but it doesn't fit with the preconceived notions of the antburners. I drive past the military cemetery from time-to-time and it's a site. There's a medal of honor memorial there with quite a few holders buried there too. Might find the time to volunteer.
California: Roll call of 150,000 military dead part of Memorial Day It may be one of the longest roll calls ever read.
On May 16, as part of its Memorial Day observance, the Riverside National Cemetery will begin a roll call of every military veteran buried there. The list is more than 150,000 names long. Cemetery officials are looking for volunteers willing to read names. They figure if they can get about 330 volunteers, each one will read names for an hour. The plan is to read the names around the clock until the list is finished. Cemetery Director Gill Gallo said Jim Buchholz, a cemetery representative, suggested the idea. "I thought it was a wonderful opportunity," Gallo said. Two other national cemeteries –– Fort Bayard, N.M., and Dallas-Fort Worth –– have done roll calls of those interred within the past year, said National Cemetery Administration spokesman Michael Nacincik. But none has ever attempted a recitation of the entire list of buried veterans. Similar readings have been done at Ground Zero in New York for those killed in the Sept. 11 attacks and at the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington D.C. None of those come close to the Riverside National Cemetery's list of names. Active military personnel, veterans and their families have been buried here since Veterans Day, 1978. With an average of 35 burials a day, it is the busiest national cemetery in the country. Despite the daunting number of names and the time involved, Gallo said there has been strong support for the project. "We've got about 200 volunteers," he said. Jim Ruester, the cemetery's public affairs officer, said that while the goal is to find another 130 readers, he isn't going to turn anyone away. "If someone wants to do it, we'll find a way," Ruester said. "If we get 600, everyone will do half an hour." Joe Landaker of Big Bear City lost his son Jared, a Marine helicopter pilot, two years ago in Iraq. He called Ruester to volunteer shortly after hearing about the project. "I was very excited," said Landaker. "Because my son is there, I'm very passionate about it." Although he is scheduled to read for an hour on the second day of the project, long before his son's name would come up alphabetically, Landaker said he has been given approval to announce Jared's name. Ruester told Landaker, and others, that they will be allowed to make a brief dedication in honor of a loved one. Landaker said he will probably make that dedication at the end of his time slot. "As long as I get an opportunity to say his name," he said, "that's all that matters." A former Marine, serving two tours in Vietnam between 1964 and 1968, Landaker said he expects reading the names will stir some emotions. "I know some of those names I read will be people who lost their lives as a result of combat on the battlefield, like Jared," he said, "so that's going to be a little difficult." Richard Blackaby, 60, was in the Army from 1971 to 1985. A member of the Patriot Guard Riders, a motorcycle group that provides support services at military funerals, Blackaby said he liked the idea of a roll call when he heard about it and called to volunteer. "To me, it's just an honor," Blackaby said. Those buried at the cemetery, he said, "are my brothers and my sisters. Even though I've never met these people in person, I'd be proud to honor their family that way. It's the least I can do." Blackaby said his father is buried at the cemetery. If he doesn't get to read his father's name, he wants to be present when it's announced, he said. During the daylight hours, Ruester said the names will be announced from the amphitheater area by two readers at a time, alternating the calling of the names. At night, the readers will move to the flagpoles near the cemetery entrance, where the area remains lighted. Both he and Gallo said they hope this will become an annual event. "As long as there's an interest," Gallo said, "we will continue to do this." |
|
Limited marriage no longer? I'd say let the homosexual community get married. Let them be miserable like the rest of the heterosexual people who are married and dealing with nasty and costly divorces, vaginamony, pre-nup agreements, child support, child custody battles, nagging wives, spouse taking half of everything you own, etc! Whew! Glad I'm not married! Let 'em suffer too! ha!
|
|
Vermont: Becomes 4th State to Allow Gay Marriage
BOSTON (Reuters) - Vermont legalized gay marriage on Tuesday after lawmakers overrode a veto from the governor by a wafer-thin margin, making the New England state the fourth in the United States where gays can wed.
The vote, nine years after Vermont was first in the United States to adopt a same-sex civil-union law, also makes the tiny state of 624,000 people the first in the nation to introduce gay marriage through legislative action instead of the courts. "We've shown that truth and fairness and justice and love are more powerful than one man's veto pen," same-sex marriage advocate Beth Robinson said to cheers from supporters in the state capital of Montpelier after Vermont's House of Representatives passed the bill by a 100-49 vote. Known for picturesque foliage, quaint dairy farms and a counter-culture spirit, Vermont joins New England neighbors Connecticut and Massachusetts in allowing gay marriage. Iowa legalized gay marriage last week. Lawmakers in next-door New Hampshire and Maine are also considering bills to allow gay marriage, putting New England at the heart of a divisive national debate over the issue. Washington D.C. extended new rights to gay couples on Tuesday, too, with a unanimous City Council vote to recognize same-sex marriages performed outside the district. Some city lawmakers lauded the move as a prelude to legal same-sex marriage in the U.S. capital. OVERRIDES GOVERNOR'S VETO Vermont's bill, which becomes law on September 1, looked in peril after a 95-52 vote on Thursday in the Democratic-controlled House that was five votes short of the support needed to clear a veto from Republican Governor Jim Douglas. Douglas vetoed the bill on Monday, urging lawmakers to focus on the economy instead. Supporters needed two-thirds of the votes in each chamber to override his veto. They got that easily in the state Senate, which passed the bill 23-5 earlier on Tuesday. The vote came just four days after Iowa's Supreme Court struck down a decade-old law that barred gays from marrying. The surprise ruling, which made Iowa the first in the heartland to allow same-sex marriages, may have influenced some Vermont lawmakers to change their vote, gay marriage advocates said. California briefly recognized gay marriage until voters banned it in a referendum last year. The group Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, which helped to legalize gay marriage in Massachusetts and Connecticut, has set a goal of expanding such marriages to all New England states by 2012. Maine and New Hampshire already offer same-sex couples some form of legal recognition. Forty-three U.S. states have laws explicitly prohibiting gay marriage, including 29 with constitutional amendments restricting marriage to one man and one woman. (From Reuters) Recall the pages of the /b/tards calling for the death of us during the election cycle last year when prop 8 was on the ballot - calling for our deaths because we were going to be a gay marriage state. When San Francisco allowed them for a couple of months the pounding was relentless. In fairness Iowa's recent thread has been heated but nobody is calling for their deaths, for the state to be thrown into the ocean, or tossed out of the union. That only happens with states that are wealthy, and the weather is better. |
|
Vermont to allow kids to share child porn
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,514875,00.html MONTPELIER, Vt. — The Vermont Legislature is considering a bill that would legalize so-called "sexting" between teenagers.
Sexting refers to the exchange of explicit photos and videos via mobile phone. Under current laws, participants can be charged with child pornography, but lawmakers are considering a bill to legalize the consensual exchange of graphic images between two people 13 to 18 years old. Passing along such images to others would remain a crime. Supporters told The Burlington Free Press they don't want to condone the behavior but they don't think teenagers should be prosecuted as sex offenders for consensual conduct. The bill passed the state Senate earlier this month. The House Judiciary Committee will hear testimony on it this week. So upon the child's 18th birthday does the FBI kick in the door and arrest the young man for pictures that were legal the day before? |
|
Florida: Why is this gun in our neighborhoods?
St. Petersburg police Chief Chuck Harmon is right when he says that AR-15 semiautomatic rifles "don't belong on any city street in America." So why are they so easily available? Maybe because they are legal.
These military-style assault weapons are the kind that police say killed 8-year-old Paris Whitehead-Hamilton after more than 50 bullets pierced her Bartlett Park home early Sunday. These guns have no practical use for hunting, but they are highly efficient tools to dispatch enemies of a rival gang, which is apparently why Whitehead-Hamilton's home was targeted. The semiautomatic AR-15 is considered the hot weapon of choice for intimidation, murder and mayhem by drug gangs. Drug gangs use them. Legitimate hunters don't. So why are they legal? Ask members of Congress — if you can find them while they are cowering from the National Rifle Association. AR-15 rifles and similar semiautomatic assault weapons should be illegal. They were as recently as five years ago. Federal law barred the manufacture and sale of these assault weapons along with 18 other types and magazines holding more than 10 cartridges. In 2004, the 10-year-old ban automatically expired and Congress failed to re-enact it. The blame back then was on the Republican-controlled Congress and President George W. Bush. Lawmakers refused to advance an extension of the ban and Bush, who claimed to be willing to sign it, never urged Congress to enact one. Now also blame the Democrats, many of whom have worked to appease the NRA. Their strategy has been only marginally successful; gun shops report an increase in sales as conservative broadcasters spout baseless claims that President Barack Obama wants to take away all legally owned guns. As a candidate, Obama said he would seek to renew the ban on assault weapons. New Attorney General Eric Holder has repeated that promise. In the meantime, more of these guns flood into marketplace. Some are flowing across the border into Mexico, assisting in the militarization of the drug cartels. Some are sold legally through gun shops or at gun shows where purchasers don't necessarily undergo background checks. And some are finding their way into the hands of U.S. drug dealers and gangs after they are stolen from homes and pawn shops. It's true that the 10-year ban didn't eliminate the scourge of semiautomatic weapons. Manufacturers got around it by making small design modifications or incorporating pre-ban materials into their weapons. But the newer legislative versions of the ban would address some of these tricks. Federal officials are tracing the histories of the AR-15s police say were aimed at Paris' home. Gun advocates argue it is not the gun but the person who fires it that is the issue. And there remain legitimate questions about whether police could have known about these gun stashes in the Bartlett Park neighborhood sooner and moved more aggressively to enforce the laws on these streets before an 8-year-old was killed. But one thing is clear: Without these semiautomatic rifles, far fewer bullets would have been fired into that house on Preston Avenue S last Sunday morning. And a little girl would have had a better chance of staying alive. http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article991298.ece This did make the General Discussion where in 3 hours it got 22 replies. Oddly none of them call for the deaths of everyone in Florida. |
|
Quoted: That's what, like five six new anti-gun laws in New York in the last week to ten days ... not a peep on the General Discussion! It was posted yesterday and got six replies. http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=861062 Apparently, GD peeps don't care if NY passes gun control. |
|
I saw on the news that the governor of Connecticut signed a gay marriage law a few days ago, but I haven't seen anything on this board about it. I think it just updated existing law and that's why nobody is saying that everyone in Connecticut should die.
|
|
Quoted:
I saw on the news that the governor of Connecticut signed a gay marriage law a few days ago, but I haven't seen anything on this board about it. I think it just updated existing law and that's why nobody is saying that everyone in Connecticut should die. Only when the people's will get's over turned by the court the General Discussion riots. When we counter the over turn and vote against gay marriage ... nary a peep. It's very very odd as if they were jealous or for some other reason carried a bias against California. |
|
Oregon: Police say man sexually abused dog
GRESHAM, Ore. (AP) –– Gresham Police say a 20-year-old man has been arrested after investigators found photographs on the internet of him sexually abusing his dog.
According to police, Brandon Vongthongthrip was arrested Thursday for sexual assault of an animal and aggravated animal abuse. Police say Vongthongthrip told officers in an interview that he assaulted his 8-year-old pit bull hundreds of times. Police say the abuse occurred over a five year period. Vongthongthrip lives in Gresham with his mother and her fiancé. Multnomah County Animal Control says the dog was removed from the residence and will receive an examination and treatment. Authorities say Vongthongthrip was lodged at the Multnomah County Detention Center on $1.5 million bail. http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_050209_news_gresham_dog_abuse.120cc459.html |
|
Add Maine to the growing list of gay marriage states.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/06/maine.same.sex.marriage/ http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=870107 |
|
And another story from Oregon
Oregon Man Used an Electric Dog Collar to Shock His Kids "Because He Thought It Was Funny" Salem, Oregon resident Todd Marcum, whose name we will use repeatedly because of the nature of his crime, has been arrested for maliciously abusing his four young children with an electric dog collar.
According to police lieutenant Dave Okada, Marcum admitted that Marcum shocked his children, aged 3, 6, 8, and 9, "because he thought it was funny." Marcum told police that he would chase the 3-year-old boy around with the collar, making him cry at the thought of being shocked. Okada said that because of the boy's behavior, it is likely that the children were shocked more than once. The collars, being powered by a nine-volt battery, are not strong enough to actually injure a child (or a dog), but that's no excuse for this jackass's behavior. Marcum is currently in jail in Salem on four charges of first-degree criminal mistreatment, and we hope he stays there. Shocking I tell you, shocking! |
|
Delaware and New York Representatives Propose Gun Show Restrictions
On May 6, at a press conference with Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign, U.S. Representatives Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 2324––the "Gun Show Loophole Closing Act." Masquerading as reform, H.R. 2324 would impose severe bureaucratic restrictions aimed at shutting down gun shows.
The bill is essentially a re-introduction of the failed H.R. 96, introduced in the 110th Congress. Despite changes from the Lautenberg juvenile justice amendment of 1999, on which the measure is based, H.R. 2324 fails to address gun owners' most significant concerns. In several areas it is even more restrictive than past attempts to regulate gun shows. H.R. 2324 would create gun owner registration, massive new government red tape, and allow harassment of gun show organizers, vendors and attendees. The bill also ignores a glaring problem––multiple government studies prove gun shows are not a source of "crime guns." Anti-gun Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced a companion bill (S. 843) in the U.S. Senate in late April. Michael Castle (R-Del.) Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) You've just brought untold numbers of folks in the General Discussion calling for the death of all your state's populations. I'm off to moderate those treads now ... ain't gonna happen. There will be no name calling here just like with Bobby Rush of Illinois and his proposals - none. |
|
Louisiana: Assault Gun Ban Proposed.
On Tuesday, May 12 at 9:00am in room HCR-6, the House Committee on Administration of Criminal Justice will consider two very different bills pertaining to the Second Amendment.
House Bill 387 is this years attempt to pass an “assault weapons” ban that continues to show a striking resemblance to the failed federal Clinton Semi-automatic gun ban that expired in 2004. HB 387, sponsored by Cedric L. Richmond (D-101), would establish far-reaching restrictions on semi-automatic firearms (describing them as "assault weapons") and ammunition magazines. Essentially, HB387 would ban many semi-automatic firearms that Louisianans use for self-defense, hunting, and shooting competitions. HB 387 would also require current owners of such firearms to register their firearms with the State Police, obtain and renew a license annually to keep them, restrict how and where they may be used or transported, and allow the State Police to inspect private homes for compliance. Wow, that seems rather news worthy don't ya' think. Makes most of California's restrictions pale in comparison. There's going to be four or five threads over this rather grim news don't ya' think? |
|
Wisconsin: Police Can Track You With GPS Without Warrant or Probable Cause
Late last week, a Wisconsin court ruled that its state police can track whoever they wish, suspect or not, without a warrant or even probable cause, using GPS.
The judge himself wrote, "police are seemingly free to secretly track anyone's public movements with a GPS device." Unsurprisingly, police are calling the decision a landmark victory for public safety, while the ACLU is up in arms about the invasion of privacy rights. Essentially, the judge ruled that it's not a violation of the fourth amendment (search and seizure) because the information gained could have been collected in some other way (like surveillance). The ACLU is expected to make a big stink, and the case in which the ruling came down (a stalking case) is expected to see appeal, but it'd be a pretty scary precedent to set if the ruling is upheld. And Wisconsin court upholds GPS tracking by police MADISON, Wis. - Wisconsin police can attach GPS to cars to secretly track anybody's movements without obtaining search warrants, an appeals court ruled Thursday. However, the District 4 Court of Appeals said it was "more than a little troubled" by that conclusion and asked Wisconsin lawmakers to regulate GPS use to protect against abuse by police and private individuals. As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights –– even if the drivers aren't suspects. Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, Judge Paul Lundsten wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel based in Madison. That means "police are seemingly free to secretly track anyone's public movements with a GPS device," he wrote. One privacy advocate said the decision opened the door for greater government surveillance of citizens. Meanwhile, law enforcement officials called the decision a victory for public safety because tracking devices are an increasingly important tool in investigating criminal behavior. The ruling came in a 2003 case involving Michael Sveum, a Madison man who was under investigation for stalking. Police got a warrant to put a GPS on his car and secretly attached it while the vehicle was parked in Sveum's driveway. The device recorded his car's movements for five weeks before police retrieved it and downloaded the information. The information suggested Sveum was stalking the woman, who had gone to police earlier with suspicions. Police got a second warrant to search his car and home, found more evidence and arrested him. He was convicted of stalking and sentenced to prison. Sveum, 41, argued the tracking violated his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure. He argued the device followed him into areas out of public view, such as his garage. The court disagreed. The tracking did not violate constitutional protections because the device only gave police information that could have been obtained through visual surveillance, Lundsten wrote. Even though the device followed Sveum's car to private places, an officer tracking Sveum could have seen when his car entered or exited a garage, Lundsten reasoned. Attaching the device was not a violation, he wrote, because Sveum's driveway is a public place. "We discern no privacy interest protected by the Fourth Amendment that is invaded when police attach a device to the outside of a vehicle, as long as the information obtained is the same as could be gained by the use of other techniques that do not require a warrant," he wrote. Although police obtained a warrant in this case, it wasn't needed, he added. Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin, said using GPS to track someone's car goes beyond observing them in public and should require a warrant. "The idea that you can go and attach anything you want to somebody else's property without any court supervision, that's wrong," he said. "Without a warrant, they can do this on anybody they want." Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen's office, which argued in favor of the warrantless GPS tracking, praised the ruling but would not elaborate on its use in Wisconsin. David Banaszynski, president of the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association, said his department in the Milwaukee suburb of Shorewood does not use GPS. But other departments might use it to track drug dealers, burglars and stalkers, he said. A state law already requires the Department of Corrections to track the state's most dangerous sex offenders using GPS. The author of that law, Rep. Scott Suder, R-Abbotsford, said the decision shows "GPS tracking is an effective means of protecting public safety." So GPS tracking of our every move - how about reporting of traffic crimes as well - speeding would be the easy one but why not rolling through stop signs and lane changes? The judge ruled that the information could be gathered though other means like surveillance - so how long before cameras and microphones are put up in public places. There is software which can automatically track an object - a truck or a person - from camera-to-camera. Coordinate that with GPS data from your car or next your telephone ... the wet dream of big brother is reality. Thanks Wisconsin. |
|
Georgia candidate for governor admits to bestiality In Georgia, the Creators’ Rights Party candidate for governor is creating quite a stir by admitting to the fact that he’s had sex with a mule, men, and a watermelon, among other things. He has done these things even though he advocates a strongly anti-gay agenda. Here is an excerpt from the candidate, Neal Horsley, appearing on the Alan Colmes Show: “Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I…” AC: “You had sex with animals?” NH: “Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule.” AC: “I’m not so sure that that is so.” NH: “You didn’t grow up on a farm in Georgia, did you?” AC: “Are you suggesting that everybody who grows up on a farm in Georgia has a mule as a girlfriend?” NH: It has historically been the case. You people are so far removed from the reality… Welcome to domestic life on the farm…” Colmes said he thought there were a lot of people in the audience who grew up on farms, are living on farms now, raising kids on farms and “and I don’t think they are dating Elsie right now. You know what I’m saying?” Horsley said, “You experiment with anything that moves when you are growing up sexually. You’re naive. You know better than that… If it’s warm and it’s damp and it vibrates you might in fact have sex with it.” This one actually made the general discussion: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=874417 |
|
Ohio: Son's messy room leads to dad's 911 call
BEDFORD, Ohio - An Ohio man who argued with his grown son over a messy bedroom says he overreacted when he called 911.
Andrew Mizsak called authorities Thursday after his 28-year-old son — who's a school board member in the Cleveland suburb of Bedford — threw a plate of food across the kitchen table and made a fist at him when told to clean his room. The son, also named Andrew, lives in a room in his parents' basement. The father declined to press charges and told police he doesn't want to ruin his son's political career. The son, who also works as a political consultant, says he's lucky to be living in the house rent free. He also promises to keep his room clean. Clean up your room or I'm calling the police! |
|
Pennsylvania: Penn Hills Student With Eyebrow Trimmer Suspended
PENN HILLS (KDKA) ―
A Penn Hills Middle School student has been suspended for bringing an eyebrow trimmer to school. Under the Safe School Act, the district says the instrument is a razor and is considered dangerous. They suspended 15-year-old Taylor Ray-Jetter. The instrument was taken from Taylor's purse at school by security guards. She told them it was harmless but they called it a weapon. Taylor was immediately suspended and was expelled Wednesday. The punishment has her worried about her future. "I want to be an anesthesiologist –a nurse anesthetist and I feel like it's going to be on my record so it's going to dampen a lot of things I wanted to do for myself and I'm very upset," she said. "I did not come up there to hurt anybody." Taylor is a member of the basketball team, 9-year Girl Scout, a youth usher, a member of the choir and leadership team, among other activities. Those things are dangerous! |
|
Paul keep em' coming, just keep em' coming the articles that is. People from other states are so fixated at CA and just plain ignores what's going on in their backyard. |
|
Quoted:
Paul keep em' coming, just keep em' coming the articles that is. People from other states are so fixated at CA and just plain ignores what's going on in their backyard. Michigan: Antburner burned! LAKEVIEW, Mich. (AP) - A man who tried to burn an anthill in west-central Michigan started a blaze that damaged about an acre of land. The Daily News of Greenville reported the fire was set Tuesday afternoon in Lakeview, about 40 miles north-northeast of Grand Rapids. The flames quickly spread to a nearby wooded area.
Firefighters were on the scene about an hour and extinguished the blaze. Lakeview Fire Chief Clark Newell said the man who started the fire will be billed for the cost of the run. Note that the guy actually didn't hurt himself, only burned up an acre of land and got fined. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.