91
General Discussion / Happy Easter
« on: April 08, 2012, 11:40:48 PM »
Never Stop Posting
News:
Welcome aboard to Tallon Zek Times, mateys!!!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
92
General Discussion / While Obama's Thugs Raid Marijuana School, People Die
« on: April 04, 2012, 12:45:08 PM »
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/neill-franklin/oaksterdam-raid_b_1401116.html
As I sit and watch video after video of Monday's senseless federal raid of Oaksterdam University and other medical cannabis-related facilities managed by Richard Lee, the orchestrator of California's historic Proposition 19, a few serious concerns come to mind.
I noticed agents from at least three federal agencies: the Drug Enforcement Administration, the US Marshals Service and the Internal Revenue Service. I'm not talking about two agents here and a couple more there. There were several dozen federal agents spending their day on the scene.
Meanwhile, just blocks away, a deadly shooting was taking place. While federal agents were using a battering ram, a sledgehammer and power saws to break into a business that complies with state and local law and pays taxes, a gunman was murdering seven people at Oikos University, just three-tenths of a mile away.
As a retired police officer who wore the badge for over 30 years, this is not how I want our law enforcers to be spending their time. Rebecca Kaplan, a member of Oakland's City Council, said it best: "We have a serious gun violence problem in Oakland. If there are extra law enforcement resources available, they should be focused on fighting illegal guns and gun violence."
Beyond the human toll, what's the fiscal cost to taxpayers of this federal raid? For yesterday's multiple-hour operation, I would estimate at least $22,000 to $30,000 just in man-hours alone, for straight time and not overtime. The planning for this raid is even more draining upon man-hours, at least another $20,000. What about the many hours of investigation follow-up, which will most likely carry on for months if not longer? Throw in likely judicial cost and when all is said and done, we could be looking at a taxpayer price tag of $250,000 or more for a raid of Oaksterdam properties, which will result in... what?
Let's take a look at the results of this "successful" raid upon those who care for the sick. The first indicator of success is one of public safety. That's why we have such enforcement activity in the first place -- law enforcement and public safety should be synonymous. Will the raid make the community safer? Will there be fewer homicides? Oh, wait, there never were any on-site at Oaksterdam. They occur blocks away while we "the police" do our thing here. Will there now be fewer robberies in the neighborhood? Just the opposite: violent crime has been down in the area since Oaksterdam became operational. Well, maybe there will now be less "pot" being sold to kids in the neighborhood? Actually, expect that to increase now that any marijuana being sold in the area, post-raid, will be done by drug dealers on the corners who don't check ID. Oh yes, one more observation: Patients will no longer have access to safe medicine in safe environments. They will be forced to acquire cannabis from the dangerous illegal marketplace, lining the pockets of criminal organizations, gangs and thugs instead of universally supported local businesses that pay taxes and create jobs.
What about the success of this raid for the IRS? If their goal is to put more people out of work, causing less people to pay federal and state income taxes, call it success. If the goal is to have the state collect fewer taxes from cannabis sales, call it success. And as for the US Marshals Service, I'm still trying to figure out their role in this. Maybe it was to apprehend members of the Mexican cartel lurking in the classrooms of Oaksterdam U? Oh wait, this wasn't a cartel operation. It was a legal state and city business where employees were US citizens and members of a workers union.
It's clear to see that this raid will be far from any true success. This raid is undoubtedly counterproductive to public safety. More people out of work, a staple of business removed from the community, patients forced into the dangerous illegal marketplace, thousands if not millions of dollars back into the pockets of criminals, fewer tax dollars for the city of Oakland and homicides occurring just blocks away while so many law enforcement resources were being squandered raiding medical cannabis facilities.
Am I accusing law enforcement of being responsible for the seven murders just blocks away? No, but what I am saying is that they are misguided and focused upon those things that will not improve public safety. It is their duty and responsibility to prioritize things of public safety first, not politics.
Our commander in chief, President Obama, the head of the executive branch, carries that ultimate responsibility for the actions of federal law enforcement. Yesterday, he let the city of Oakland and this country down. At a time when 80 percent of the public supports medical marijuana, I can't for the life of me imagine how this fits into the president's reelection strategy. There's still time for President Obama to reign in the federal thugs who work for him and seem hell-bent on intimidating the medical cannabis industry out of existence, but the hour is growing late.
As I sit and watch video after video of Monday's senseless federal raid of Oaksterdam University and other medical cannabis-related facilities managed by Richard Lee, the orchestrator of California's historic Proposition 19, a few serious concerns come to mind.
I noticed agents from at least three federal agencies: the Drug Enforcement Administration, the US Marshals Service and the Internal Revenue Service. I'm not talking about two agents here and a couple more there. There were several dozen federal agents spending their day on the scene.
Meanwhile, just blocks away, a deadly shooting was taking place. While federal agents were using a battering ram, a sledgehammer and power saws to break into a business that complies with state and local law and pays taxes, a gunman was murdering seven people at Oikos University, just three-tenths of a mile away.
As a retired police officer who wore the badge for over 30 years, this is not how I want our law enforcers to be spending their time. Rebecca Kaplan, a member of Oakland's City Council, said it best: "We have a serious gun violence problem in Oakland. If there are extra law enforcement resources available, they should be focused on fighting illegal guns and gun violence."
Beyond the human toll, what's the fiscal cost to taxpayers of this federal raid? For yesterday's multiple-hour operation, I would estimate at least $22,000 to $30,000 just in man-hours alone, for straight time and not overtime. The planning for this raid is even more draining upon man-hours, at least another $20,000. What about the many hours of investigation follow-up, which will most likely carry on for months if not longer? Throw in likely judicial cost and when all is said and done, we could be looking at a taxpayer price tag of $250,000 or more for a raid of Oaksterdam properties, which will result in... what?
Let's take a look at the results of this "successful" raid upon those who care for the sick. The first indicator of success is one of public safety. That's why we have such enforcement activity in the first place -- law enforcement and public safety should be synonymous. Will the raid make the community safer? Will there be fewer homicides? Oh, wait, there never were any on-site at Oaksterdam. They occur blocks away while we "the police" do our thing here. Will there now be fewer robberies in the neighborhood? Just the opposite: violent crime has been down in the area since Oaksterdam became operational. Well, maybe there will now be less "pot" being sold to kids in the neighborhood? Actually, expect that to increase now that any marijuana being sold in the area, post-raid, will be done by drug dealers on the corners who don't check ID. Oh yes, one more observation: Patients will no longer have access to safe medicine in safe environments. They will be forced to acquire cannabis from the dangerous illegal marketplace, lining the pockets of criminal organizations, gangs and thugs instead of universally supported local businesses that pay taxes and create jobs.
What about the success of this raid for the IRS? If their goal is to put more people out of work, causing less people to pay federal and state income taxes, call it success. If the goal is to have the state collect fewer taxes from cannabis sales, call it success. And as for the US Marshals Service, I'm still trying to figure out their role in this. Maybe it was to apprehend members of the Mexican cartel lurking in the classrooms of Oaksterdam U? Oh wait, this wasn't a cartel operation. It was a legal state and city business where employees were US citizens and members of a workers union.
It's clear to see that this raid will be far from any true success. This raid is undoubtedly counterproductive to public safety. More people out of work, a staple of business removed from the community, patients forced into the dangerous illegal marketplace, thousands if not millions of dollars back into the pockets of criminals, fewer tax dollars for the city of Oakland and homicides occurring just blocks away while so many law enforcement resources were being squandered raiding medical cannabis facilities.
Am I accusing law enforcement of being responsible for the seven murders just blocks away? No, but what I am saying is that they are misguided and focused upon those things that will not improve public safety. It is their duty and responsibility to prioritize things of public safety first, not politics.
Our commander in chief, President Obama, the head of the executive branch, carries that ultimate responsibility for the actions of federal law enforcement. Yesterday, he let the city of Oakland and this country down. At a time when 80 percent of the public supports medical marijuana, I can't for the life of me imagine how this fits into the president's reelection strategy. There's still time for President Obama to reign in the federal thugs who work for him and seem hell-bent on intimidating the medical cannabis industry out of existence, but the hour is growing late.
93
LoLz / Anyone else experience this bug?
« on: March 31, 2012, 12:07:09 AM »
You auto-attack something and you "miss" like if you're blinded by Teemo's dart just randomly out of no where, but you have no debuff. Not only that, after you miss a couple of times, auto-attack stops on it's own (No, I wasn't pressing "S." I don't have stop bound to any of my keys, S does something completely different for me).
This has happened to me when I picked both Fiora and Twitch. And no I wasn't under leveled either.
It already cost me two games because of that.
This has happened to me when I picked both Fiora and Twitch. And no I wasn't under leveled either.
It already cost me two games because of that.
94
General Discussion / Hunger Games (movie)
« on: March 24, 2012, 06:57:55 PM »
Just finished watching it and I highly recommend it.
It's similar to the movie Gladiator, only in a post-apocalyptic setting.
| The Hunger Games Theatrical Trailer #2 | |
It's similar to the movie Gladiator, only in a post-apocalyptic setting.
95
General Discussion / Snow White and the Huntsman
« on: March 19, 2012, 10:44:35 AM »
It's suppose to be the original Brother's Grimm story, where else Disney changed a lot of it to make it less scary and more pleasant.
| Snow White and the Huntsman - First Trailer (HD) | |
96
General Discussion / The "horrors" of Amsterdam's coffee shops! (By LEAP)
« on: March 19, 2012, 10:30:35 AM »97
General Discussion / I think I'm done watching Tim Burton's movies.
« on: March 16, 2012, 04:58:02 AM »103
The Lord's House / What do you think Jesus said when he found out he had two daddies?
« on: February 28, 2012, 05:20:33 PM »
Just curious.
105
General Discussion / The Magic Ingredient (Science is awesome)
« on: February 26, 2012, 12:09:06 AM »108
General Discussion / Alex the Parrot's Posthumous Paper Shows His Mathematical Genius
« on: February 22, 2012, 09:22:58 PM »
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=alex-parrot-posthumous-paper-mathematical-genius
Alex and a chimpanzee named Sheba are the only nonhumans that have so far been shown to represent the numerical value of a summed set, an ability once thought to depend on language
Even in death, the world's most accomplished parrot continues to amaze. The final experiments involving Alex — an African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) trained to count objects — have just been published.
They show that Alex could accurately add together two Arabic numerals to a sum of eight and the total number of objects under three cups, putting his mathematical abilities on par with (and maybe beyond) those of chimpanzees and other non-human primates. The work appears in the journal Animal Cognition.
Alex gained world renown for his ability to learn and voice labels for dozens of different objects and concepts, such as colour, size and quantity. His primary trainer, Harvard University psychologist Irene Pepperberg, even reported that Alex understood a "zero-like" concept.
In early September 2007, Alex said to Pepperberg: "You be good. I love you. See you tomorrow." The next day, the 31-year-old parrot was found dead of what was determined to be a heart event, probably related to hardened arteries (see Farewell to a famous parrot).
Pepperberg and her colleagues had been testing Alex on a series of tasks pushing the limits of his mathematic prowess.
In previous work, the parrot gave hints that he could add objects. For instance, when presented with a tray containing four green, three red and five blue blocks and asked "what colour five?", Alex would respond "blue", suggesting that he had totted up the blocks of different colours.
But Pepperberg didn't get the idea to probe Alex's ability to add until she was testing whether another parrot named Griffin could equate sound sequences with quantities. She played two clicks, hoping Griffin would squawk "two", but he said nothing. After two more clicks, Alex, who was in the same room, chimed in with "four", two more clicks and Alex said "six".
"I just looked at him and said you want to do addition? Fine," Pepperberg says.
She discovered that Alex could accurately add two sets of objects, such as crackers or jelly beans, as long as the total was six or less. In related work, Alex learned to order correctly the Arabic numerals 1 through 8 (in the form of multicoloured refrigerator magnets). She says he then spontaneously learned to equate these symbols with the appropriate number of objects.
In the latest work, Pepperberg tested whether Alex could add the Arabic numerals and also whether he could sum three sets of objects totalling six or less. Both experiments were cut short when Alex died, but Pepperberg says that the parrot did better than chance in both experiments.
In 12 trials of the Arabic numeral addition task, when asked "How many total?" he indicated the correct sum nine times, demonstrating that 3 + 4 is 7, 4 + 2 is 6, 4 + 4 is 8 and so on. When presented sequentially with three sets of objects hidden under three cups and asked how many, Alex offered the correct answer eight out of ten times. He determined, for instance, that 1, 2 and one jelly beans adds up to four.
Pepperberg was able to complete only one round of each task before Alex died. She would have liked to present more combinations of numerals and objects to better determine how Alex was performing addition and to see whether some errors were more common than others. But the fact that the tasks were completely new to Alex reassures Pepperberg that his performance was genuine and not, for instance, a function of practice.
"I wish that Alex had lived longer and I think this is an important study because it showed what he could do and where he was going," she says.
Alex and a chimpanzee named Sheba are the only non-humans that have so far been shown to represent the numerical value of a summed set, an ability once thought to depend on language. "These brains can do, if not exactly what an adult human can do, really advanced behaviour that nobody expected them to be capable of," Pepperberg says.
Pepperberg doesn't have a video of Alex's final experiments, but this video shows Alex adding up objects under two cups.
Alex and a chimpanzee named Sheba are the only nonhumans that have so far been shown to represent the numerical value of a summed set, an ability once thought to depend on language
Even in death, the world's most accomplished parrot continues to amaze. The final experiments involving Alex — an African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) trained to count objects — have just been published.
They show that Alex could accurately add together two Arabic numerals to a sum of eight and the total number of objects under three cups, putting his mathematical abilities on par with (and maybe beyond) those of chimpanzees and other non-human primates. The work appears in the journal Animal Cognition.
Alex gained world renown for his ability to learn and voice labels for dozens of different objects and concepts, such as colour, size and quantity. His primary trainer, Harvard University psychologist Irene Pepperberg, even reported that Alex understood a "zero-like" concept.
In early September 2007, Alex said to Pepperberg: "You be good. I love you. See you tomorrow." The next day, the 31-year-old parrot was found dead of what was determined to be a heart event, probably related to hardened arteries (see Farewell to a famous parrot).
Pepperberg and her colleagues had been testing Alex on a series of tasks pushing the limits of his mathematic prowess.
In previous work, the parrot gave hints that he could add objects. For instance, when presented with a tray containing four green, three red and five blue blocks and asked "what colour five?", Alex would respond "blue", suggesting that he had totted up the blocks of different colours.
But Pepperberg didn't get the idea to probe Alex's ability to add until she was testing whether another parrot named Griffin could equate sound sequences with quantities. She played two clicks, hoping Griffin would squawk "two", but he said nothing. After two more clicks, Alex, who was in the same room, chimed in with "four", two more clicks and Alex said "six".
"I just looked at him and said you want to do addition? Fine," Pepperberg says.
She discovered that Alex could accurately add two sets of objects, such as crackers or jelly beans, as long as the total was six or less. In related work, Alex learned to order correctly the Arabic numerals 1 through 8 (in the form of multicoloured refrigerator magnets). She says he then spontaneously learned to equate these symbols with the appropriate number of objects.
In the latest work, Pepperberg tested whether Alex could add the Arabic numerals and also whether he could sum three sets of objects totalling six or less. Both experiments were cut short when Alex died, but Pepperberg says that the parrot did better than chance in both experiments.
In 12 trials of the Arabic numeral addition task, when asked "How many total?" he indicated the correct sum nine times, demonstrating that 3 + 4 is 7, 4 + 2 is 6, 4 + 4 is 8 and so on. When presented sequentially with three sets of objects hidden under three cups and asked how many, Alex offered the correct answer eight out of ten times. He determined, for instance, that 1, 2 and one jelly beans adds up to four.
Pepperberg was able to complete only one round of each task before Alex died. She would have liked to present more combinations of numerals and objects to better determine how Alex was performing addition and to see whether some errors were more common than others. But the fact that the tasks were completely new to Alex reassures Pepperberg that his performance was genuine and not, for instance, a function of practice.
"I wish that Alex had lived longer and I think this is an important study because it showed what he could do and where he was going," she says.
Alex and a chimpanzee named Sheba are the only non-humans that have so far been shown to represent the numerical value of a summed set, an ability once thought to depend on language. "These brains can do, if not exactly what an adult human can do, really advanced behaviour that nobody expected them to be capable of," Pepperberg says.
Pepperberg doesn't have a video of Alex's final experiments, but this video shows Alex adding up objects under two cups.
| Alex 3 again 2005.mpg | |
109
The Lord's House / What are you going to give up for Lent?
« on: February 21, 2012, 08:47:45 PM »
I'm going to give up Lent for Lent.
110
LoLz / Shyvana players represent
« on: February 18, 2012, 08:06:35 AM »
http://www.lolstatistics.com/champions/all/3/02-18-2012
Shyvana is the most popular champion for the high elo players.
Sup?
Too bad my elo is shit.
Shyvana is the most popular champion for the high elo players.
Sup?
Too bad my elo is shit.
113
The Lord's House / Weekly Erotic Bible verses
« on: February 16, 2012, 01:49:37 AM »
"There she had longed for her lovers. Their private parts seemed as big as those of donkeys. And their flow of semen appeared to be as much as that of horses."
- Ezekiel 23:20
- Ezekiel 23:20
114
LoLz / Awkwardly waiting in team arrangements
« on: February 15, 2012, 02:59:15 AM »
With skellyton.
115
General Discussion / VLT Takes Most Detailed Infrared Image of the Carina Nebula
« on: February 08, 2012, 09:39:48 PM »
http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1208/
ESO’s Very Large Telescope has delivered the most detailed infrared image of the Carina Nebula stellar nursery taken so far. Many previously hidden features, scattered across a spectacular celestial landscape of gas, dust and young stars, have emerged. This is one of the most dramatic images ever created by the VLT.
Deep in the heart of the southern Milky Way lies a stellar nursery called the Carina Nebula. It is about 7500 light-years from Earth in the constellation of Carina (The Keel) [1]. This cloud of glowing gas and dust is one of the closest incubators of very massive stars to the Earth and includes several of the brightest and heaviest stars known. One of them, the mysterious and highly unstable star Eta Carinae, was the second brightest star in the entire night sky for several years in the 1840s and is likely to explode as a supernova in the near future, by astronomical standards. The Carina Nebula is a perfect laboratory for astronomers studying the violent births and early lives of stars.
Although this nebula is spectacular in normal visible-light pictures (eso0905), many of its secrets are hidden behind thick clouds of dust. To penetrate this veil a European team of astronomers, led by Thomas Preibisch (University Observatory, Munich, Germany) has used the power of ESO’s Very Large Telescope along with an infrared-sensitive camera called HAWK-I [2].
Hundreds of individual images have been combined to create this picture, which is the most detailed infrared mosaic of the nebula ever taken and one of the most dramatic images ever created by the VLT. It shows not just the brilliant massive stars, but hundreds of thousands of much fainter stars [3] that were previously invisible.
The dazzling star Eta Carinae itself appears at the lower left of the new picture. It is surrounded by clouds of gas that are glowing under the onslaught of fierce ultraviolet radiation. Across the image there are also many compact blobs of dark material that remain opaque even in the infrared. These are the dusty cocoons in which new stars are forming.
Over the last few million years this region of the sky has formed large numbers of stars both individually and in clusters. The bright star cluster close to the centre of the picture is called Trumpler 14. Although this object is seen well in visible light, many more fainter stars can be seen in this infrared view. And towards the left side of the image a small concentration of stars that appear yellow can be seen. This grouping was seen for the first time in this new data from the VLT: these stars cannot be seen in visible light at all. This is just one of many new objects revealed for the first time in this spectacular panorama.
ESO’s Very Large Telescope has delivered the most detailed infrared image of the Carina Nebula stellar nursery taken so far. Many previously hidden features, scattered across a spectacular celestial landscape of gas, dust and young stars, have emerged. This is one of the most dramatic images ever created by the VLT.
Deep in the heart of the southern Milky Way lies a stellar nursery called the Carina Nebula. It is about 7500 light-years from Earth in the constellation of Carina (The Keel) [1]. This cloud of glowing gas and dust is one of the closest incubators of very massive stars to the Earth and includes several of the brightest and heaviest stars known. One of them, the mysterious and highly unstable star Eta Carinae, was the second brightest star in the entire night sky for several years in the 1840s and is likely to explode as a supernova in the near future, by astronomical standards. The Carina Nebula is a perfect laboratory for astronomers studying the violent births and early lives of stars.
Although this nebula is spectacular in normal visible-light pictures (eso0905), many of its secrets are hidden behind thick clouds of dust. To penetrate this veil a European team of astronomers, led by Thomas Preibisch (University Observatory, Munich, Germany) has used the power of ESO’s Very Large Telescope along with an infrared-sensitive camera called HAWK-I [2].
Hundreds of individual images have been combined to create this picture, which is the most detailed infrared mosaic of the nebula ever taken and one of the most dramatic images ever created by the VLT. It shows not just the brilliant massive stars, but hundreds of thousands of much fainter stars [3] that were previously invisible.
The dazzling star Eta Carinae itself appears at the lower left of the new picture. It is surrounded by clouds of gas that are glowing under the onslaught of fierce ultraviolet radiation. Across the image there are also many compact blobs of dark material that remain opaque even in the infrared. These are the dusty cocoons in which new stars are forming.
Over the last few million years this region of the sky has formed large numbers of stars both individually and in clusters. The bright star cluster close to the centre of the picture is called Trumpler 14. Although this object is seen well in visible light, many more fainter stars can be seen in this infrared view. And towards the left side of the image a small concentration of stars that appear yellow can be seen. This grouping was seen for the first time in this new data from the VLT: these stars cannot be seen in visible light at all. This is just one of many new objects revealed for the first time in this spectacular panorama.
117
General Discussion / Court Strikes Down Ban on Gay Marriage in California
« on: February 07, 2012, 07:11:50 PM »
Finally. Ban has been lifted.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/us/marriage-ban-violates-constitution-court-rules.html
LOS ANGELES – A federal appeals court panel ruled on Tuesday that a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage in California violated the Constitution, all but ensuring that the case will proceed to the United States Supreme Court.
The three-judge panel issued its ruling Tuesday morning in San Francisco, upholding a decision by Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who had been the chief judge of the Federal District Court of the Northern District of California but has since retired. The panel found that Proposition 8 – passed by California voters in November 2008 by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent – violated the equal protection rights of two same-sex couples that brought the suit. The proposition placed a specific prohibition in the State Constitution against marriage between two people of the same sex.
But the 2-1 decision was much more narrowly framed than the sweeping ruling of Judge Walker, who asserted that barring same-sex couples from marrying was a violation of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution. The two judges in this case stated explicitly they were not deciding whether there was a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry, instead ruling that the disparate treatment of couples under California law since the passage of Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
“Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different people differently,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the decision. “There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted.”
“All that Proposition 8 accomplished was to take away from same sex-couples the right to be granted marriage licenses and thus legally to use the designation ‘marriage,” the judge wrote, adding: “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gay men and lesbians in California."
Supporters of Proposition 8 can now ask for a larger panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to take up the case. But they could also choose instead to appeal the case directly to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a decision by the nation’s highest court on an issue that has roiled legal, political and cultural circles here and across the country.
The decision was the latest victory by same-sex marriage proponents here since losing at the polls four years ago and sets the stage for what backers of same-sex marriage said they were seeking: a fight before the Supreme Court.
“This is a huge day: The United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit, which represents nine states and certain territories, has decided that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional," said Theodore B. Olson, one of the attorneys representing the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which challenged Proposition 8. Speaking at a news conference here Tuesday morning, Mr. Olson said he was now “very confident” the Supreme Court would uphold this decision and nullify the voter initiative.
Proponents of Proposition 8 expressed disappointment at the decision, but said they were not surprised given the nature of the Ninth Circuit, which they view as a liberal court, and predicted it would fail before the Supreme Court.
“Ever since the beginning of this case, we’ve known that the battle to preserve traditional marriage will ultimately be won or lost not here, but rather in the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Andy Pugno, general counsel for the ProtectMarriage.com coalition, the official proponents of Proposition 8. “We will immediately appeal this misguided decision that disregards the will of more than 7 million Californians who voted to restore marriage as the unique union of only a man and woman. We are confident that the rights of California voters will finally win out.”
Mr. Pugno said he was still reviewing the decision and had not yet decided whether he would appeal directly to the Supreme Court or ask a larger panel of the Ninth circuit to review this decision.
The decision, though, was narrowly cast. The judges specifically avoided drawing any grand constitutional right to marriage, unlike the decision by Mr. Walker. Instead, they decided it on narrow grounds, referring to California law and its handling of the rights of domestic partnerships, in a way that might make it difficult to extend the logic of the ruling to other states.
"It's striking that the court - or at least the two judges - went out of their way to define the judgment as narrowly as they could," said Douglas NeJaime, an associate professor at Loyola law school in Los Angeles. He said the narrowness of the decision could influence the Supreme Court to take a road it often favors: issuing narrow and incremental decisions instead of sweeping ones.
"The laws of other states won't be directly impacted," he said.
The judges continued the stay on the decision that had been handed down by Judge Walker,meaning that it will have no immediate effect on the state of play here: Same-sex marriages will not be allowed to commence while the litigation continues.
The judges also upheld a lower-court decision rejecting an effort by supporters of the proposition to have Judge Walker’s decision struck down on the grounds that he is gay and involved in a long-term relationship with another man.
The decision is the latest turn in a tangled battle that has been fought out here for almost 12 years. In the spring of 2008, the California Supreme Court threw out a 2000 voter proposition barring same-sex marriage. Opponents immediately marshaled their forces to get Proposition 8 on the ballot and get it passed. That proposition amended the California Constitution to bar same-sex marriage. During the period when same-sex marriages were legal in the state, nearly 18,000 couples married; their unions remain in place.
Judge Walker ruled in August of 2010 that the ban on same-sex marriage violated the rights of gay men and lesbians. The decision on Tuesday upheld Judge Walker’s ban and reasoning.
The California battle has churned on even as other states – including New York – have moved to legalize same-sex marriage in their Legislatures. Yet it has continued to attract national attention, largely because of California’s size, the state’s large and politically active gay population and the unusual coalition of lawyers who represented the case in court: Mr. Olson, a Republican, and David Boies, a Democrat. Before this, the two lawyers were best known as opponents in the Supreme Court battle over the 2000 election returns in Florida that resulted in George W. Bush becoming president.
Some gay activists have been apprehensive about taking this case to the current Supreme Court, fearful that conservative justices could lead it to codify a ban against same-sex marriage. But Mr. Boies and Mr. Olson have argued that this court would be receptive to the arguments they are making and the changing climate in the land.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/us/marriage-ban-violates-constitution-court-rules.html
LOS ANGELES – A federal appeals court panel ruled on Tuesday that a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage in California violated the Constitution, all but ensuring that the case will proceed to the United States Supreme Court.
The three-judge panel issued its ruling Tuesday morning in San Francisco, upholding a decision by Judge Vaughn R. Walker, who had been the chief judge of the Federal District Court of the Northern District of California but has since retired. The panel found that Proposition 8 – passed by California voters in November 2008 by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent – violated the equal protection rights of two same-sex couples that brought the suit. The proposition placed a specific prohibition in the State Constitution against marriage between two people of the same sex.
But the 2-1 decision was much more narrowly framed than the sweeping ruling of Judge Walker, who asserted that barring same-sex couples from marrying was a violation of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitution. The two judges in this case stated explicitly they were not deciding whether there was a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry, instead ruling that the disparate treatment of couples under California law since the passage of Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
“Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different people differently,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the decision. “There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted.”
“All that Proposition 8 accomplished was to take away from same sex-couples the right to be granted marriage licenses and thus legally to use the designation ‘marriage,” the judge wrote, adding: “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gay men and lesbians in California."
Supporters of Proposition 8 can now ask for a larger panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to take up the case. But they could also choose instead to appeal the case directly to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a decision by the nation’s highest court on an issue that has roiled legal, political and cultural circles here and across the country.
The decision was the latest victory by same-sex marriage proponents here since losing at the polls four years ago and sets the stage for what backers of same-sex marriage said they were seeking: a fight before the Supreme Court.
“This is a huge day: The United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit, which represents nine states and certain territories, has decided that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional," said Theodore B. Olson, one of the attorneys representing the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which challenged Proposition 8. Speaking at a news conference here Tuesday morning, Mr. Olson said he was now “very confident” the Supreme Court would uphold this decision and nullify the voter initiative.
Proponents of Proposition 8 expressed disappointment at the decision, but said they were not surprised given the nature of the Ninth Circuit, which they view as a liberal court, and predicted it would fail before the Supreme Court.
“Ever since the beginning of this case, we’ve known that the battle to preserve traditional marriage will ultimately be won or lost not here, but rather in the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Andy Pugno, general counsel for the ProtectMarriage.com coalition, the official proponents of Proposition 8. “We will immediately appeal this misguided decision that disregards the will of more than 7 million Californians who voted to restore marriage as the unique union of only a man and woman. We are confident that the rights of California voters will finally win out.”
Mr. Pugno said he was still reviewing the decision and had not yet decided whether he would appeal directly to the Supreme Court or ask a larger panel of the Ninth circuit to review this decision.
The decision, though, was narrowly cast. The judges specifically avoided drawing any grand constitutional right to marriage, unlike the decision by Mr. Walker. Instead, they decided it on narrow grounds, referring to California law and its handling of the rights of domestic partnerships, in a way that might make it difficult to extend the logic of the ruling to other states.
"It's striking that the court - or at least the two judges - went out of their way to define the judgment as narrowly as they could," said Douglas NeJaime, an associate professor at Loyola law school in Los Angeles. He said the narrowness of the decision could influence the Supreme Court to take a road it often favors: issuing narrow and incremental decisions instead of sweeping ones.
"The laws of other states won't be directly impacted," he said.
The judges continued the stay on the decision that had been handed down by Judge Walker,meaning that it will have no immediate effect on the state of play here: Same-sex marriages will not be allowed to commence while the litigation continues.
The judges also upheld a lower-court decision rejecting an effort by supporters of the proposition to have Judge Walker’s decision struck down on the grounds that he is gay and involved in a long-term relationship with another man.
The decision is the latest turn in a tangled battle that has been fought out here for almost 12 years. In the spring of 2008, the California Supreme Court threw out a 2000 voter proposition barring same-sex marriage. Opponents immediately marshaled their forces to get Proposition 8 on the ballot and get it passed. That proposition amended the California Constitution to bar same-sex marriage. During the period when same-sex marriages were legal in the state, nearly 18,000 couples married; their unions remain in place.
Judge Walker ruled in August of 2010 that the ban on same-sex marriage violated the rights of gay men and lesbians. The decision on Tuesday upheld Judge Walker’s ban and reasoning.
The California battle has churned on even as other states – including New York – have moved to legalize same-sex marriage in their Legislatures. Yet it has continued to attract national attention, largely because of California’s size, the state’s large and politically active gay population and the unusual coalition of lawyers who represented the case in court: Mr. Olson, a Republican, and David Boies, a Democrat. Before this, the two lawyers were best known as opponents in the Supreme Court battle over the 2000 election returns in Florida that resulted in George W. Bush becoming president.
Some gay activists have been apprehensive about taking this case to the current Supreme Court, fearful that conservative justices could lead it to codify a ban against same-sex marriage. But Mr. Boies and Mr. Olson have argued that this court would be receptive to the arguments they are making and the changing climate in the land.
119
General Discussion / YouTube Ignores Cop's First Place Marijuana Legalization Video Question
« on: January 30, 2012, 07:47:58 PM »
http://copssaylegalize.blogspot.com/2012/01/youtube-ignores-cops-first-place.html
YouTube Ignores Cop's First Place Marijuana Legalization Video Question for Obama
Site Finds Time for Questions About Dancing, Late-Night Snacks and Playing Tennis
WASHINGTON, DC -- Today YouTube ignored a question advocating marijuana legalization from a retired LAPD deputy chief of police that won twice as many votes as any other video question in the White House's "Your Interview with the President" competition on the Google-owned site. They did, however, find the time to get the president on record about late night snacking, singing and dancing, celebrating wedding anniversaries and playing tennis.
Stephen Downing, the retired LAPD police officer and a board member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), had this to say about the site ignoring his question: "It's worse than silly that YouTube and Google would waste the time of the president and of the American people discussing things like midnight snacks and playing tennis when there is a much more pressing question on the minds of the people who took the time to participate in voting on submissions. A majority of Americans now support legalizing marijuana to de-fund cartels and gangs, lower incarceration and arrest rates and save scarce public resources, all while generating new much-needed tax revenue. The time to discuss this issue is now. We're tired of this serious public policy crisis being pushed aside or laughed off."
The top-voted video question from Downing is as follows: "Mr. President, my name is Stephen Downing, and I'm a retired deputy chief of police from the Los Angeles Police Department. From my 20 years of experience I have come to see our country’s drug policies as a failure and a complete waste of criminal justice resources. According to the Gallup Poll, the number of Americans who support legalizing and regulating marijuana now outnumbers those who support continuing prohibition. What do you say to this growing voter constituency that wants more changes to drug policy than you have delivered in your first term?" The question can be viewed at
Downing's question came in first place for video questions and ranked second out of all questions (with the overall top spot going to a text question about copyright infringement). Many of the other top-ranking questions were about marijuana policy or the failed "war on drugs," as has been the case every other time the White House has invited citizens to submit and vote on questions via the web.
Voting in the YouTube contest wrapped up Saturday at midnight EST. In addition to the top-voted marijuana and drug policy questions mentioned above, there were a number of other similar questions that received thousands of votes but were mysteriously deleted after being marked "inappropriate."
More information about the contest and the top-voted questions can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse. The Gallup poll referenced in Downing's winning question can be found online at http://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/Record-High-Americans-Favor-Legalizing-Marijuana.aspx
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) represents police, prosecutors, judges, FBI/DEA agents and others who want to legalize and regulate drugs after fighting on the front lines of the war on drugs and learning firsthand that prohibition only serves to worsen addiction and violence. More info at http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com.
YouTube Ignores Cop's First Place Marijuana Legalization Video Question for Obama
Site Finds Time for Questions About Dancing, Late-Night Snacks and Playing Tennis
WASHINGTON, DC -- Today YouTube ignored a question advocating marijuana legalization from a retired LAPD deputy chief of police that won twice as many votes as any other video question in the White House's "Your Interview with the President" competition on the Google-owned site. They did, however, find the time to get the president on record about late night snacking, singing and dancing, celebrating wedding anniversaries and playing tennis.
Stephen Downing, the retired LAPD police officer and a board member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), had this to say about the site ignoring his question: "It's worse than silly that YouTube and Google would waste the time of the president and of the American people discussing things like midnight snacks and playing tennis when there is a much more pressing question on the minds of the people who took the time to participate in voting on submissions. A majority of Americans now support legalizing marijuana to de-fund cartels and gangs, lower incarceration and arrest rates and save scarce public resources, all while generating new much-needed tax revenue. The time to discuss this issue is now. We're tired of this serious public policy crisis being pushed aside or laughed off."
The top-voted video question from Downing is as follows: "Mr. President, my name is Stephen Downing, and I'm a retired deputy chief of police from the Los Angeles Police Department. From my 20 years of experience I have come to see our country’s drug policies as a failure and a complete waste of criminal justice resources. According to the Gallup Poll, the number of Americans who support legalizing and regulating marijuana now outnumbers those who support continuing prohibition. What do you say to this growing voter constituency that wants more changes to drug policy than you have delivered in your first term?" The question can be viewed at
Downing's question came in first place for video questions and ranked second out of all questions (with the overall top spot going to a text question about copyright infringement). Many of the other top-ranking questions were about marijuana policy or the failed "war on drugs," as has been the case every other time the White House has invited citizens to submit and vote on questions via the web.
Voting in the YouTube contest wrapped up Saturday at midnight EST. In addition to the top-voted marijuana and drug policy questions mentioned above, there were a number of other similar questions that received thousands of votes but were mysteriously deleted after being marked "inappropriate."
More information about the contest and the top-voted questions can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse. The Gallup poll referenced in Downing's winning question can be found online at http://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/Record-High-Americans-Favor-Legalizing-Marijuana.aspx
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) represents police, prosecutors, judges, FBI/DEA agents and others who want to legalize and regulate drugs after fighting on the front lines of the war on drugs and learning firsthand that prohibition only serves to worsen addiction and violence. More info at http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com.
120
General Discussion / LAPD needs your help (Against Drug Prohibition)
« on: January 27, 2012, 11:10:58 PM »
President Obama is taking questions from YouTube again, and LEAP has a marijuana question for him. Please go to http://www.youtube.com/whitehouse and search for "LAPD" in the search box on the right to find our question. Then vote it up and ask your friends to do the same. Spread the word.