Muda69

Colorado School Suspends 17-Year-Old After She Posted a Non-Threatening Gun Photo With Her Older Brother: https://reason.com/2019/10/24/colorado-school-suspends-17-year-old-after-she-posted-a-non-threatening-gun-photo-with-her-older-brother/

Federal Prosecutors Are Punishing Actor Lori Loughlin for Exercising Her Right To Defend Herself: https://reason.com/2019/10/24/federal-prosecutors-are-punishing-actor-lori-loughlin-for-exercising-her-right-to-defend-herself/ Plea deals aren’t about mercy these days. They’re about intimidating defendants into giving up the right to a trial. Prosecutors are only now insisting on holding the defendants "fully accountable" because these parents are insisting on exercising their constitutional right to a fair trial. Loughlin and the other defendants would not have received these additional charges if they'd accepted plea deals. One of the parents told the judge Monday that the Justice Department told them it would not seek any further punishment if the parent accepted the deal. This behavior by federal prosecutors is both common and a frustrating subversion of the criminal justice process. Despite our constitutional right to a trial, a full 97 percent of all criminal cases are resolved with plea deals, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL). And when you look at what's happening with Loughlin, it's easy to see why. Actor Felicity Huffman pleaded guilty to mail fraud and was sentenced to 14 days in prison, a year of supervised release, 250 hours of community service, and a $30,000 fine. By adding charges against Loughlin (and other parents) of conspiracy to commit bribery and money laundering, prosecutors are adding months and even years of additional prison time in the event the parents are convicted. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts boasts that these new charges carry prison sentences of up to 25 years. There is absolutely no way any of these people will receive sentences that harsh, but it's abundantly clear that the prosecutors want to punish them not just for the offenses they are alleged to have committed, but also for insisting on going to trial. What's more, the new indictments include asset forfeiture requests should the defendants be convicted. The NACDL doesn't publicly comment on specific cases, but last year the organization published a report about this trend, which it and other criminal justice reform groups have long called "the Trial Penalty." The NACDL report warns that Americans are essentially losing their Sixth Amendment right to a trial because of the massive charging disparity between the offenses prosecutors offer in a plea deal and the offenses they take to trial. The report notes that "the mere decision to charge triggers a domino effect making a guilty plea the only rational choice in most cases. And as trials and hearings decline, so too does government accountability. Government mistakes and misconduct are rarely uncovered, or are simply resolved in a more favorable plea bargain." Studies of exonerations have determined that hundreds of people who serve prison time for crimes that it later turns out they didn't commit had pleaded guilty in the hopes of less punishment. What's happening to Loughlin and these other parents happens to hundreds of poorer, less connected defendants every day across the country. But we should be careful not to see it as karmic "balance" that a small group of wealthy, privileged parents is now getting railroaded by the system. It's not more "fair" when prosecutorial overreach affects rich people. It is, however, an excellent opportunity to talk about the fact that our criminal justice system punishes defendants not just for breaking the law, but also for exercising their constitutional rights. I wonder if this kind of despicable, lazy behavior by federal prosecutors can somehow be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, and stopped.

I have to buy groceries this week. Sorry.

Ahh, nothing like a government bureaucracy to makes things confusing. Anyway I assume then you are talking about this?: http://www.nevadatreasurer.gov/uploadedFiles/nevadatreasurergov/content/GGMS/Forms/Doc-FactSheet.pdf

And what exactly is your relationship to them?

Why 'Free College' Is a Terrible Idea: https://reason.com/video/why-free-college-is-a-terrible-idea/

So that is for two, count them two, students each year who are majoring in elementary or secondary education with the intent of teaching in Nevada. Nice example for a national program, Dante.

This Indiana Data Center? https://inddc.com/

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/education/2019/10/24/woman-says-roncalli-fired-her-supporting-employees-fired-over-same-sex-marriages/2387527001/ The lawsuits just keep piling up against the Archdiocese of Indianapolis.

Using what mechanism, Dante? "Free College" for all courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer?

I like the Big Mac without the thousand island dress.. err "Special Sauce", add mayo. So texting while operating a motor vehicle is legal in Nevada?

https://gizmodo.com/google-confirms-achieving-quantum-supremacy-1839288099 I for one will welcome our Quantum Computer overlords...................

?

https://reason.com/2019/10/23/how-to-fix-the-student-loan-mess/ Agreed. We need to get the federal government out of the student loan business entirely. It's been nothing but a huge bust.

The fries at BK are gross. I refuse to eat them. But the one in Frankfort doesn't have a self-service kiosk, just that stupid all-in-one coke machine.

Guess we will agree to disagree. I've been in a situation where the kiosk crashed in the middle of taking my order so I had to actually, you know, talk to another human being.

In my experience, not really. I can usually place my order and pay faster with a human being manning a register than I can having to navigate those self-service kiosks, especially if you deviate from their standard offerings (change condiments, ask for extra of this, minus that, etc.).

From what I can dig up, no. But some very small groups of target employees have voted to unionize over the last several years. Case in point: https://gawker.com/target-which-hates-unions-gets-its-first-union-1731620945. But this is kind of a hollow victory because since that vote Target has sold it's pharmacy business to CVS.

Wonder if schools with an effective zero percent chance of winning a section should even be allowed in the playoff to begin with?

So competitive balance among Indiana football playing high schools should be discouraged because they are not the NFL?

Seattle Public Schools Will Start Teaching That Math Is Oppressive: https://reason.com/2019/10/22/seattle-math-oppressive-cultural-woke/ The proposal has drawn fire from the right. The American Conservative's Rod Dreher referred to it derisively as "woke math," writing: That's a hyperbolic statement. But having read over the proposed framework, I have to say that it does seem fairly terrible. It's chock full of social justice jargon that sounds smart but is actually vapid. What does it mean to decode mathematical "beauty" or "identify how the development of mathematics has been erased from learning in school?" (Has it been erased? That seems like a problem for history class.) The guidance says it will "re-humanize mathematics through experiential learning" and facilitate learning "independently and interdependently." That's a fancy way of saying almost nothing at all. The guidance also includes some extremely political, simplistic talking points that might be popular among activist academics but are in reality somewhat dubious. This is verbatim from the proposal: Students will be able to "identify the inherent inequities of the standardized testing system used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color," "explain how math has been used to exploit natural resources," and "explain how math dictates economic oppression." Each of these statements are debatable, but they are not being presented as such. It would be one thing to hold a class discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of standardized testing, but what's happening here is that students are being trained to reject standardized testing due to its "inherent inequity," which is asserted as some kind of proven fact. If math is too daunting for students, a better option would be for schools to stop making it mandatory. Giving parents—and even students themselves—more choice and control over their own educational experience is always a plus, and few people actually need to understand higher mathematics to function in society. Infusing the existing math curriculum with a bunch of unfounded progressive assumptions about cultural appropriation is a silly approach.

Sounds like good facilities for private charter schools.

I lives in northern Michigan, but not the UP, for over 8 years. I know somewhat about winters are like.

https://www.nps.gov/grsm/index.htm Truth be told, I could probably lose myself here for a long while. Just not in the heat of the summer.

Meh, they can just take their sleeping bags to the rubber rooms spread around the city. After all they get paid to sit in them and do nothing.