http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/oklahoma-halt-executions-supreme-court-drug-review-28489823
Oklahoma may put three executions of prisoners on hold until the Supreme Court rules on a case concerning the drugs used to put criminals to death. Lethal injection is a three stage process that uses three different drugs to first sedate the prisoner, then paralyze them, and finally stop their heart. The issue is with the sedative, midazolam. The three inmates whose execution may be halted, along with a fourth who has since been put to death, sued the state over concerns that the sedative would not prevent their suffering during the procedure. These concerned were raised after Oklahoma used midazolam for the first time in an execution which ended with the prisoner dying painfully 43 minutes after the lethal drugs were administered. The government is still investigating the drug, so any executions may be halted until a substitute is found.
I could get into whether death or a life sentence is worse and whether or not death is actually too good for our worst criminals, but that's not what this is about. I think people who do get lethal injection shouldn't have to suffer horribly during the procedure. We're not barbarians. This is not the medieval ages where people were killed by being drawn and quartered. If we kill people in cruel and awful ways, we're no better than the criminals. We are no more humane. Some people might see criminals suffering as justice or something they deserve, but then we're getting into revenge which doesn't solve the problem. Hopefully the Supreme Court will get this fixed if there is, in fact, a problem with the drugs.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Thursday, January 22, 2015
*slams head into keyboard* I'm in.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2015/01/14/no-one-at-homeland-security-is-addressing-cyber-threats-for-government-buildings/
According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Department of Homeland Security is totally unprepared for cyberattacks on vital government buildings and networks. There are no strategies for fending off cyber terrorists, hackers, or 35 year olds with laptops, a misplaced sense of social justice, and a little too much Mountain Dew in their systems. Ok, maybe I made that last one up, but the fact of the matter remains that the DoHS has no clue what they're doing when it comes to threats from hackers. Evidently not only are their computer networks vulnerable, but things like elevators, heating and cooling systems, and other electrical things in federal buildings are also open to cyber attacks, and no one is doing anything about it.
Admittedly making a building a little too hot or stopping an elevator isn't a great strategy if you want to cripple a country, so I don't think we're going to see hackers getting into that any time soon, but given that government social media accounts and companies like Sony have all recently been hacked by our enemies, I think that cyberattacks are definitely going to become a problem in the future. While the information age is still a baby at this point, technology has been around long enough that Homeland Security should have some idea of what they're doing. Even if it's really simple, at least it would be a plan, and they don't even have that. It's pretty pathetic.
According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Department of Homeland Security is totally unprepared for cyberattacks on vital government buildings and networks. There are no strategies for fending off cyber terrorists, hackers, or 35 year olds with laptops, a misplaced sense of social justice, and a little too much Mountain Dew in their systems. Ok, maybe I made that last one up, but the fact of the matter remains that the DoHS has no clue what they're doing when it comes to threats from hackers. Evidently not only are their computer networks vulnerable, but things like elevators, heating and cooling systems, and other electrical things in federal buildings are also open to cyber attacks, and no one is doing anything about it.
Admittedly making a building a little too hot or stopping an elevator isn't a great strategy if you want to cripple a country, so I don't think we're going to see hackers getting into that any time soon, but given that government social media accounts and companies like Sony have all recently been hacked by our enemies, I think that cyberattacks are definitely going to become a problem in the future. While the information age is still a baby at this point, technology has been around long enough that Homeland Security should have some idea of what they're doing. Even if it's really simple, at least it would be a plan, and they don't even have that. It's pretty pathetic.
Wednesday, January 7, 2015
A vote of no confidence
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/day-old-congress-hated-ever
America isn't interested in giving second chances. According to a survey done by the University of Minnesota, Congress' approval rating is at 8%. Only 8% of the country likes Congress, and it's only the first day that the 114th Congress is in session. And to make matters worse, one of the senators, Joni Ernst (a Republican from Iowa) said this: "If you ask somebody to pick a number between one and ten, eight is a pretty high number. So it's all good." After that, the approval rating dropped to 4%.
Where do I begin? It's bad enough that this is the most hated Congress in history, but Ernst's comment has pretty much made me lose all faith in humanity. People, this lady was just sworn into office. This lady is part of the majority party in the most powerful house in Congress. This lady is helping run our country. It's official. I'm moving to Australia.
America isn't interested in giving second chances. According to a survey done by the University of Minnesota, Congress' approval rating is at 8%. Only 8% of the country likes Congress, and it's only the first day that the 114th Congress is in session. And to make matters worse, one of the senators, Joni Ernst (a Republican from Iowa) said this: "If you ask somebody to pick a number between one and ten, eight is a pretty high number. So it's all good." After that, the approval rating dropped to 4%.
Where do I begin? It's bad enough that this is the most hated Congress in history, but Ernst's comment has pretty much made me lose all faith in humanity. People, this lady was just sworn into office. This lady is part of the majority party in the most powerful house in Congress. This lady is helping run our country. It's official. I'm moving to Australia.
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Back to Davy Jone's Locker...for now
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/pirate-bay-file-sharing-website-sweden-police-raid/story?id=27498033
The popular site for illegally downloading media such as music, movies, and TV shows, Pirate Bay, has been taken down by a raid on the servers in Stockholm, Sweden. The website has completely disappeared from the Internet, marking the biggest raid on the site in recent history. Pirate Bay's original co-administrator, who is no longer involved, expressed indifference and hopes that if the site resurrects, it'll be better than it was before as he expressed disappointment in what it had become. As for the site's eventual fate, no one has any delusions that it'll stay sunk for long. Administrators are already formulating new ways to avoid authorities and bring the site up again.
I don't have any strong opinions on the topic of pirated media, but I don't think it's as big of a deal as authorities think it is. The creators of the media still get a good amount of money from their work, and if it reaches a wider audience their work will be promoted. Among those who see it in an illegal setting will be people who like it well enough to support it with their money by legally buying merchandise or future media. The temporary destruction of Pirate Bay won't change the illegal media trade in the long run. After all, who doesn't like free stuff?
The popular site for illegally downloading media such as music, movies, and TV shows, Pirate Bay, has been taken down by a raid on the servers in Stockholm, Sweden. The website has completely disappeared from the Internet, marking the biggest raid on the site in recent history. Pirate Bay's original co-administrator, who is no longer involved, expressed indifference and hopes that if the site resurrects, it'll be better than it was before as he expressed disappointment in what it had become. As for the site's eventual fate, no one has any delusions that it'll stay sunk for long. Administrators are already formulating new ways to avoid authorities and bring the site up again.
I don't have any strong opinions on the topic of pirated media, but I don't think it's as big of a deal as authorities think it is. The creators of the media still get a good amount of money from their work, and if it reaches a wider audience their work will be promoted. Among those who see it in an illegal setting will be people who like it well enough to support it with their money by legally buying merchandise or future media. The temporary destruction of Pirate Bay won't change the illegal media trade in the long run. After all, who doesn't like free stuff?
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Our prison system is broken
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-execution-stayed-amid-mental-health-dispute/
The execution of convicted murderer Scott Panetti has been halted on an appeal of mental illness. Panetti's lawyers say he is too delusional to qualify for capital punishment and have been trying to get Panetti a new competency test. There have also been other appeals to the Supreme Court, saying that mentally ill people cannot be executed if they cannot understand why they are being punished. Critics have said that Panetti's mental state has not change much since he was given his last competency test, and no court has found him insane. In 2002 , justices prohibited the execution of the mentally impaired, but 5 years later they said the mentally ill could be put to death if they understood why they were being punished. Panetti was sentenced and convicted in 1995 for the murder of his estranged wife's parents. In court he was his own lawyer, dressed in a purple cowboy outfit, and attempted to subpoena over 200 witnesses including Jesus and the pope. He also claims that Satan is working through the justice system to try and get him executed for preaching the Gospel.
I think that if this guy really is mentally ill and does not understand completely why he's being punished, then he shouldn't be given the death penalty. Capital punishment, I think, should really only be reserved for really dangerous killers who cannot be redeemed. I'm a huge believer in trying to reform prisoners and give them the help they need so that they don't resort to crime once they're released. I don't think that locking people up and treating them poorly is going to make anything better, especially in the case of mentally ill prisoners. If a prisoner has a broken leg or a heart problem when they come in, the prison will take them to a medical facility to treat that. Why isn't is the same for the mentally ill? Why are they locked up and punished for things they can't control? We should be helping these people, not condemning them to death.
The execution of convicted murderer Scott Panetti has been halted on an appeal of mental illness. Panetti's lawyers say he is too delusional to qualify for capital punishment and have been trying to get Panetti a new competency test. There have also been other appeals to the Supreme Court, saying that mentally ill people cannot be executed if they cannot understand why they are being punished. Critics have said that Panetti's mental state has not change much since he was given his last competency test, and no court has found him insane. In 2002 , justices prohibited the execution of the mentally impaired, but 5 years later they said the mentally ill could be put to death if they understood why they were being punished. Panetti was sentenced and convicted in 1995 for the murder of his estranged wife's parents. In court he was his own lawyer, dressed in a purple cowboy outfit, and attempted to subpoena over 200 witnesses including Jesus and the pope. He also claims that Satan is working through the justice system to try and get him executed for preaching the Gospel.
I think that if this guy really is mentally ill and does not understand completely why he's being punished, then he shouldn't be given the death penalty. Capital punishment, I think, should really only be reserved for really dangerous killers who cannot be redeemed. I'm a huge believer in trying to reform prisoners and give them the help they need so that they don't resort to crime once they're released. I don't think that locking people up and treating them poorly is going to make anything better, especially in the case of mentally ill prisoners. If a prisoner has a broken leg or a heart problem when they come in, the prison will take them to a medical facility to treat that. Why isn't is the same for the mentally ill? Why are they locked up and punished for things they can't control? We should be helping these people, not condemning them to death.
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
The age old question continues: where does life begin?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/04/personhood-colorado_n_6104120.html
Earlier this month Colorado voters rejected a measure that would have granted developing fetuses personhood rights under the 14th amendment. Consequences of this amendment, had it passed, would include harsher punishments for people who cause the death of a pregnant woman's baby and the criminalization of women who get abortions. It would also call into question the legality of in vitro fertilization and certain kinds of contraception. This is the third time that this particular bill has been rejected in Colorado, and other states such as Mississippi and South Dakota have also rejected similar bills in the past.
While I am no supporter of abortion, I am a supporter of a woman's right to make her own decisions about her body and her life in general. I don't like the fact that this bill would criminalize women who get abortions and possibly make illegal in vitro fertilization and certain contraception. Women who find themselves in such a situation that they feel an abortion is their only way out should under no circumstances be treated with judgement or hate. These women likely recognize the gravity of their actions, and there is no need for people to make them feel any worse about it. These women must be treated with love and support so that they don't feel alone or trapped, as feelings like this very well may have caused them to get an abortion in the first place.
Earlier this month Colorado voters rejected a measure that would have granted developing fetuses personhood rights under the 14th amendment. Consequences of this amendment, had it passed, would include harsher punishments for people who cause the death of a pregnant woman's baby and the criminalization of women who get abortions. It would also call into question the legality of in vitro fertilization and certain kinds of contraception. This is the third time that this particular bill has been rejected in Colorado, and other states such as Mississippi and South Dakota have also rejected similar bills in the past.
While I am no supporter of abortion, I am a supporter of a woman's right to make her own decisions about her body and her life in general. I don't like the fact that this bill would criminalize women who get abortions and possibly make illegal in vitro fertilization and certain contraception. Women who find themselves in such a situation that they feel an abortion is their only way out should under no circumstances be treated with judgement or hate. These women likely recognize the gravity of their actions, and there is no need for people to make them feel any worse about it. These women must be treated with love and support so that they don't feel alone or trapped, as feelings like this very well may have caused them to get an abortion in the first place.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Protection of election integrity or discrimination?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/us/supreme-court-upholds-texas-voter-id-law.html?_r=0
On October 18th, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas could use its stricter voter ID laws for the November elections. These ID laws state that in order to vote, citizens must present a photo ID. While that doesn't seem too bad, opponents of the ruling state that the court's action could deny the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of otherwise eligible voters. Opponents also argue that a disproportionate number of these voters who will be barred from voting by the new law are African American or Hispanic. The process for obtaining a Texas state issued ID is also difficult as travel times to agencies issuing IDs can be upwards of 3 hours for some people.
I honestly don't know what to think about this. It seems ridiculous that racial discrimination at the polls could still be a thing, and one has to wonder why these hundreds of thousands of voters don't have photo IDs (Don't they drive? Don't they at least have a gun license or a passport lying around? Do they only have unacceptable forms of ID such as student IDs or tribal IDs? Surely they have something.) However, I can kind of see where the opponents of this ruling are coming from. I don't know anything about where these voters are coming from, and if I were in their position I'd be really ticked off if I couldn't vote just because I didn't have an ID. But at the same time, I can see how the use of IDs would prevent illegal aliens and resident aliens from voting, which is something we definitely don't want. It's a complicated issue.
On October 18th, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas could use its stricter voter ID laws for the November elections. These ID laws state that in order to vote, citizens must present a photo ID. While that doesn't seem too bad, opponents of the ruling state that the court's action could deny the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of otherwise eligible voters. Opponents also argue that a disproportionate number of these voters who will be barred from voting by the new law are African American or Hispanic. The process for obtaining a Texas state issued ID is also difficult as travel times to agencies issuing IDs can be upwards of 3 hours for some people.
I honestly don't know what to think about this. It seems ridiculous that racial discrimination at the polls could still be a thing, and one has to wonder why these hundreds of thousands of voters don't have photo IDs (Don't they drive? Don't they at least have a gun license or a passport lying around? Do they only have unacceptable forms of ID such as student IDs or tribal IDs? Surely they have something.) However, I can kind of see where the opponents of this ruling are coming from. I don't know anything about where these voters are coming from, and if I were in their position I'd be really ticked off if I couldn't vote just because I didn't have an ID. But at the same time, I can see how the use of IDs would prevent illegal aliens and resident aliens from voting, which is something we definitely don't want. It's a complicated issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)