Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Sex Offenders Forced To Live Under Miami Bridge

Sex Offenders Forced To Live Under Miami Bridge : NPR

In Miami, a causeway in the middle of Biscayne Bay has become home to one of the county's least desirable populations: sex offenders.

What began a few years ago as a stopgap solution has become de facto public policy. For sex offenders with few resources who want to stay in Miami, there's just one option: an encampment of tents and shacks on the Julia Tuttle Causeway.

The encampment got started a few years ago, when Miami-Dade County, like other communities across the country, adopted an ordinance banning sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of anywhere that children gather.

It's a law that applies not just to sex offenders on probation but also to felons who have served their time — people like 31-year-old Juan Martin. He served an eight-year sentence for exposing himself to a teenaged girl.

After Martin got out of prison in 2006, his probation officer brought him to what at that time was just a small camp of several men and a few tents under the bridge on the causeway. After three years of living here, he's angry. He says, "The state is forcing you to live like an animal."

Right now, 67 people live here. And nearly every week, probation officers drop off sex offenders, recently released, who have nowhere else to go.

Voncel Johnson recently became the first woman who was told she'd have to live under the bridge. She says when her probation officer dropped her off at the camp, it was unexpected and frightening.

"I'm thinking she's bringing me to a three-quarter-way house," Johnson recalls. "But when I got here it was … pitch dark. The first thing I saw was men, and I'm the only lady here. … I broke down.

The fact is, about half the counties in Florida now have an ordinance similar to the one in Miami. There are fewer and fewer places sex offenders can legally live in the state after they are released from prison.





Friday, August 22, 2008

The Columbus Dispatch : Ohio's voting machine glitch exposed

 

The maker of touch-screen voting machines used in half of Ohio's counties has admitted that its own programming error is to blame for votes being dropped in some counties.

The problem can't be fixed before the Nov. 4 election, so Premier Election Solutions and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner are issuing guidelines to counties for how to avoid the problem.

The Columbus Dispatch : Ohio's voting machine glitch exposed

 

 

This company cannot. be. trusted.  They have proved this over and over again.  First they blame anti-virus software for the loss of votes; then turn around and admit it's their own programming at issue. 

 

There are _open_ solutions out there.  A prime example is http://www.openvotingconsortium.org.  This is a fully open, verifiable, 3 way system which can be audited by millions of technically savvy individuals.  Donate to them, if you've got spare change.

Monday, August 18, 2008

xkcd - A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language - By Randall Munroe

 

(Click image for full version)

Came across this comic today -- this about perfectly sums up the base idiocy of the "AV software caused lost votes" argument coming from Premier/Diebold.  (See Ohio Sues Diebold/Premiere Over Lost E-Voting Votes)

Thursday, March 27, 2008

The 5 Most Ridiculously Over-Hyped Health Scares of All Time | Cracked.com

This is the most insightful article I've read all week.  I'm not sure if that's good or bad.... but this article is spot on.

The 5 Most Ridiculously Over-Hyped Health Scares of All Time | Cracked.com

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Fears of Internet predators unfounded, study finds

 

WASHINGTON — A lot of parental worries about Internet sex predators are unjustified, according to new research by a leading center that studies crimes against children.

Perhaps this should say "Media FUD" instead of "parental worries"?  I'm hopeful that this is the first step in the end of this particular phase of media fear-mongering; unfortunately this will like be ignored.

The study comes out with a set of information that have individually been reported/suspected for years, but as far as I'm aware, were never performed as a formal study.

In this case, their are 3 studies:

  1. 3,000 children aged 10 thru 17, interviewed first in 2000, then again in 2005
  2. 3,000 children aged 10 thru 17, interviewed first in 2000, then again in 2005 (2 of the same study!)
  3. 612 Interviews with a investigators from a "nationally representative" sample of agencies in the Unites States.

The conclusions, published in American Psychologist (the journal of the American Psychological Association), in a paper titled "Online 'Predators' and Their Victims", by Janis Wolak  & co-researchers, were as follows:

  • Sex assaults on teens fell 52 percent from 1993 to 2005, according to the Justice Department's National Crime Victimization Survey, the best measure of U.S. crime trends
  • Internet predators don't hit on the prepubescent children whom pedophiles target. They target adolescents, who have more access to computers, more privacy and more interest in sex and romance, Wolak's team determined from interviews with investigators.
  • Most Internet-linked offenses are essentially statutory rape: nonforcible sex crimes against minors too young to consent to sexual relationships with adults.
  • Most victims meet online offenders face-to-face and go to those meetings expecting to engage in sex. Nearly three-quarters have sex with partners they met on the Internet more than once.
  • Only 5 percent of predators posed online as other teens, according to the survey of investigators.
  • Usually their targets are adolescent girls or adolescent boys of uncertain sexual orientation, according to Wolak. Youths with histories of sexual abuse, sexual orientation concerns and patterns of off- and online risk-taking are especially at risk.

Here's hoping we can get more facts -- I'd settle for well-supported theories! -- in the near future, instead of more fear mongering from the media.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

The Roots of Fear | Newsweek Politics | Newsweek.com

This is an excellent article on the basis of fear, and it's use (and misuse) in politics.  This should be required reading before registering to vote!

The evolutionary primacy of the brain's fear circuitry makes it more powerful than the brain's reasoning faculties. The amygdala sprouts a profusion of connections to higher brain regions—neurons that carry one-way traffic from amygdala to neocortex. Few connections run from the cortex to the amygdala, however. That allows the amygdala to override the products of the logical, thoughtful cortex, but not vice versa. So although it is sometimes possible to think yourself out of fear ("I know that dark shape in the alley is just a trash can"), it takes great effort and persistence. Instead, fear tends to overrule reason, as the amygdala hobbles our logic and reasoning circuits. That makes fear "far, far more powerful than reason," says neurobiologist Michael Fanselow of the University of California, Los Angeles. "It evolved as a mechanism to protect us from life-threatening situations, and from an evolutionary standpoint there's nothing more important than that."

The Roots of Fear | Newsweek Politics | Newsweek.com

Monday, November 19, 2007

Evidence Of Injustice, FBI's Bullet Lead Analysis Used Flawed Science To Convict Hundreds Of Defendants - CBS News

 

I can remember this being used in TV shows as the basis for the prosecutions case; I can imagine this will have pretty significant impact on quite a few case.

The science, called bullet lead analysis, was used by the FBI for 40 years in thousands of cases, and some of the people it helped put in jail may be innocent.

Lee Wayne Hunt says he's been behind bars for over 22 years and 6 months, and maintains he's an innocent man. "What I've said from the word get go that I ain't -- never killed nobody. I didn't have nothing to do with this," Hunt tells Kroft.


Hunt was convicted in 1986 of murdering two people in Fayetteville, N.C., based on the testimony of two questionable witnesses and what turned out to be erroneous ballistics testimony from the FBI lab.
For years, the FBI believed that lead in bullets had unique chemical signatures, and that by breaking them down and analyzing them, it was possible to match bullets, not only to a single batch of ammunition coming out of a factory, but to a single box of bullets. And that is what the FBI did in the case of Lee Wayne Hunt, tying a bullet fragment found where the murders took place to a box of bullets the prosecutors linked to Hunt.

---

Tobin says the Quantico lab was the only place in the country that did bullet lead analysis, and the assertion that you could actually match a bullet fragment to a specific batch or box of bullets went unchallenged for 40 years -- until Tobin retired in 1998 and decided to do his own study, discovering that the basic premise had never actually been scientifically tested.

"FBI lab personnel testified that you could match these fragments to this bullet," Kroft remarks.

"Yes, that's correct," Tobin says.

Asked what he found out, Tobin tells Kroft, "It hadn't been based on science at all, but rather had been based on subjective belief for over four decades."

Evidence Of Injustice, FBI's Bullet Lead Analysis Used Flawed Science To Convict Hundreds Of Defendants - CBS News

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Good news.. but wait, what about the terrorists and pedophiles!!

 

Reading the news today, I came across this bit, which by itself is pretty good news.  It, if passed, would extend reporter's privilege to federal cases; such already exists for all states, including DC.  It also, as a side effect, would include Bloggers, or anyone else involved in "the regular gathering, preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local, national, or international events or other matters of public interest for dissemination to the public".

Anyone regularly engaged in "journalism," which would seem to include some bloggers, wouldn't generally be forced to divulge confidential sources in federal cases under a bill approved Thursday by a U.S. Senate committee.

By a 15-2 vote, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee backed an amended version of the so-called Free Flow of Information Act. Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) cast the "no" votes.

Bloggers land legal shield in Senate panel vote | Tech news blog - CNET News.com

 

But wait, there's more!  You can't simply pass a new law these days; someone has to tie it to terrorism and child porn or child predators:

The Justice Department has argued that the language is far too broad and could endanger national security and criminal investigations. A Thursday Washington Post op-ed by U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald claims the bill would unwittingly protect Iraqi spies posing as journalists and child pornographers who swapped information via the Internet.

Give me a break.  I'm sick and tired of everything being reduced to either terrorism or "protect the children!".  I'd vote for Mickey Mouse for president at this point if I thought he'd govern thru wisdom, and not thru fear mongering.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Ridiculous! Texas Legislature

 

This is shameful behavior from politicians.  Voting for other members, racing to get your vote in place for another member before someone else can get THEIR vote in place for another member... shocking behavior that clearly needs to be blocked against, since those who should be policing themselves, aren't.

Starting at 00:55: "Elkins goes to vote for Merit but Hancock is faster. Elkins heads back to his desk but before he can vote Joe Crabb turns around and beats him to it." Then watch... while Elkins turns around to vote on someone else's desk, Crabb votes on Elkins desk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG6X-xtVask

Friday, September 14, 2007

Dark Sky, Bright Lights Over Pennsylvania - New York Times

Well I'm not over 40, but I can certainly remember.  Living in San Jose now, there's very little star shine, and tons of light pollution .

Anyone over 40 can probably remember staring into a sky that pulsed with stars, but nowadays, man’s artificial light has erased the view. Chip Harrison, who manages Cherry Springs and seven other state parks, said only 10 percent of the United States population has seen a true dark sky

...

On a good night for stargazing at Cherry Springs State Park, in north central Pennsylvania, the Milky Way is a speckled wash across the sky. On a perfect night, particularly during a new moon, the Milky Way is so bright it casts shadows. Stargazers hold out their hands and look at the shadows on the ground in awe.

...

“I don’t have a telescope, but I love to come out here because it’s so beautiful,” she said between bites of a cookie. “These people are so anxious to share their telescopes with you and help you see the skies. It takes your breath away.

“You feel like you can touch the stars.”

Dark Sky, Bright Lights Over Pennsylvania - New York Times

Monday, September 10, 2007

Protecting our children: Are we destroying childhood? - Telegraph

This is an outstanding piece, from Britain --  I can't find a single thing in it with which to disagree.  The state of childhood in modern urban areas is such that I have a hard time seeing my own childhood in my kids' -- there is simply very little similarity.

Whereas I spent most of my time outdoors, climbing trees, running thru fields, torturing frogs, and walking the 1/2 mile to the neighbor boys house, my son is only able to spend time outdoors when we're outside to supervise him.  In the front or back yard only.  The single neighborhood (next-door, in fact) boy he's been able to meet comes over a few times a week, and vice-versa.  Yes, the kids go to the park... all at 10-20 minutes walking distance.  Play dates, common in the toddler years, become less so as the original group ages.

The reason, as I see it, was touched on in the article.  The media, especially the American media, love fear.  Fear of food (genetically modified), fear of medicine (vaccines -- who cares that we've eradicated entire diseases in the united states? Be afraid anyway!), fear of the economy, fear of foreign nations, fear of guns, and the big ratings topic, fear of pedophiles.  I would wager there is no parent of a child under 10 in the United States today who can look at a male adult with, or near, a child, and wonder if he's a threat.

A new city design would help, of course.  Urban design, maximized for traffic (vehicle) throughput and housing density (even when considering only single family homes, and not complexes) has destroyed American cities.  No longer is the grocer a walk away; introduce yourself to a non-immediate neighbor passing, and they are as likely to ignore you as be afraid.  Of the retailers that are near enough for you to frequent, you'll just be another face, another name.  Perhaps I'll talk more on this later; it's a bit off-topic at the moment.

Snippet of the article:

When my youngest was born, his grandmother gave us a sampler she had embroidered of a little Victorian homily: "Dear little one / I wish you two things / To give you roots and to give you wings," it read.

...

Never mind wings, these days parenting consists largely of ensuring that our offspring venture nowhere near the edge of the nest; you never know what danger might lie beyond its cosy, bubble-wrapped confines.

...

Instead of allowing our youngsters to head off alone abroad, discovering life for themselves, we keep them indoors, plonked in front of screens.

And when we do let them step outside, it is only for the short journey from doorstep to car, as we ferry them in our accident-resistant people carriers from school to violin class to swimming lesson, formalising their leisure time, filling it with bustling purpose.

Coupled with over-prescriptive, exam-oriented educational curricula, the result, according to the signatories of the letter, has been an exponential rise in mental health problems, not to mention a decline in independent thinking, basic social skills and plain common sense. In short, smothered by their parents' anxiety, our kids are going stir crazy.

The experts' observation is not a new one. In 1999, the NSPCC issued a report suggesting that childhood was being over-regulated, the life squeezed out of it by parental panic.

Much of the blame was placed then - as now - on a wrongful assumption that a child was in danger from predatory adults the moment they ventured out of sight. As it happens, statistics tell us that no more children are killed or abducted by strangers these days than in the past.

The figures have barely changed in half a century. What's more, of the 50 or so children murdered every year, more than 90 per cent are killed by someone they love, their lives taken in the very place we assume them to be safest: the home.

Protecting our children: Are we destroying childhood? - Telegraph