Dallas Mavericks owner, Mark Cuban, accused of insider trading

In June of 2004, Mark Cuban, sold his stake in the website www.mamma.com. Cuban owned 6.3 percent of the website, but sold it all after a conversation with the chief executive of the company. The Security and Exchange Commission claims that the information that he was told led to Cuban selling his stake in the company. The issue is if the information that was given to him was truly "inside" information. This case is still in the early stages, and very little details have been given to the public. In my opinion he should have never sold his share of the website, even if he did know that the website was not going to do so well. Cuban has made over a billion dollars as a tech entrepreneur, and should know the laws about insider trading. Even if he did end up losing money with his investment into mamma.com, he can afford it. This was a stupid mistake that can end up sending him to jail for over a year. This case has been compared to the Martha Stewart case, which as we know didn't end very well for her. Also, Cuban has been trying to purchase the Chicago Cubs for some time now and the MLB will probably not allow Cuban to purchase the Cubs, even if the Chicago Tribune sold the team to him. This was a stupid mistake for Cuban that he will have to pay for one way or another.

Article from Dallas News

At Times of Financial Hardship, Company Executives Sitting Pretty

Last Tuesday I was utterly disgusted to learn that throughout all of the economic hardships that have plagued this country for the past month that the CEO’s of Ford have been asking for government money while they themselves are flying private jets. The real aspect of this story that really angered me was the fact that Ford is cutting so many jobs and this mean that countless number of people have lost their source of income. I believe that if the CEO’s sold their private jets, which go for hundreds of millions of dollars a piece, this would enable countless numbers of people to hold onto their jobs.

After I learning about the whole Ford incident I was naïve enough to believe that Ford was the only company which had executives that did not give two cents about the blue collared workers. The fact of the matter is that blue collared workers are the backbone of a company, without them a company would cease to exist. I was all too disappointed to learn that Ford is just one of many companies that have grown careless towards their hardworking employees. The main company I will talk about is the local bus company by the name of Pace.

The main difference between Pace and Ford is that Pace is not running to the government asking for money; on the other hand Pace is actually reporting earnings. The issue I have with Pace is that they are increasing the amount of money it will take to ride a bus. Why this fact is an issue is because Pace top executives are seeing a major increase in their paychecks. Some executives are seeing an increase of as little as 4% but a good amount of executives are seeing increases as large as 35%. All of these people make over $100,000. With regards to Pace, my main issue is not the pay increase for top executives because of the fact that regular paid employees are still keeping their jobs. My main issue with Pace is simply that people should not pay more money to ride a bus, especially with our flailing economy.



Americans are already hurting financially because of the fact that the price of living is still on the rise. Combine this with the fact that many people do not have a real strong sense of job security, and you suddenly realize that a simple bus fee can really start to make people nervous. An increased bus fee as well as an increased price on food starts to add up for people who live their lives from paycheck to paycheck. Instead of increasing the salary of top executives and as a result increasing bus fees at this moment couldn’t Pace have waited long enough until the economic troubles blow over.



I know that this is America, the free capitalistic society of the world, and with all the riches that come with this society there are also the lows that this economy goes through. I also realize that in America hard work and time often result in a person succeeding in life. But never have I ever heard that it was okay to sit back and relax as the poor get poorer while the rich get richer.

And that’s just my take on things.

Goverment Bailout Efforts

The goverment is taking substantial steps to help get americas economy back on track. Every day the our goverment spends millions of dollars to keep banks and buisnesses alive to get americas economy back to where it once was. How much is our government willing to spend? Try 7 trillion dollars. The goverment says that it would not reach that substantial of an amount, but optimist say that the goverment has no other choice but to keep dishing out money to prevent a total collapse in the economy. But the 7 trillion dollars might not seem as bad as one thinks. Government says that a large amount of the 7 trillion dollars is investment, which might help in the long run. 1.2 trillion has already got back to the fed after putting in 1.6 trillion earlier in the year. But as the year moves on, more struggles in the U.S keep developing. Recently the struggles at automaker companies like GM, Ford, and Chrysler have gotten the countries attention and might include even more spending from our goverment. Here is some interesting information of the recent plans by goverment to help save corporate america.

AIG: the government is willing to spend 152.2 billion
Automakers: 25 billion dollars to help transition to more fuel effcient cars
Fannie mae, Freddie mac: Another 200 billion to bailout mortgage finance giants

Bakke vs. California Sets Precedent

With college rapidly approaching for me, I thought there was no more important issue than college admissions. In 1978, the precedent for all future college admissions was altered and set by the landmark case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. In 1973, Allan Bakke applied for admission to the University of California Davis' Medical School with an above average grad point average and test scores. On the application, it was required that all students check a box on their ethnicity. Upon doing so and turning in his application, he was denied by the University. Not willing to accept this, he reapplied in 1974 with the same grades and scores, only again to be denied. As he looked more greatly into it, he found out much detail about the system used to accept students: they had a quota of certain amount of students per ethnicity each year in order to achieve diversity. Upon recognition, Bakke believed his dismissal to be unconstitutional because he had better grades than many accepted minority students did; he took this to court. After years of argument, the supreme court ruled 5-4 in favor of Bakke that it was unconstitutional to give a quota in order to accept students, however they also determined that race is a legitimate factor when considering applicants.

The outstanding effects of this case affect applicants everyday and are something each college applicant should know about. When considering students, it is no longer an issue of whether you are being denied because there were already "too many of your kind" admitted. This sigh of relief can be attributed to Allan Bakke and his fight. Thanks Mr. Bakke, when I get denied from college, I'll be able to blame my poor work ethic, not minorities.

Oklahoma Abortion Law

Oklahoma is currently getting sued by the Center for Reproductive Rights for a law that requires a woman to see an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion. The decision to get an abortion could be due to reasons such as: financial hardships, pregnancy resulting from rape, a teenager unable to support a child, health conditions, or a married woman that already has children. The Center for Reproductive Rights argues that this law “intrudes on privacy, endangers health and assaults dignity”. Furthermore, this law would not excuse rape victims that may be traumatized by the pregnancy and could be further disturbed by viewing the ultrasound. This fact is enough of a reason for Governor Brad Henry to veto the bill; although his veto was overridden.

An ultrasound can provide information about the size of the fetus, if there is more than one, the condition (heartbeat and if there are any abnormalities) and during the second trimester, the gender could be shown. Under this law, the doctor would describe the fetus from an ultrasound such as the one shown above.

Personally this law disgusts me. It is difficult enough to decide to even carry out an abortion. But after having made the choice, there is this added “obstacle” of being subjected to an ultrasound and a description of the possible life inside of you. That is certainly the point of the law, as State Senator Todd Lamb said, “I introduced the bill because I wanted to encourage life in society”; although Mr. Lamb did not stop to consider if this life would be welcome and if guilt is the key to a woman keeping a baby. For instance, a rape victim would probably not want to be encouraged to produce the life of someone that may have traits of her rapist.

Overall, I am pro-choice and I do believe a there are better ways to decrease the rate of abortions than applying laws that guilt the woman and intrude on privacy. The option of an abortion will continue to be present which many Pro-Life groups have become aware of. They are turning towards reducing abortions by “providing pregnant women with health care, child care and money for education” instead of banning them. Creating positive options in the event of unwanted pregnancies is more powerful than creating uncomfortable requirements.

Steps that made Obama President

Wouldn't everyone in America or even the WORLD want to know just how Barack Obama becomes President?!?!

Barack Obama had gone to college like any other person. He started at Columbia University (1983) then went to Harvard law school (1991). Obama had received his B. A degree of political science in 1983. He had received his Juris Doctor degree from Harvard Law School in 1991. Then the fallowing year Obama ventured to teaching at the University of Chicago Law School in 1992. In 1996 Obama was elected Illinois State senator then he was elected U.S State Senate in 2004. Thus, in 2008 he ran for President of the United States. With such a long gernery and still a long one to come as the elected president of the USA. Obama would seem to have a lot ahead of him.

I strongly believe that Obama, makes a very intelligent, strong willed and enthusiastic president. He had gone through schooling and had been through the times of America. Ever Since he was born on August 4, 1961 Being born and raised a U.S citizen. Obama being raised around family in a small town, knows what America is facing and seems to be the right "guy" for the job. His overal personality is very well liked, he seems to have way to get everyone to listen to him and get all their attention. They way and know how of the words he uses and speaks really draws the audience into the picture.

Laws about Fireworks in Illinois

 fireworks law in illinois

Key facts                                                                                         fireworks display

• small, not loud fireworks are permitted


• loud, flyer fireworks prohibited.

    If you get caught for shooting any air borne or loud noise explosion fireworks, you will get warned, written up, and confiscated of your fireworks.

DISPLAY FIREWORKS
Display Permit	Required. Apply to local authorities at least 15 days before display date.
Insurance	Required. No amount specified in state law.
Operator	No license specifically required in state law but display must be handled by competent individual designated by local authorities.
Sale	Fireworks must be purchased from licensed wholesaler.

Illegal fireworks:

Roman candles

Bottle rockets

legal fireworks:

smoke grenades

San Diego may force Padres to trade "star pitcher"

The San Diego Padres are a pretty decent baseball team. The team is going through a scandal right now because they might have to trade their "star" pitcher that might have to traded to another team. The San Diego Padres don't want to trade their star pitcher because he is really good and has helped them through out of the season. The contract stated that Jake Pevy was going to have to be traded because his contract was finished with. The Padres eventually kept Jake Pevy. He later became of the best players in all National League. Here is the website for more information: http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/sullivan/20081019-9999-1s19sullivan.html

Here are three ways you can make sure that you have a up-to-date contract.

1. Visit the person that wrote out the contract and have it be up to date.

2. Check before you sign a contract

3. Call people that are a part of the contract if you have any problems

Study: Paying more for alcohol saves live

In Alaska tax on alchohol was raised resulting in a decrease of deaths. During a 28 years of study, researched showed the death rate decrease with each increase in alchol tax. Raising the tax in 1983 the death rate decreased by 29%. When the tax was raised again in 2002 the rate decreased by 11%. Researchers inferred that that the death rate decreases with the increase of alchol tax.

The study done in Finland show that when the alchol tax was decrease, there was in increase in disorderly conduct as well as al chol consumption.

Alchol businesses and opponents think the increase in alchol tax will hurt the economy. Tax can hurt the econmy because less alchol will be bought thus resulting in less government taxes. supporters believe an increase in tax will result in a decrease in deaths.

In my opinion, it is a good idea. because livers are being saved and alchol assumption is lowered. I think Alchol tax in Illinois should be raised. This is a good idea because, there will be less teen acident driving. However, I don't think it is a good time to raise the tax because the econmy is bad now. Raising tax might hurt the already bad evonmy. There should be raised after econmy is steady.

Dow Jones Industrials dives below 8,000

U.S. stocks thudded sharply lower on Wednesday to finish at more than five-years lows, with financial powerhouse Citigroup Inc. pummeled by its greatest ever one-day percentage drop falling 23.4% to end at $6.40, its largest one-session decline since the market collapse on Oct. 19, 1987, as fears intensified about its fate as well as the U.S. auto industry.

"It's a combination of comments from [Fed Chairman Ben] Bernanke and [Treasury Secretary Hank] Paulson that has us on pins and needles. Everything is hinging on what happens with the General Motors bailout," said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at Wall Street firm, Jefferies & Co.

After climbing in and out of positive and negative turf in the early going, the major stock indexes were down decisively in afternoon trades, with the losses intensifying in the final hour.

A day after the Big Three's CEOs went begging on Capitol Hill, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of confidence that whatever measures taken to save the industry and its suppliers will be enough. Chrysler LLC returned to Capitol Hill for a second day to make their case for the government extending a bridge loan to their ailing industry. Stocks were under pressure much of the day after the biggest-ever drop in consumer prices and another gloomy housing report offered little cheer to investors already fretting about the fate of the Big Three automakers.

And, equities remained solidly lower after the release of the minutes from the last Federal Open Market Committee meeting, which had the central bank's policy-makers expecting the economic slump to last for as much as a year, if not longer.

Volume on the New York Stock Exchange topped 1.6 billion, and for every stock on the rise, more than 15 fell.

Just 13 months ago the Dow Jones Industrial average was at roughly 14,200, today it closed at 7,997 that is 45% lower in just a little over a year. Historically, dating back 60 years anyway, the Dow has returned 10% annually on your investment. Some financial stocks are at 50+ year lows. GM (General Motors)for example, an icon of american industry closed today at $2.79 a price not seen since 1942.

(google.com/images)
Sources: marketwatch.com & www.thestreet.com

Thomas Issued Retrial for Music Copyright Case

The first ever case in which the Recording Industry of America (RIAA) has filed a lawsuit on an individual for illegally downloading and sharing sound recordings over peer-to-peer (P2P) networks is being retried. U.S. District Court Judge Michael Davis has overturned the original $222,000 lawsuit brought up against single mother Jammie Thomas. A tentative retrial date has been set for March 9, 2009, where the record labels will file additional lawsuits for infringement on music copyright laws. Even though Thomas claims her computer was hacked into, the RIAA has strong evidence that Thomas did, in fact, make such files available for download.

The trial was deemed a mistrial by Judge Davis, claiming that he was mistaken when he instructed jurors that simply making files available on a network is not illegal; however, making files available for others to download via P2P networks or any variation of one violates copyright laws.

I cannot even begin to imagine the agony and pain the RIAA has put Thomas through; however, the plaintiffs bring up a credible point. Simply making files available on a computer is still copyright infringement. I strongly feel that it is essential to not illegally download music because it takes away the rights musicians have to the music they compose. In addition to the negative effects on musicians, music piracy can also negatively affect the RIAA because it constantly loses money for each music file illegally downloaded. Also, music piracy can be potentially harmful to computers because of the P2P networks that allow viruses to ruin the computer. Music piracy should continue to be enforced by the law in order to better society and the music industry.

Background Information
In April 2007, Thomas was charged with downloading more than 1700 songs off of P2P networks. Thomas was charged initially $60,000 in fines because she chose to ignore warning letters from the RIAA . If she had not ignored these letters, she could have avoided attorney fees and such high fines from the RIAA.

When Thomas lost her case to the RIAA in 2007:


What Law Prevents Someone From Illegally Downloading Music?
In 1998, Congress passed a law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in order to prevent one from illegally downloading music from the Internet “without the consent of the original copyright owner”. If someone were found guilty of infringing this law, he or she would have to pay fines capable of reaching $150,000 for each illegally downloaded file. Most people began to realize that this law was dangerous and could put them in major debt; however, there were those who still wanted to partake in music piracy. Since the DMCA has been passed, enforcers of copyright laws have been working to strongly implement laws against music piracy.

Down the wrong path? Lindsay Lohan's DUI

Lindsay Lohan had been charged with DUI after police searched and found cocaine in her car. Her car had been crashed while she was intoxicated, and police found cocaine at the accident scene. She was charged with a misdemeanor for driving under the influence. 

My personal opinion about this is that the action is extremely upsetting to me. To think that a girl grew up to be extremely successful and all of it is thrown down the drain is sad to me. She is described in the celebrity cafe as "discourteous, irresponsible, and unprofessional."I would have to strongly agree. I am extremely confused as to why she didn't think before drinking and driving. That goes for all teen-agers. They should understand the consequences ahead of them if they do irresponsible things like this. 

Lindsay Lohan didn't only have to go to court to answer the DUI citation, but she will have to live with what she's done and the judgements people will make on her. Her lifestyle is going to be so different now that she is doing irresponsible things like drinking and driving. "I'm just a girl, but I'm growing up; I'm learning," she tells Hollywood.com reporters. News flash Lindsay- you're not a girl anymore. She is setting a horrible example for not only the members of her family but her thousands of fans. It is good that she is coming to the realization that she is growing up, but if she had come to that thought a few years back, she wouldn't be nearly as disoriented as she is now. 

Celebrity cafe says that Lohan makes no signs of slowing down in spite of her DUI, at least to alcohol. She told the public that she is spending her 21st birthday drinking vodka. Obviously still, she is headed down the wrong path.

Ali M.

Drunk Driving

I recently received my driving permit, so that means I have to start thinking a lot about being a responsible driver. At the end of the school year, I will be able to get my license, and many of my friends will have a license too. Drinking is obviously not legal at my age, but it doesn't mean that I don't have to worry about it. It is definitely important for me to avoid situations with drunk drivers. That starts with knowing the facts about the effect alcohol has on driving. Although the limit for blood alcohol content is .08, the average BAC of fatally injured drivers is .16, twice the amount that makes driving illegal. Even worse for me, males were involved in about eighty-one percent of fatal crashes involving a driver with BAC .08 or over. The risk of death in single-vehicle crashes is about 385 times higher for people with a high BAC than with zero alcohol. Even without an illegal concentration amount, if a police officer observes you are not fit to drive, you can be given a DUI, according to alcoholalert.com. Also mentioned on that site, thirty-two percent of traffic fatalities involved an alcohol-impaired driver. Between 1990 and 1999, the percent of fatalities involving alcohol decreased or made no change every year. It went up from '99 to 2002, but has been going down since. On the down side, Illinois had the fifth highest number of alcohol related deaths, and seventh highest percent, in 2006 in the United States.




Solutions:

Sobriety courts have a low rate of failure. They treat alcoholism and address repeat offenders and are very effective. Taking away someone's license automatically is the most effective way, though, to handle drunken driving problems. An added mandatory jail session of course works even better. These solutions and many more were suggested by http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrinkingandDriving.html.



The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that eighteen to twenty percent of injured drivers are using drugs, and although drinking is decreasing, drug use is increasing. However, in a study of three Australian states, under ten percent of crashes involved both drugs and alcohol.

Because the risk of crashing with an alcohol impaired driver is much higher than with one who is not under the influence, do not drink and drive or ride with a driver who has been drinking. The second link has many more suggestions about how to stay safe and is worth reading. For high school students, I have a question to consider. What is worse? Being scolded by a parent for drinking, or for crashing their car after drinking?

What's the deal with Embezzlement?

I was curious to find out more on embezzlement, so I found a website to help me learn more...

Old School Embezzlement

One of the first reported cases of embezzlement occurred in 1873. After suffering over $42,000 in stock market losses, Nathaniel Appleton Shute embezzled $150,000 from two New Hampshire banks. Shute was apparently a well-respected citizen who served as cashier and treasurer at the two banks. After committing the crime, Shute fled to Cuba and never returned to the United States. The crime shocked his family, who were forced to make payment on bonds they had signed to help Shute obtain his position at the banks.

Embezzlement in the News
Casper, Wyoming - Wednesday, January 18, 2006

According to this article in the San Antonio Express-News, A busy Washington, D.C., dentist had complete confidence in his bookkeeper until it was too late. Like many small business owners, the dentist gave his new bookkeeper control of his books. He trusted her so much that he never watched his money or looked over his financial statements. The woman, aware of her boss' casual attitude, had stolen at least $130,000 from the business within two years. She had also given herself a $20-an-hour raise and falsely claimed to work 50-hour weeks. Ashamed that he had been victimized so easily, the dentist did not report the crime to the police. Instead, he dismissed the woman and helped her get another bookkeeping position with a solid reference.

White-collar crime is increasingly throwing small businesses into debt, forcing owners to lay off employees, go bankrupt, or close shop.

The article pointed out some interesting statistics involved with embezzlement:

A) Employees helping themselves to company funds cost U.S. businesses about $660 billion annually, according to a recent report from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. The report also revealed that more than 46 percent of all workplace fraud happens to small businesses with fewer than 100 employees.

B) The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that employee theft is growing by as much as 15 percent each year. According to an Auditors Inc. survey of 1,000 certified public accountants, as many as 40 percent of small-business owners are embezzlement victims.

C) Other statistics show the broader scope of the problem: Up to 30 percent of the nation's workers will steal at some time in their career, with up to 75 percent of all employee theft going unnoticed, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

D) One-third of all business bankruptcies are due to employee theft, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

E) At least 20 percent of all business failures are the direct result of employee theft, according to the American Management Association.

F) The average business loses 6 percent of its annual revenue to fraud and abuses by employees, according to the management association.

More Embezzlement in the News
April 10, 2008

Garcia First Blog Post

Garcia First Blog Post
Tenn. professor sues Germany for Nazi art seizure
I think this article is pretty interesting. A holocaust survivor wants to sue Germany for the Nazi's seizure of his families art. Instead of getting back all the pictures they stole or seized, which might take a long time considering the fact that the art collection was very extensive and has been sold to dozens of art collectors around the world. They only want money instead of the art. Germany has three months of accepting the case or rejecting it.

The Most Famous Kidnapping Case in America

On March 1, 1932, the 20 month year old son of famous pilot Charles Lindbergh was taken from his crib between 8-10 p.m. A ransom note was left demanding the payment of 50,000$, and it was obviously written by a foreigner who had very poor english...

It read... Dear Sir, Have 50,000$ redy in 25,000$ in 20$ bills 15000$ in 10$ bills and 10,000$ in 5$ bills. After 2-4 days will inform you were to deliver the Mony. We warn you for making anyding public or for notify the Polise the child is in gut care. Indication for all leters are singnature and 3 holds. 

 The trial was held in Flemington, New Jersey and was watched by hundreds of spectators and reporters, making it a very famous case. The babies body was found on March 12; a chisel, ladder, and a number of notes from the kidnappers were found with the body, but there were no useful fingerprints or footprints. 

THE TRIAL-

  The defendant in the case was a man named Richard Bruno Hauptmann, a 35 year old German born carpenter who lived in the bronx. He was found with one of Lindbergh's gold notes, the currency the Lindbergh's used to pay the kidnapper and later $14,000 of the ransom money was found hidden in the walls of his garage. In the trail, Lindbergh testified that he had heard the kidnappers voice and it was the voice of Hauptmann. There were also a number of police witnesses brought in and a handwriting specialist. Hauptmann's lawyer was a man named Edward J. Reilly, who is described as "florid, hulking, bombastic-he wore a swallowtail coat and striped trousers- and something of a boozer". Is it widely spectated that he hired and invented witnesses and deliberately misled the jury. The prosecution had too much substantial evidence that Hauptmann was indeed the kidnapper, and he was sentenced ( after 29 court sessions, 162 witnesses, and 381 exhibits) to death on Wednesday, February 13, 1935. He was finally put to death on April 3, 1936, but his death did not rid the Lindbergh family of their troubles. They exiled themselves  to England and received death threats against their second son.

Google Flu Trends- Tommy

Google Flu Trends

above you see an example of how the flu trend works.

Below is a link to see what the flu activity is in your region.

     Google search isn't just about looking up football scores from last weekend or finding a great hotel for your next vacation. It can also be used for the public good. Yesterday, Google announced Google Flu Trends, which uses collected search data in an effort to confront the challenge of influenza outbreaks.

What does it do?

By taking Google Trends — where you can see snapshots of what's on the "public's collective mind" — and applying the tool to a public health problem, our engineers found that there was a correlation between flu-related queries and the actual flu. They created a model for near real-time estimates about outbreaks, in the hopes that both health care professionals and the general public would use this tool to better prepare for flu season.

Since google Flu Trends launched yesterday, the response from the medical community has been positive. "The earlier the warning, the earlier prevention and control measures can be put in place," said Dr. Lyn Finelli of the influenza division at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to The New York Times. "This could prevent cases of influenza." You can check out the tool for yourself.

Why did they make this?

Google built this Flu Trends by looking at history to figure where it hits. Because flu season is different every year, just a few months of data wouldn't have done the trick. For example, the 2003-2004 flu season was unusually severe in many regions. The data from that season was especially robust and allowed us to discover a more accurate, reliable set of flu-related terms. To learn more about how we built the system, see this page on how Flu Trends works.

    In order to provide a rough geographic breakdown of potential flu outbreaks, google uses "IP address information from our server logs to make a best guess about where queries originate". To protect your privacy, we anonymize those IP addresses at nine months. And they don't provide this aggregated, anonymized data to third parties. This is important feature because it will minimize personal information fraud.

    I think with this new technology the flu will effect less people every year. Before this technology, 5 to 20 percent of people were affected by flu last year. With this new great technology businesses could remind workers to get the flu shot when the flu activity is high around the given area. With this warning it might be enough to lower the percent or maybe even totally eliminate the flu altogether. But for now all we can do is wait and see the results.

 

Should an 8 year old be Convicted for Murder?

In FlagStaff Arizona, news coverage has been heavy. Allegedly an eight year old boy used a 22.-caliber rifle Wednesday to kill his father and another man, Timothy Romans, 39, of San Carlos. His father was a big hunter and taught his son to use the rifle. The boy didn't just do this on a spur, but after a long time of potential abuse. St. Johns Police Chief Roy Melnick said, "I'm not accusing anybody of anything at this point," he said Saturday. "But we're certainly going to look at the abuse part of this. He's 8 years old. He just doesn't decide one day that he's going to shoot his father and shoot his father's friend for no reason. Something led up to this." Under Arizona law, charges can be filed to everyone 8 years of age or older. If the boy is convicted as a minor he could be in juvenile detention until 18 years old, and be charged with murder! Prosecutors don't know where this case is headed. The boy is not the only one who has killed a parent from abuse. According to FBI homicide reports, there were at least three such cases each year in 2003, 2004 and 2005, in 2002 there were 15.

Should the child be convicted with murder? A child doesn't have thoughts of killing their father or loved one unless they hurt them. I believe that in this case and of the few cases that have happened in the past, that it was not their fault. The abuse part played a huge role in why these children do what they do. Charging an 8 year old for murder is really big and almost unethical in this situation. What if he was trying defend himself? Pressing those high of charges might be a little to high because of what the father did. What do you think?

The global gag rule.

The global gag rule.

Probably 3/4 of our school population doesn't even know what the the global gag rule is, even though it causes suffering to thousands of victims a year. African countries are the worst hit. Some countries that are negatively affected include Kenya, Ghana, Tanzania, Ethiopia, and Uganda.

The global gag rule ensures that "no U.S. family planning assistance can be provided to foreign NGOs that use funding from any other source to: perform abortions in cases other than a threat to the woman’s life, rape or incest; provide counseling and referral for abortion; or lobby to make abortion legal or more available in their country" (actual definition). In other words, a family planning assistance program/clinic can't give ANY form of assistance that supports abortion. The clinic can't even MENTION the word abortion. That is why the law was named the "gag rule" because it literally "gags" family planning clinics from even talking about abortion. It was re-implemented by George W. Bush on his first day of office in January 2001.

This law is responsible for many deaths a year. Even though the law was designed to decrease the frequency of abortions, it has skyrocketed the number of unsafe abortions. Women are defaulting to unsafe methods and performing abortions on THEMSELVES because clinics won't help them out. Some medical workers calculate that the death toll so far is in the thousands. This law is also arguably the root cause of overpopulation in indigenous populations. Women and men alike are not educated on safe-sex practices. They don't use condoms, take birth pills, or utilize any other birth control mechanisms that the United States and other privileged countries have. Overpopulation is causing a multitude of problems such as pollution and environmental destruction. For instance, many citizens have to cut down forests to create room for people to live in. Furthermore, overpopulation creates energy shortages and Africans have to cut down trees to have firewood to generate heat and light.

--- That is a picture of an African woman carrying firewood.

Some may wonder why these clinics even abide by this rule. If clinics are supposed to help citizens, why would they harm them by not providing the needed assistance? The answer is money. The rule also mandates that the clinics who don't abide by this rule will lose all the funding they receive from the USAID (United States Agency For International Development). If clinics fail to abide by this rule, they lose every single penny they receive from the United States. Without the funding, they can't operate or function cohesively because they need money to pay for workers and medical supplies. These clinics are placed in an awful position because whether or not they decide to abide by the rule, deaths become an inevitable result (either from the patient dying because she couldn't receive proper abortion services or from patients not receiving proper aid because clinics don't have money).

Other international donors have attempted to fill in the monetary gap. These donors include France, Great Britain, and even Cuba. Some multilateral institutions that have given some money are the European Union, the United Nations Children's Fund, and the World Health Organization. The largest donor of African health assistance so far has been France, who channels a lot of assistance through UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund). However, the money is directed towards helping children with HIV/AIDS, not abortion services. A lot of countries are hesitant to provide money for abortion services because they realize that the United States is adamantly against abortion and doesn't want to hurt ties by creating tension with one of the world's biggest superpowers. France's president, Nicolas Sarkozy has been especially committed to developing a strong relationship with the United States, and he would not detriment the relationship by doing something the United States would not want.

Some, however, resent the United States for imposing such an inhumane law against those who have no resources or means to retaliate. There has been no clear justification provided for this action. It just seems like Bush is trying to impose his own Christian ideals without any justification. Just because believes abortion shouldn't be allowed, why should people have to suffer? Why should we risk lives just to prove a point? AND WHY DO WE HAVE TO IMPOSE SUCH AN AWFUL RULE ON THOSE WHO DON'T EVEN HAVE THE RESOURCES TO FIGHT BACK? These questions have never been answered.

It's time for change, and thankfully Barack Obama is ready to make that change. He has promised to repeal this law and increase family planning assistance to indigenous countries. This change is change for the better. Think about how the negatively the United States would be impacted if abortion was illegal. Better yet, think about how that would affect our school. Those who are sexually active won't have any means to protect themselves from getting pregnant or sexually transmitted diseases because contraceptives might be banned as well. Then, when girls do get pregnant, they won't have the ability to get an abortion. It's time for the Bush administration to be, well, gagged.

Here's a video to sum it all up ---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4wrmweSdGg

Obama Wants to Constrain Second Amendment Rights

After the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired a decade later, Congress has realized the inherent flaws that the bill had. Many congressmen and senators fought bitterly over the renewal of the ban and it has ultimately stayed dormant up until the recent 2008 election. Senator John McCain was against the ban from the get go. He said that the ban was unnecessary and a misappropriation of tax dollars. On the other hand, President Elect Barack Obama's actions indicated that this ban was an important step in stopping gang and other forms of organized violence.
The main issue that seems to be impeding upon the ban’s renewal is the fact that Assault Weapons are only used in a small minority of crimes. The FBI released some data regarding the use of Assault Weapons in 2001.


Some important facts:


Fact: Only 1.4% of recovered crime weapons are models covered under
the 1994 assault weapons ban.2

Fact: The ban covered only 1.39% of the models of firearms on the market;
therefore so the bans effectiveness is automatically constrained.

Fact: "The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun
murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.”3

Fact: The classification scheme used encompassed almost all firearms sold
in the U.S. since 1987 (center fire rifles and shotguns holding more than six
cartridges, and handguns holding more than 10 rounds). The proposed ban
included Olympic marksmanship rifles and quail hunting shotguns. By inventing
a new definition for “assault weapons”, they created a problem from
where no problem existed.
Fact: Only 8% of criminals use anything that is classified (even incorrectly)
as an assault weapon.5

Fact: "Assault rifles have never been an issue in law enforcement. I have
been on this job for 25 years and I haven't seen a drug dealer carry one.
They are not used in crimes, they are not used against police officers."4

Fact: "Since police started keeping statistics, we now know that assault
weapons are/were used in an underwhelming 0.026 of 1% of crimes in New
Jersey. This means that my officers are more likely to confront an escaped
tiger from the local zoo than to confront an assault rifle in the hands of a
drug-crazed killer on the streets."4


1 S.C. Helsley, Assistant Director DOJ Investigation and Enforcement Branch, California, October 31,1988
2 From statewide recovery report from Connecticut (1988-1993) and Pennsylvania (1989-1994)
3 “Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96”, National Institute of Justice, March 1999
4 Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Constance, Trenton NJ, Senate Judiciary Committee, Aug 1993
5 Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Firearm Use by Offenders”, November 2001


With these facts in mind, the assault weapons ban can clearly be viewed as another misappropriation of federal tax dollars.
But it does end here. Obama also made a strong point to repeal the Tiahrt Amendment. “Since 2003, the Tiahrt Amendment has been an amendment to the Department of Justice appropriations bill. It prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) from releasing gun trace data to the public. It does not prevent access to gun trace data to law enforcement organizations in the course of a criminal investigation. The data had been used by lawyers to fuel lawsuits by localities against firearm dealers. In the process, they had also endangered ongoing investigations.” (Gun Law News)


To be even more specific:


From the 2006 H.R.2862:


That no funds appropriated under this or any other Act with respect to any fiscal year may be used to disclose part or all of the contents of the Firearms Trace System database maintained by the National Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or any information required to be kept by licensees pursuant to section 923(g) of title 18, United States Code, or required to be reported pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (7) of such section 923(g), to anyone other than a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency or a prosecutor solely in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution and then only such information as pertains to the geographic jurisdiction of the law enforcement agency requesting the disclosure and not for use in any civil action or proceeding other than an action or proceeding commenced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or a review of such an action or proceeding, to enforce the provisions of chapter 44 of such title, and all such data shall be immune from legal process and shall not be subject to subpoena or other discovery in any civil action in a State or Federal court or in any administrative proceeding other than a proceeding commenced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to enforce the provisions of that chapter, or a review of such an action or proceeding; except that this proviso shall not be construed to prevent the disclosure of statistical information concerning total production, importation, and exportation by each licensed importer (as defined in section 921(a)(9) of such title) and licensed manufacturer (as defined in section 921(a)(10) of such title):


Going back to the simple summary, Obama wants to allow the ATF to release gun trace data to the public. This will result in an influx of frivolous lawsuits and a general endangerment of ongoing investigations.


According to CNN, Obama also wants to permanently reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired on September 13th, 2004. As proven above, this ban is a useless waste of money that simply infringes the second amendment rights of all Americans. In fact, “the ban triggered speculative price increases and ramped-up production of the banned firearms.”(RKBA)

In conclusion, President Elect Obama as some serious thinking to do. This is only one of many issues where Obama fails to see the underlying problems and plausible solutions. If he is really about “Change,” then he needs to start soon. Otherwise, the next four years are going to be turbulent times.



Sources:
Gun Law News: http://www.gunlawnews.org/Analysis/tiahrt062607-3.html
RKBA: http://rkba.org/research/smith/AWBrief.pdf
CNN: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

Sports Law Case- Clarett V. NFL

In 2004, Maurice Clarett, an Ohio State standout running back brought suit to the NFL for not letting him in on the draft because it was his 2nd year in the NFL. Law prohibits an NFL player from leaving college until they are a junior. He brought the case to a federal judge.





I think that there are two sides to this debate



Maurices side-



Clarett said that by not letting him play, and get paid in the NFL, they were denying him of a job, thus he needed the income, and they wouldnt let him get it. I think that Clarett had every right to be saying this. I do not, however, think it is wise to be leaving college early, and i do agree with the federal laws in place today. He kept saying he needed money, a job, and an income to satisfy his goals.



The NFL's side-

They argued that he was not part of the trust agreement between the NFL and the NFL players associatian agreement in 1993 that players must play a minimum of 2 years of college football. They had the laws on their side, and they had every right in the case.



The outcome-

The judge ruled that Maurice Clarett had every right to enter the draft, and make an income for his family





I believe that the decision was the wrong one! It first of all is against the law to enter the draft early, let alone stupid. You should take your time, finish school, wait until you are more mature of a person to make that kind of decision. Clarett was drafted late second round. He then went on to get cut by the Denver Broncos, and got arrested twice for armed robbery and posession of weapons. This shows that all he went through was truly not worth it. All of his whining for one extra year of college? His grades were average too! I find this ridiculous, and I do not see how the judge voted for Clarett.

Transporting Guantanamo Bay detainees to U.S.

President elect Barack Obama talked about many different policies when he was campaining for president. But how many will actually go into place when he becomes president in 2009?

When Barack was campaigning he talked about how Guantanamo Bay was a “sad chapter in American history" AP reports that Obama's advisors are making a plan which to transfer some if not all of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay to the U.S. for trial in the legal system. However moving these detainees may mean that the U.S. may have to make a new controversial system of justice. The Obama advisors defend this way of thinking by saying “We can’t put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there.”

There is an issue here in whether the detainees should be shipped to the U.S. to be tried in the current legal system or if they should just stay in Guantanamo Bay. The Wall Street Journal Law Blog has written about this topic and has provided some key information about how this would effect the current legal system. The actual removal would mean some detainees would go free while others would go into the American legal system. Critics have said that this would cost to much money to do and may entail long periods of time to try a single case. However there are also other detainees that have cases involving classified material related to National Security. These detainees would need a new special court specifically for dealing national security cases. This would also entail large ammounts of money and time in order to have a trial for everyone of the detainees.

Whatever your opinion is about Guantanamo Bay and its detainees it is almost guaranteed that Barack Obama will implement these new policies as soon as he enters office in 2009 as he has recently made the issue of closing the prison a top priority.

Gay Marriage Now Legal in Connecticut

On Wednesday November 12th the Connecticut superior judge ruled that same sex marriage was legal. Gay and lesbian couples may now pick up a marriage license in the great state of Connecticut.

The biggest issue here isnt whether you think gay marriage should be allowed or not, its who gets to decided whether gay marriage should be allowed or not. So far, only TWO states out of the entire 50 states have legalized gay marriage. Those two states are Connecticut and Massachuets. So the question that I have is if we leave the decision up to state governments, will it ever be legalized in every state? I beleive the answer is no! A prime example of this is just recently California not passing the law to legalize gay marriage. California is just one state out of many to not allow gay marriage. But even with saying all that, I still believe that each state must decide and not the federal government.

If the federal government intervens, then we will have a huge national debate on this, thus taking away the much needed focus on issues that pertain to everyone like the economy and the war. So whether you beleive that gay marriage is wrong or right, I believe it must be decided on a state by state basis in order for the country to run to its best ability.

5 Ways to Avoid Breaking Copyright Laws

5 Ways to Avoid Breaking Copyright Laws

By Alex G.

1. Know What Can Be Copyrighted.

If you're going to avoid breaking copyright laws, you're probably going to need to know what can be copyrighted. As I was researching copyright law information for my Business Law class, I stumbled upon this webpage and was shocked to discover that, as well as books and music, people can copyright photographs, dances, buildings, and even sculptures. Believe it or not, even maps can fall under the copyrightable picture category. Don't worry about using Google maps or Mapquest though, because you aren't specifically using the maps through your own domain.

2. Only Write Criticisms and Parodies of Copyrighted Works.

Have you ever noticed that movie critics like Roger Ebert don't have to seek out copyright owners for the films he critiques? This is because, though people cannot write stories based on copyrighted materials, we can write critiques and parodies. The Fair Use doctrine (see number 4 for a further explanation) doctrine allows us to make fun of movies and books! So feel free to do so, just don't write stories based on characters or the storyline from a copyrighted work.

3. Realize that even Images Without a Watermark could be Copyrighted.

Some people like to think that just images with a watermark or copyright label are free game, and this isn't true. As a matter of fact, in the USA almost all privately created or original work after April of 1989 are copyrighted, whether they have a notification or not.

4. You Have Fair Use!

In certain circumstances, you are allowed to use, for example, clips from a movie to show your point in a movie review, or show a short snippet of a song in a project. This is thanks to a doctrine called Fair Use. However, to continue to avoid breaking Copyright Law, you have to stay within your limits of how much you can use of the copyrighted product.

5. Don't Use Obviously Copyrighted Images.

When putting together a powerpoint or otherwise visual project, be sure to avoid using images with watermarks or copyright marks somewhere on the page unless you have permission for use from the artist or photographer. This happens frequently when people search for images on google and use them without regard to the owner of the image. An example of an obviously copyrighted image:

(This image is from DPhoto Journal, a website dedicated to Digital Camera Reviews & Photography Tips.)

Curfew Laws

In January of 2008, new curfew laws were established in Illinois. Previously, there was an 11 o'clock curfew on weekdays and a 12 o'clock curfew on weekends. Today, the new law set both curfews one hour earlier. The law continues to say that it only applies to driving. Teenagers 17 and under can be out, but can't be driving. Also, if the teenager is driving home from a job, religious, or school event, he/she is exempt from the law. I think that the curfew should be pushed back to where is was originally. This law is unreasonable, inconvenient, and unnecessary. It puts teenagers in conflicting situations. For example, a student has a huge test the next day so he decides to go to a friend's house to study. It doesn't make sense to make the student go home as early as 945 (in order to get home in time for the state curfew) when they could have used the extra hour or so to study. Another situation is a group of high school kids are hanging out at a friends house. No drinking, drugs, or anything illegal is going on. Why should a high school senior, who is doing nothing wrong, be required to go home at 1045 on a Saturday night? One last example is a school team coming home from a game. When the opposing school is far away, an athlete can get back to school as late as 930. Why is it okay for the state to prohibit a high school team to go out for a piece of pizza together after a victory?

I will admit that this law does make sense in certain areas of the state. Research shows that between the hours of 10-11 on weekdays and 11-12 on weekends, the amount of accidents and shootings rises. So, naturally, the state made the curfew earlier to avoid these statistics. In places like the city, it makes sense to differentiate between driving and walking curfew because walking home is more common in the city. However, in the suburbs, people leave much farther away from each other, making it impossible to walk home. I think that the state should make curfew laws based on area, instead of one law for the whole state. Illinois varies from city, to suburb, and rural, so different areas should require different rules. 

Shaky Economy Plan

As you may know by now that Barack Obama won the race against his Republican rival , Senator John McCain to become the first African American president. Obama beat McCain by a two to one margin. Obama's victory gave the Democratic party control of both the White House and the Congress for the first time since 1992. After the eight year term of George W. Bush the American electorate were very ready for a change because they wanted something new. Many analysts said the Obama's campaign use a good source of modern technology; like cell phone calls, texts and e-mail to reach the younger first time voters. The deteriorating and sinking stock market left the middle class voters fearing of their life's saving. Other things that helped Obama win were McCain's failings about the stock market and Obama's choice in the Vice President Senator Joe Biden because he helped relate to working class Democrats and independent voters in the key states that Obama won.

Democrats Craft Economic Plan

As the Democrats gained the majority of the house after last Tuesdays election day, the Democrats moved to mandate their action plan. The plan would have a $100 billion immediate stimulus spending and new tax cuts for the middle class in the early of next year. Congress has already approved a $25 billion loan package. Today President - Elect Barack Obama meet with President George W. Bush at the White House to talk about the smooth transition to President. This was the first time the two have spoke, since Obama was elected the next President.

10 Reasons why people shoplift

www.mindspring.com/~stancom/shop.html

1. They feel like they can get something out of nothing and that nothing is like a gift to them that they must receive. The thought makes them want it more and more and the deal is worth it to them.

2. It feels like a major thrill ride that can only be ridden on if they shoplift something they like or enjoy. However, sometimes the product they're stealing they don't even want it, but they steal it anyways just for the thrill.

3. They're depressed and the only way they think they can cure the depression or at least make it a little bit better is by shoplifting. Depression is common for many people in this world and 1/3 of shoplifters suffer from depression.

4. They're angry from something that previously just happened. Someone might've said something that angered the person and they decide to rebel by shoplifting. Rebelling can be found in many other ways, such as slashing tires, burning stuff, destroying random objects, and more and more. Other types of anger can be from just being angry on a regular basis and those types of people usually seek for anger management classes.

5. They're addicted to shoplifting because they're either addicted to some drug or because they've done it already a bunch of times. Lots of drug addicts say that shoplifting is equally addicting to them as drugs are addicting. They might say that "this time will be the last time", but that is usually never the case. 

6. They suffer from a condition known as kleptomania where they are addicted to shoplifting and they need to shoplift in order to be and feel normal. This condition could eventually be treated with time.

7. They're influenced by other people such as family, friends, or co-workers. This usually happens with teenagers, but could be found with adults too. Shoplifting to some teens means that the shoplifting teenager is cool and not scared of anything. Some other teenagers have nothing to do and the group of friends will go to a store and shoplift just to get something nice and get a thrill out of it.

8. They're desperate in getting that particular product because it would boost their appearance or anything else. Sometimes it's also because others have it and in order to be on the same page as that person you have to get that product, but you might not have enough money for it. 

9. They feel like they have more control over their lives and that they can be confident and do anything they want to do. Some people have self-esteems and shoplifting might give them some sort of boost on their self-esteem. Others might say that they don't have any "guts" or assertiveness and the person might want to prove that they're possible of taking control of a situation or being the bigger man or woman.

10. They've heard that shoplifting is easy to get away with. Almost every shoplifter believes that the cameras and shoplifting security is a pure joke and that shoplifting is almost a piece of cake. I reality it's easy, but not as easy as people think it is. Cameras don't really help that much because the person probably will be gone by the time they leave. However there is a possibility of the store catching you doing it and them tracking your license plate. Many shoplifters don't know this and will get caught. However though the store can't always tell if someone is shoplifting or not and they can't assume anything until they have clear cut evidence. Another way of getting caught is by getting caught by an employee who is wearing normal clothing and just looking and acting like a normal customer. This method is getting more and more common, but is really time consuming because not everyone is shoplifting at a specific time. The final method is hiring some security personnel to scan the building. This is smart, but many shoplifters could get away with shoplifting because they can tell that they're security. The best way would be to hire a security guard who wears normal clothing.