Muslims And Jews Spent A Day Of Prayer Together And The Result Was Beautiful
This is a long read but definitely worth it.
The city that once served as a prime example of broken policing now stands as a model of effective reform. Cincinnati’s lessons seem newly relevant as officials call for police reform in the aftermath of the deaths of Freddie Gray in Baltimore, Michael Brown in Ferguson and Tamir Rice in Cleveland. Indeed, the recently released report from President Obama’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing recommends that departments adopt some of the strategies used by Cincinnati. A task force convened by Ohio Governor John Kasich cited Cincinnati as a model for community-oriented policing and recommended that other law-enforcement agencies in that state develop similar reforms.
But the lessons of Cincinnati are complicated. Success required not just the adoption of a new method of policing, but also sustained pressure from federal officials, active support by the mayor, and the participation of local communities. If Cincinnati is a model of reform, then it is equally a sobering reminder of how difficult it can be to change entrenched systems.
Looking back, the results of Cincinnati’s reform efforts are startling. Between 1999 and 2014, Cincinnati saw a 69 percent reduction in police use-of-force incidents, a 42 percent reduction in citizen complaints and a 56 percent reduction in citizen injuries during encounters with police, according to a report by Robin S. Engel and M. Murat Ozer of the Institute of Crime Science at the University of Cincinnati. Violent crimes dropped from a high of 4,137 in the year after the riots, to 2,352 last year. Misdemeanor arrests dropped from 41,708 in 2000 to 17,913 last year.
Yet it might not be so simple to adopt Cincinnati’s changes in other cities. It took a long time—five to ten years, by some counts—to get police to actually buy into the reforms. Nobody likes it when somebody comes into their workplace and tells them how to do their job. The changes Cincinnati adopted were nothing short of a complete turnaround in how the city approached incarceration, crime and its relationship with its residents. And to make sure they were adopted, the federal government had to apply constant pressure, reminding all parties involved about the need to stay vigilant about reform.
When the argument gets shifted to a lack of abuse and yet has a dearth of evidence of real world utility you know the game is afoot.
The Times is correct that the NSA has not disclosed, nor have any reporters uncovered, any misuses of the call-records database for political or other corrupt purposes. (There were thousands of violations a year between 2006 and 2009, but they do not appear to have been politically motivated.) But the premise of that observation appears to be that privacy only matters when the information is misused.
We could not disagree more. Privacy is a right unto itself, fundamental to human dignity. Without it, human intimacy and artistic creativity would have little room to flourish. Ever-present eyes, even if watching with the best of intentions, spoil the sanctity of the spaces they invade. For that reason, no one would defend a government program that had swept up everyone’s phone calls, emails, or home videos by pointing out that the information had never been misused. The invasion of privacy, itself, is the abuse.
That abuse—one that a federal appeals court recently called “unprecedented” in scope—is the reason that many privacy advocates have called for far-reaching reform of NSA surveillance or, short of that, simple expiration of the three Patriot Act provisions now being debated in Congress. Anything else would risk irreversibly diminishing the privacy that our nation’s founders knew to be critical to liberty.
A comment made by a WBRZ-TV reporter resulted in his arrest early Thursday morning after he was issued a criminal summons for interfering with a law enforcement investigation, a Baton Rouge police report says.
Brett Buffington, 27, of 11959 Nicholson Drive, was booked on counts of interfering with an officer and intimidating a public official.
According to the report, Buffington interfered with a burglary investigation at the 600 block of South Eugene Drive at about 2:30 a.m. Thursday when he disobeyed police requests to leave the area and took photos using a flash, which diverted the officers’ attention and put “their lives in danger.”
Police placed Buffington in the back of a police unit until the area was made safe, the report says. Buffington was then issued a criminal summons and told he was free to leave, to which he told an officer, “Hope you enjoy the rest of your career.”
So, pointing out the possibility of legal accountability is “intimidation of a public official?” Would you also be arrested for threatening to report to internal affairs? Get a lawyer? Tell the judge you’re not guilty? Vote against the sheriff? Publicize the event?
I don’t think a federal civil rights investigation is out of place here.
Man finds fossils. Man runs museum dedicated to ancient dogma and myth. Man decides factual evidence is still up to “interpretation.”
1. A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
Potentially complicating his 2016 bid, the Wisconsin governor has said he will sign a 20-week abortion bill that includes no exemption for rape or incest.
When it comes to abortion, Scott Walker aims to keep his promises.
But doing so could make his life—and his almost presidential campaign—tricky.
That’s because Republicans in the Wisconsin state legislature have introduced legislation banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The bill is expected to get a vote in the next few weeks, before the state’s biennial budget passes. But unlike a federal bill on the issue, this legislation doesn’t include an exception allowing abortions for victims of rape or incest.
The governor plans to sign the legislation, Laurel Patrick, a spokeswoman for Walker’s office, emailed.
On the morning of September 11, 2011, Krystal Moore thought she was dying. Sharp pain stabbed at her stomach, so much so that she curled up into a fetal position on her bed. She didn’t know what was happening. Though she was pregnant, she was only six months along, not nearly ready to give birth.
She couldn’t simply call the family doctor. She was an inmate, serving time at the Jerome Combs Detention Center in Kankakee, Illinois, for smoking marijuana while on probation. But in the early hours of that Sunday morning, her pain was escalating quickly.
“I woke up hurting,” she told RH Reality Check. “I tried to get in the shower, and I couldn’t.”
The Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that in 2007, the most recent year for which data are available, 1.7 million children had a parent in state or federal prison.
But since women inmates are more likely than males to have been their children’s primary caregivers, those children are often displaced — either sent to live with family members outside the home or placed in state care.
In addition, the comparatively limited number of women’s facilities — there are 28 federal women’s prisons, versus at least 83 for men — means that women often end up farther from their homes and families, compounding the strain of maintaining healthy relationships while they’re serving time.
PRINCETON, N.J. — Half of Americans consider themselves “pro-choice” on abortion, surpassing the 44% who identify as “pro-life.” This is the first time since 2008 that that the pro-choice position has had a statistically significant lead in Americans’ abortion views
For most of the past five years, Americans have been fairly evenly divided in their association with the two abortion labels. The only exception between 2010 and 2014 was in May 2012, when the pro-life position led by 50% to 41%.
Prior to 2009, the pro-choice side almost always predominated, including in the mid-1990s by a substantial margin. While support for the pro-choice position has yet to return to the 53% to 56% level seen at the time, the trend has been moving in that direction since the 2012 reading.
GOP Presidential candidate Rick Santorum is not the first person to do so, but during his first official even in Iowa he compared scientists convinced that the climate is changing to people who once believed the world was flat:
One man stood up during the event’s Q&A portion, expressing concern about climate change. Addressing it, the audience member said, should be an imperative to Christians commanded by the Bible to be stewards of the Earth.
“I always have problems when people come up and say the science is settled,” said Santorum, winner of the 2012 Iowa caucuses. “That’s what they said about the world being flat. When someone says the science is settled you’re not a scientist, because scientists never say the science is settled.”
Some might say that those who once denied the spherical shape, or scientifically proven fact, that the Earth is round are much more like those who deny the scientifically proven fact that man is the cause of climate change….but that may take some thought and introspection I suppose