[QUOTE=chappy;421281][URL]http://www.theonion.com/graphic/what-you-need-know-about-oregon-militia-standoff-52111[/URL]

The Onion breaks from its long standing tradition of satire to publish a serious news item.[/QUOTE]
Excellent summation!

.

Ethics Watchdog: NRA Is Lying About Its Political Spending
 

[URL="http://prospect.org/blog/checks/ethics-watchdog-nra-lying-about-its-political-spending-0"]Checks: Political Money & Democracy[/URL]
[QUOTE]The National Rifle Association might be misrepresenting the extent of its political activity, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). The ethics watchdog filed a new complaint today with the IRS calling on the agency to investigate alleged discrepancies in political spending disclosures.

According to the complaint, the reported \$12.6 million in political expenditures during the 2014 election cycle. However, it only reported \$5.79 million in political spending to the IRS. And its annual audited statement showed that the group had covered \$18.5 million of its PAC’s expenses—bringing the grand total of political expenditures up to \$31.1 million.
[/QUOTE]

I just wanted to drop in and point out that one of the geniuses who have the best grasp on Federalism and the Constitution[URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/protester_arrested_in_burns_dr.html"] drove a stolen government truck[/URL] to the Safeway to get some snacks.

Did authorities cut all electric power and water supply from the building yet? That would be a peacefull way to end this situation more quickly. Catching anyone who get out or try to get out. make a no fly zone around the building too (droping supply, anyone?).

[QUOTE=chappy;422655]I just wanted to drop in and point out that one of the geniuses who have the best grasp on Federalism and the Constitution[URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/protester_arrested_in_burns_dr.html"] drove a stolen government truck[/URL] to the Safeway to get some snacks.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for this story. :smile:

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/01/whats-your-threat-score.html]What's Your Threat Score?[/url] | naked capitalism
[quote]Beware is the new stats-bank that helps officers analyze “billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and…social-media postings” to ultimately come up with a score that indicates a person’s potential for violence, according to a Washington Post story. No word yet on whether this meta data includes photos and facial recognition software. For example would an ordinary person, yet to commit a crime, be flagged when seen wearing a hoodie in a gated Florida community.

The company tries to paint itself as a savior to first responders, claiming they want to help them “understand the nature of the environment they may encounter during the window of a 911 event.” Think of it like someone pulling your credit score when you apply for a job. Except, in this instance you never applied for the job and they’re pulling your credit score anyway because they knew you might apply. It’s that level of creepiness.[/quote]
And if you think avoiding the life-sucking social media (as I do, except for this particular big-data-only-in-the-numbers-we-crunch venue here) will help keep you out of the AI's crosshairs, think again:
[i]
"Suppose a person doesn’t use social media or own a house but was once arrested when he was 17 for possession of marijuana. The absence of data might lend itself to a high threat level."
[/i]
And unlike your credit score(s), you've no way of viewing your profile and challenging inaccuracies. "Safety through opacity, comrades!"

"Sleepwalking our way into totalitarianism," is spot-on.

WTF?
 

I can't wait to have more of these kind of [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/24/sheriff-gun-shop-shootout-over-25-kills-2-wounds-2.html"]folks[/URL] walking around....

It looks like a prosecutor would have to [URL="http://www.newsms.fm/mississippis-version-of-stand-your-ground/"]prove[/URL] that the shooter was in the gun shop illegally before he shot, or prove that he provoked the owner, to be able to prosecute. It will be interesting to see how the NRA spins this one.

Oregon protest leader Ammon Bundy seized in deadly clash
[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35416516[/url]

Ethical question
 

Most people here are probably aware of the precarious survival odds for rhinos. Poachers continue to pick them off from protected areas. Today, I saw this story about a program in two preserves in Kenya, which involves [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35503077"]snipers shooting presumed poachers on sight[/URL]. When I mentioned this story to my partner he became incensed that I might come anywhere close to accepting such a policy.

I am not sure what drives the level of presumption. Given the numbers of dead rhinos and dead poachers mentioned, one might guess that the sniper teams do not wait for a rhino to be killed. This suggests preemptive killing, based, perhaps, on such things as being in a wildlife refuge with weapons. It is definitely "shoot first, ask questions later."

So what do people think?

[QUOTE]I'm lying in wet grass with three heavily armed Kenyans. One hundred metres ahead stand three white rhinos. They're oblivious to our presence, and from here, with three shots, my companions could earn themselves a year's salary each.


But they won't. They're part of an SAS-trained private army raised to protect the species from poachers. I ask the sergeant what he would do if he spotted one of his friends or neighbours up to no good.


His reply is unequivocal. "If he comes to kill rhinos he is robbing the entire community. And I will shoot him dead."
[/QUOTE]

If I understand the article correctly:
[LIST=1][*]Rhino horn fetches exorbitant prices because it is scarce and falsely believed to cure many illnesses.[*]To counter poaching in Kenya, convicted poachers can expect 25 years in prison.[*]As a result of (2), poachers are willing to use extreme violence to avoid being caught.[*]As a result of (3), the park officials justify pre-emptive killing of (suspected) poachers as the only safe way to deal with them.[/LIST]Is it really impossible to reduce the demand? (Prove that horn is no cure, or flood the market with synthetically produced horn that works just as well, or as a last resort remove the horns yourself without harming the rhino.)
Is it really impossible to reduce the prison term (so poachers are less violent) but increase the likelihood of catching them (alive)?