But then again, it wouldn't take long for one of the workers to escape and kill someone else
I am not merely tolerant of, but in fact absolutely in favor of, the death penalty for those escaping from prison while serving a sentence for a violent crime. And yes, I've seen The Shawshank Redemption, so don't bother trying to play that card. (Not you HB, I mean others.)
Re: Politics
32Cali
I'm sure alot of what I post most people around here care less about but that Boeing story is a big freakin deal. I hope people follow it.
I am so sick of progressives choking the $#!^ out of our capitalist and free market system, then after screwing it up they sit back and gripe about the system and want a different one. Which is their plan all along.
After Boeing says fine, we'll move our operations to Hong Kong or something, then the same politicians who ran them out of the country will demonize the hell out of them for all the jobs they cost us.
I'm sure alot of what I post most people around here care less about but that Boeing story is a big freakin deal. I hope people follow it.
I am so sick of progressives choking the $#!^ out of our capitalist and free market system, then after screwing it up they sit back and gripe about the system and want a different one. Which is their plan all along.
After Boeing says fine, we'll move our operations to Hong Kong or something, then the same politicians who ran them out of the country will demonize the hell out of them for all the jobs they cost us.
Re: Politics
33South Carolina ran a big Amazon new operation out of South Carolina a couple weeks back over a tax issue. The State Legislature is trying to fix it now. I think it might have been an Amazon bluff.
Not that Amazon is all THAT.
My ideal government taxes and governs as little as possible.
And doesn't kill anyone. Unless being shot at.
Not that Amazon is all THAT.
My ideal government taxes and governs as little as possible.
And doesn't kill anyone. Unless being shot at.
Re: Politics
34Supreme Court to California: Release 33,000 prisoners in 2 years
In what is being billed as one of the biggest prison release orders in history, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ordered California government to reduce its prison population by nearly 33,000 over a period of two years to avoid "serious constitutional violations."
The Supreme Court, in a sharply divided 5-4 decision, upheld an injunction by a three-judge panel of a lower court that had ordered California to overhaul its prison system that has held nearly twice its designed capacity.
The Supreme Court said California's current prison system endangered guards as well as inmates.
The apex court said "grossly inadequate provision of medical and mental health care" resulted in "needless suffering and death." It ruled that California's prison population must be reduced from 143,000 to 110,000 by mid-2013.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by the court's more liberal justices - Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - wrote the majority opinion, citing evidence from two decades of litigation, including a prisoner dying of testicular cancer after prison doctors failed to do a work up for cancer for the prisoner, who was in pain for 17 months; wait times for treatment of mentally ill inmates being as high as 12 months; suicidal inmates held for 24 hours in "telephone booth-sized cages without toilets"; backlogs of up to 700 prisoners waiting to see a doctor; up to 54 inmates sharing a single toilet; gyms converted into triple-bunked living quarters that breed disease; and violence victimizing guards and inmates alike.
In one case, a prisoner "was assaulted in a crowded gymnasium, prison staff did not even learn of the injury until the prisoner had been dead for several hours," Kennedy wrote.
Though Kennedy expressed "grave concern" in releasing prisoners in large numbers, yet the prison conditions violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
"A prison that deprives prisoners of basic sustenance, including adequate medical care, is incompatible with the concept of human dignity and has no place in civilized society," Kennedy wrote in the 52-page majority opinion.
The dissenters, led by Justice Antonin Scalia, called the decision "staggering" and "absurd" and said it "takes the federal courts wildly beyond their institutional capacity."
The dissenters, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, warned the court was freeing "the equivalent of three Army divisions" of criminals and was "gambling with the safety of the people of California."
"The majority is gambling with the safety of the people of California," Alito wrote. "I fear that today's decision, like prior prisoner release orders, will lead to a grim roster of victims. I hope that I am wrong."
Alito also warned that the Constitution does not give federal judges the authority to run state penal systems. "Decisions regarding state prisons have profound public safety and financial implications, and states are generally free to make these decisions as they choose," he wrote.
The ruling ends a legal battle that began in 1990, when inmates sued the state, challenging the substandard treatment of mentally ill inmates. In 2001, they were joined by another class action lawsuit with prisoners suing over medical care for purposes of the court's decision.
In 2006, a federal judge appointed a receiver to manage the health care system, saying state officials were unable to comply with constitutional standards. After a trial in 2009, a three-judge panel said the system could be repaired only if the state first addressed overcrowding. At the time, there were 156,000 inmates in a system designed for 80,000.
At issue was whether federal judges had the power to order the release of state prisoners as a necessary means of curing a constitutional violation.
Many rights groups have hailed the ruling, saying it was high time the state overhauled its prison system.
California locks up too many people who pose no threat to public safety and keeps them locked up for too long," said Allen Hopper, an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney in San Francisco.
Donald Specter, an attorney for the inmates and the director of the nonprofit Prison Law Office, has welcomed the ruling. "This landmark decision will not only help prevent prisoners from dying of malpractice and neglect but it will make the prisons safer for the staff, improve public safety and save the taxpayers billions of dollars," he said.
It costs California $49,000 annually to house an inmate, or almost seven times what we spend on each child in our public schools.
"We want to see that money go into community based programs that will help those prisoners transition into our society," said Prison reform advocate Debbie Reyes of the California Prison Moratorium Project.
California Governor Jerry Brown's administration was critical of the ruling but said the state will try to comply with it without releasing any dangerous criminals. "As we work to carry out the Court's ruling, I will take all steps necessary to protect public safety," Brown said in a statement.
Brown said Assembly Bill 109 could accomplish what the Supreme Court wants and though the measure has been approved, the legislature has refused to fund it.
The Assembly Bill 109, which calls for a realignment of the prison and parole system, shifts to counties the responsibility for incarcerating many low-risk inmates. Under the bill, up to 30,000 state prison inmates could be transferred to county jails over three years. First, however, state officials must agree on a way to pay for it.
Under former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the state's lawmakers had sped up the releases of some low-risk inmates and stopped returning parolees to prison for minor violations. Declaring the state's overcrowded prisons a "state of emergency" in 2006, Schwarzenegger had transferred nearly 10,000 prisoners to other states.
In what is being billed as one of the biggest prison release orders in history, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ordered California government to reduce its prison population by nearly 33,000 over a period of two years to avoid "serious constitutional violations."
The Supreme Court, in a sharply divided 5-4 decision, upheld an injunction by a three-judge panel of a lower court that had ordered California to overhaul its prison system that has held nearly twice its designed capacity.
The Supreme Court said California's current prison system endangered guards as well as inmates.
The apex court said "grossly inadequate provision of medical and mental health care" resulted in "needless suffering and death." It ruled that California's prison population must be reduced from 143,000 to 110,000 by mid-2013.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by the court's more liberal justices - Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - wrote the majority opinion, citing evidence from two decades of litigation, including a prisoner dying of testicular cancer after prison doctors failed to do a work up for cancer for the prisoner, who was in pain for 17 months; wait times for treatment of mentally ill inmates being as high as 12 months; suicidal inmates held for 24 hours in "telephone booth-sized cages without toilets"; backlogs of up to 700 prisoners waiting to see a doctor; up to 54 inmates sharing a single toilet; gyms converted into triple-bunked living quarters that breed disease; and violence victimizing guards and inmates alike.
In one case, a prisoner "was assaulted in a crowded gymnasium, prison staff did not even learn of the injury until the prisoner had been dead for several hours," Kennedy wrote.
Though Kennedy expressed "grave concern" in releasing prisoners in large numbers, yet the prison conditions violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
"A prison that deprives prisoners of basic sustenance, including adequate medical care, is incompatible with the concept of human dignity and has no place in civilized society," Kennedy wrote in the 52-page majority opinion.
The dissenters, led by Justice Antonin Scalia, called the decision "staggering" and "absurd" and said it "takes the federal courts wildly beyond their institutional capacity."
The dissenters, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, warned the court was freeing "the equivalent of three Army divisions" of criminals and was "gambling with the safety of the people of California."
"The majority is gambling with the safety of the people of California," Alito wrote. "I fear that today's decision, like prior prisoner release orders, will lead to a grim roster of victims. I hope that I am wrong."
Alito also warned that the Constitution does not give federal judges the authority to run state penal systems. "Decisions regarding state prisons have profound public safety and financial implications, and states are generally free to make these decisions as they choose," he wrote.
The ruling ends a legal battle that began in 1990, when inmates sued the state, challenging the substandard treatment of mentally ill inmates. In 2001, they were joined by another class action lawsuit with prisoners suing over medical care for purposes of the court's decision.
In 2006, a federal judge appointed a receiver to manage the health care system, saying state officials were unable to comply with constitutional standards. After a trial in 2009, a three-judge panel said the system could be repaired only if the state first addressed overcrowding. At the time, there were 156,000 inmates in a system designed for 80,000.
At issue was whether federal judges had the power to order the release of state prisoners as a necessary means of curing a constitutional violation.
Many rights groups have hailed the ruling, saying it was high time the state overhauled its prison system.
California locks up too many people who pose no threat to public safety and keeps them locked up for too long," said Allen Hopper, an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney in San Francisco.
Donald Specter, an attorney for the inmates and the director of the nonprofit Prison Law Office, has welcomed the ruling. "This landmark decision will not only help prevent prisoners from dying of malpractice and neglect but it will make the prisons safer for the staff, improve public safety and save the taxpayers billions of dollars," he said.
It costs California $49,000 annually to house an inmate, or almost seven times what we spend on each child in our public schools.
"We want to see that money go into community based programs that will help those prisoners transition into our society," said Prison reform advocate Debbie Reyes of the California Prison Moratorium Project.
California Governor Jerry Brown's administration was critical of the ruling but said the state will try to comply with it without releasing any dangerous criminals. "As we work to carry out the Court's ruling, I will take all steps necessary to protect public safety," Brown said in a statement.
Brown said Assembly Bill 109 could accomplish what the Supreme Court wants and though the measure has been approved, the legislature has refused to fund it.
The Assembly Bill 109, which calls for a realignment of the prison and parole system, shifts to counties the responsibility for incarcerating many low-risk inmates. Under the bill, up to 30,000 state prison inmates could be transferred to county jails over three years. First, however, state officials must agree on a way to pay for it.
Under former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the state's lawmakers had sped up the releases of some low-risk inmates and stopped returning parolees to prison for minor violations. Declaring the state's overcrowded prisons a "state of emergency" in 2006, Schwarzenegger had transferred nearly 10,000 prisoners to other states.
Re: Politics
35Now dagnabbit, Cali. You tellin me your state continues to pay 15 million a year to care for psychos on death row when your prison system is grossly over-populated? Just another reason your state is in the mess it's in.
Too bad they just don't go ahead and off all the murderers on death row. Then the state would only have to release 32,000 child molesters, rapists and armed robbers onto your citizens.
Thing is, it's not just your citizens. More & more people from your fine state are moving to Montana. First time one of those released convicts comes here and rapes or kills someone I'm gonna give you guys a cussin'.
Too bad they just don't go ahead and off all the murderers on death row. Then the state would only have to release 32,000 child molesters, rapists and armed robbers onto your citizens.
Thing is, it's not just your citizens. More & more people from your fine state are moving to Montana. First time one of those released convicts comes here and rapes or kills someone I'm gonna give you guys a cussin'.
Re: Politics
38Not partisan, but I'm very concerned that a mining company has quietly purchased a bunch of connected properties near historic Virginia City, Nevada using different company names the past few years to keep it "hush hush."
6,100 connected acres in a sprawling shape.
Of course, the "different company name strategy" is how Walt Disney was able to quietly acquire all the land that is now Walt Disney World in the 1960's.
This NV company is planning to "open pit" mine gold and silver just south of historic Virginia City in a couple of months. JUST south.
They bought the oldest hotel in Nevada in Gold Hill, Nevada where my wife had our wedding brunch after we were married in the oldest chapel in Nevada just up the street a mile or so in Virginia City.
There are some places that should be avoided for open pit mining. In my book, Virginia City is one. First fame of Mark Twain, and all.
I'd never chain myself to a digging machine, or anything like that. Though I once touted taking up arms with South Carolinians as South Carolina had done previously in American History. The time I touted involved keeping the feds from dumping nuclear waste in South Carolina.
I'm doing some open minded research on this company's plans for safeguarding the sanctity of "The Silver Lode" mining history. And for minimal disruption to the few roads in the area with their requisite mining equipment.
I'll write some emails.
We'll see how it goes. My wife has been urging me to show her how to use firepower for years. In personal safeguarding prudence, I've avoided.
She's innately athletic, and smart. I know she'll shoot well if I ever teach her.
(which might be a good personal reason not to......
......)
6,100 connected acres in a sprawling shape.
Of course, the "different company name strategy" is how Walt Disney was able to quietly acquire all the land that is now Walt Disney World in the 1960's.
This NV company is planning to "open pit" mine gold and silver just south of historic Virginia City in a couple of months. JUST south.
They bought the oldest hotel in Nevada in Gold Hill, Nevada where my wife had our wedding brunch after we were married in the oldest chapel in Nevada just up the street a mile or so in Virginia City.
There are some places that should be avoided for open pit mining. In my book, Virginia City is one. First fame of Mark Twain, and all.
I'd never chain myself to a digging machine, or anything like that. Though I once touted taking up arms with South Carolinians as South Carolina had done previously in American History. The time I touted involved keeping the feds from dumping nuclear waste in South Carolina.
I'm doing some open minded research on this company's plans for safeguarding the sanctity of "The Silver Lode" mining history. And for minimal disruption to the few roads in the area with their requisite mining equipment.
I'll write some emails.
We'll see how it goes. My wife has been urging me to show her how to use firepower for years. In personal safeguarding prudence, I've avoided.
She's innately athletic, and smart. I know she'll shoot well if I ever teach her.
(which might be a good personal reason not to......
......)Re: Politics
39Why did they buy the Gold Hill hotel, Cali?
I hope not to tear it down or anything like that. It's very historic, and a hot spot for ghost hunting enthusiasts.
The old Washoe Club is very haunted as well.
Me personally I have no problem with mining and drilling and the like, as long as it wouldn't effect the city. Keep us posted.
I have quite an arsenal at home myself.
I hope not to tear it down or anything like that. It's very historic, and a hot spot for ghost hunting enthusiasts.
The old Washoe Club is very haunted as well.
Me personally I have no problem with mining and drilling and the like, as long as it wouldn't effect the city. Keep us posted.
I have quite an arsenal at home myself.
Re: Politics
40Hillbilly
The company line is they bought the Gold Hill Hotel as a "good faith gesture of their intentions" with regard to operating while respecting the area's history. No word that I know of as to whether or not they plan to keep it open and operating.
With the market down they bought the place and the land for just a tick over $700,000. For perspective that's less than the cost of an average house in the Bay Area.
If you know the area well, they own property to the west and slight north of Virginia City, then down both sides of the road south to Gold Hill and then on down mostly on the west side of the road to Silver City. Then further south on the west side of the road approaching Carson City where on the approach they then have both sides of the road. The road is Highway 341 and Highway 342 along the way.
I look at the Reno Gazette website most days. Last week they teased the story every day, noting it would ONLY be available in the Sunday print edition. I went up to see the Nevada Reno football stadium for kicks and giggles and remembered to pick up the Sunday paper. My wife read the article in the car and paraphrased for me while I was driving I-80 home. I'll try to find it around here and see if there is anything more specifically to the hotel operation.
EDIT: No mention in the article as to whether the company plans to keep The Gold Hill Hotel in operation. Oh, and the purchase price was actually a tick over $800,000.
By the way, here is a link to the organized group concerned about the open pit mining so close to Silver City and whatever mining will be going on above Virginia City. At this time the company says the mines near Virginia City would be underground.
http://comstockresidents.org/
The company line is they bought the Gold Hill Hotel as a "good faith gesture of their intentions" with regard to operating while respecting the area's history. No word that I know of as to whether or not they plan to keep it open and operating.
With the market down they bought the place and the land for just a tick over $700,000. For perspective that's less than the cost of an average house in the Bay Area.
If you know the area well, they own property to the west and slight north of Virginia City, then down both sides of the road south to Gold Hill and then on down mostly on the west side of the road to Silver City. Then further south on the west side of the road approaching Carson City where on the approach they then have both sides of the road. The road is Highway 341 and Highway 342 along the way.
I look at the Reno Gazette website most days. Last week they teased the story every day, noting it would ONLY be available in the Sunday print edition. I went up to see the Nevada Reno football stadium for kicks and giggles and remembered to pick up the Sunday paper. My wife read the article in the car and paraphrased for me while I was driving I-80 home. I'll try to find it around here and see if there is anything more specifically to the hotel operation.
EDIT: No mention in the article as to whether the company plans to keep The Gold Hill Hotel in operation. Oh, and the purchase price was actually a tick over $800,000.
By the way, here is a link to the organized group concerned about the open pit mining so close to Silver City and whatever mining will be going on above Virginia City. At this time the company says the mines near Virginia City would be underground.
http://comstockresidents.org/
Last edited by Tribe Fan in SC/Cali on Thu May 26, 2011 3:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Politics
41And in other Reno-Virginia City news today.....
Adult entertainment venue Penthouse Club opens today
The Penthouse Club, a multimillion-dollar adult entertainment venue on the site of a previous strip club, opens tonight in southeast Reno.
It's the first club in the West for Penthouse men's magazine -- an effort to open a franchise in Las Vegas in 2008 failed -- and it has 100 non-dancing employees and 100 "Key Girl" entertainers, floor host Kevin Beachboard said.
Penthouse has opened 14 sites worldwide in the past decade, he said, adding the Reno-Tahoe region is ready for what he describes as an "extremely high end" club open to those 21 years old and older.
"The Key Girls will wear gowns. They don't walk around in their underwear," Beachboard said.
"It's all about hospitality," he said. "It's what makes us stand above the rest."
The owners held two job fairs last summer, he said, and more than 1,500 applicants showed up for employment opportunities in the club, which has a full-service restaurant, two bars, lounges, suites, three stages and valet parking. There is no gaming on the premises.
The 10,000-square-foot club, at 1060 Telegraph St. east of Terminal Way near Reno-Tahoe International Airport, is the site of the former Goldfinger's club.
"We gutted the whole place," Beachboard said. "We've put close to $18 million into the place with furniture made in Italy and glass stages and dancing booths and something like 30 TVs, including an 85-inch big screen."
He said entrance fees will be competitive: $20 on weekends and $10 on weekdays.
And for locals who sign up for the "775 Club" card, he said, entry charges will be half-off before 7 p.m., with points accrued from bar and restaurant spending that can be used toward discounts.
He said the Key Girl entertainers are considered independent contractors whose charges for lap dances are separate.
"They're 'P-E's,' professional entertainers, not strippers," Beachboard said. "It's a clean club. There's no hanky-panky going on."
http://www.rgj.com/article/20110429/BIZ ... Business|s
Adult entertainment venue Penthouse Club opens today
The Penthouse Club, a multimillion-dollar adult entertainment venue on the site of a previous strip club, opens tonight in southeast Reno.
It's the first club in the West for Penthouse men's magazine -- an effort to open a franchise in Las Vegas in 2008 failed -- and it has 100 non-dancing employees and 100 "Key Girl" entertainers, floor host Kevin Beachboard said.
Penthouse has opened 14 sites worldwide in the past decade, he said, adding the Reno-Tahoe region is ready for what he describes as an "extremely high end" club open to those 21 years old and older.
"The Key Girls will wear gowns. They don't walk around in their underwear," Beachboard said.
"It's all about hospitality," he said. "It's what makes us stand above the rest."
The owners held two job fairs last summer, he said, and more than 1,500 applicants showed up for employment opportunities in the club, which has a full-service restaurant, two bars, lounges, suites, three stages and valet parking. There is no gaming on the premises.
The 10,000-square-foot club, at 1060 Telegraph St. east of Terminal Way near Reno-Tahoe International Airport, is the site of the former Goldfinger's club.
"We gutted the whole place," Beachboard said. "We've put close to $18 million into the place with furniture made in Italy and glass stages and dancing booths and something like 30 TVs, including an 85-inch big screen."
He said entrance fees will be competitive: $20 on weekends and $10 on weekdays.
And for locals who sign up for the "775 Club" card, he said, entry charges will be half-off before 7 p.m., with points accrued from bar and restaurant spending that can be used toward discounts.
He said the Key Girl entertainers are considered independent contractors whose charges for lap dances are separate.
"They're 'P-E's,' professional entertainers, not strippers," Beachboard said. "It's a clean club. There's no hanky-panky going on."
http://www.rgj.com/article/20110429/BIZ ... Business|s
Re: Politics
42This Weiner story out of New York is boring me.
The media needs to get on to more important stuff.
The historically solid Democrat voters of his district will elect him again even if he kills all his immediate relatives.
The media needs to get on to more important stuff.
The historically solid Democrat voters of his district will elect him again even if he kills all his immediate relatives.
Re: Politics
44Word is, Weiner is going to enter the presidential race.
Rumor is he will pick atty. general Eric Holder as his running mate.
I look forward to getting one of the bumper stickers.
Rumor is he will pick atty. general Eric Holder as his running mate.
I look forward to getting one of the bumper stickers.