People are so blase about contacts with law enforcement.
It would probably change your opinion a bit if you were dragged out of your workplace (or wherever), hauled to the police station, and forced to give a DNA sample, and locked up to wait for the results; guilty until proven innocent.
Where did I get that? Well how do you think this part proceeded: "The woman's father had a sample taken by investigators but the test cleared him of suspicion." Did you think the officers just asked nicely to drop by, at some convenient time, at the home of a suspected serial rapist/murderer, to ask nicely for a DNA sample? And kindly let him stay at home, to give him a good opportunity to flee, while they waited for results?
DNA can be multiplied, that's what PCR is about. They take the original sample and PCR some of it to make a lot of copies, which could then be submitted to the service. Just dip a swab and send it in. The lab at the service might notice that the sample is a little odd, but they're not in business to reject odd samples.
Between the slavish corporate support of national censorship policies and all of the moves worldwide to block "fake news" (i.e. any viewpoints those in power don't like) it's beginning to look like this generation will be known for being censored.
That's so sad, given that the web was supposed to make the free exchange of ideas easier.
I don't know why anyone is worried about this. Verizon and AT&T, respectively, control 35% and 33% of the market. T-Mobile and Sprint combined would control 30% (right now their respective shares are 17% and 13%). There is no way that AT&T and Verizon are ever going to allow this to happen, because it would turn also-ran upstarts into a competitor on equal footing. Now the skullduggery starts.
It's completely unclear as to how information on the dead man's phone would have aided an investigation into his being shot and killed by officers.
The police are merely looking for a cause. People don't just get up one day and decide to be killed by a cop. There must be a reason why this event happened.
Maybe the deceased was a drug dealer. Maybe he was a thug, who had committed previous violent crimes. Maybe he had previous arrests.
Failing that, maybe he had a nasty temper, maybe he beat his wife/S.O. Maybe he wrote a manifesto espousing the overturn of world order. Maybe he associated with people who did, if he didn't himself.
Failing that, maybe he was suicidal (suicide by cop). Maybe he was dying of a terminal disease, maybe he recently lost a loved one. Maybe he lost his job; maybe his favorite political candidate lost an election.
There just has to be a reason for his causing his shooting that the public, the media, can accept. Anything other than that unacceptable answer, excessive force.
Maybe there's child porn on his phone, perhaps proof of drug dealing, pimping, associating with thugs, a picture of his manifesto, his medical history.
Of course they had to search his phone. Demonization requires it.
I did not know it was possible to sue because traffic problems have not been solved. It never occurred to me.
So, those LA lawmakers: shouldn't we sue them for their long-running failure to solve Los Angeles traffic problems? They've been failing a lot longer than Google has been causing any problem.
Yes, the account could be a troll. But it could also be someone like me, who just became disillusioned with the whole thing and stopped trying for a time. I go through phases where sometimes I feel like posting on things, and other times I say, "What is the point?" and forget it...and what I might think about the article doesn't have anything to do with that. It has more to do with whether I think I'm playing anything other than the trolls.
On the other hand it's good to know that system breaking, theft of private documents and consequential character assassination of political parties is legal if you use a foreign cut out. I'm sure that will be useful information in 2018.
1. For deniability. 2. Give them plausible deniability. 3. It wouldn't make it less dodgy, but it would give them plausible deniability. 4. It makes it difficult to prove. 5. Deflects attention from the real guilty party.
This is not surprising. All the richest Swamp Critters want TPP, to protect their beautiful Swamp Investments. Trump might have promised to "drain the swamp" but that always was doubtful given that he is Swamp Critter-in-Chief.
I'm sure he was thinking that shooting at the scene precludes prosecutor decisions. But you're right, it doesn't. In that case, the prosecutor decides if the cop will be prosecuted.
By stereotyping people on the basis of where and how they live, there is an evident risk that people will find it harder to escape from more challenging life situations, since those with less favorable stereotypes are more likely to be prosecuted than those with more favorable profiles, thus reducing social mobility.
What a nice way to say, "We want to limit jail-sentence prosecutions to those people who can't afford a high-priced barrister."
Yes, but, you see, your truck matters. To you at least. You might sue if the test is wrong.
Those people behind bars are crooks. No one cares about them. The only thing regrettable about this situation is that we have to let all these crooks back out on the street. At least: that's the prosecutor's position.
On the post: Cops Aren't Just Submitting DNA Samples To Genealogy Services; They're Also Obtaining Customer Info
Re: Not Just Law Enforcement
Or refuse to hire you because you are "in-valid", as in Gattaca?
On the post: Cops Aren't Just Submitting DNA Samples To Genealogy Services; They're Also Obtaining Customer Info
Re:
It would probably change your opinion a bit if you were dragged out of your workplace (or wherever), hauled to the police station, and forced to give a DNA sample, and locked up to wait for the results; guilty until proven innocent.
Where did I get that? Well how do you think this part proceeded: "The woman's father had a sample taken by investigators but the test cleared him of suspicion." Did you think the officers just asked nicely to drop by, at some convenient time, at the home of a suspected serial rapist/murderer, to ask nicely for a DNA sample? And kindly let him stay at home, to give him a good opportunity to flee, while they waited for results?
On the post: Cops Aren't Just Submitting DNA Samples To Genealogy Services; They're Also Obtaining Customer Info
Re: Just how do these things work?
On the post: German Politician Decries Censorship, Follows It Up By Suing Facebook To Have A Critical Comment Deleted
Re: Lacking on several points
On the post: Amazon Joins Google In Making Censorship Easy, Threatens Signal For Circumventing Censorship Regimes
Generation [CENSORED]
That's so sad, given that the web was supposed to make the free exchange of ideas easier.
On the post: Sprint, T-Mobile Try To Sell The Public On A Job-Killing, Competition Eroding Megamerger
Time for skullduggery
On the post: Cops Follow Up Officer-Involved Shooting By Heading To Funeral Home To Apply Dead Man's Fingers To His Locked Phone
Looking for a cause
The police are merely looking for a cause. People don't just get up one day and decide to be killed by a cop. There must be a reason why this event happened.
Maybe the deceased was a drug dealer. Maybe he was a thug, who had committed previous violent crimes. Maybe he had previous arrests.
Failing that, maybe he had a nasty temper, maybe he beat his wife/S.O. Maybe he wrote a manifesto espousing the overturn of world order. Maybe he associated with people who did, if he didn't himself.
Failing that, maybe he was suicidal (suicide by cop). Maybe he was dying of a terminal disease, maybe he recently lost a loved one. Maybe he lost his job; maybe his favorite political candidate lost an election.
There just has to be a reason for his causing his shooting that the public, the media, can accept. Anything other than that unacceptable answer, excessive force.
Maybe there's child porn on his phone, perhaps proof of drug dealing, pimping, associating with thugs, a picture of his manifesto, his medical history.
Of course they had to search his phone. Demonization requires it.
On the post: The Washington Post Thinks Overpaying For Broadband Bundles Is A Hoot
Re: Wow, "TripMN", you're WAY ACTIVE after 2 years 10 months DEAD!
On the post: L.A. Lawmakers Looking To Take Legal Action Against Google For Not Solving Long-Running City Traffic Problems
People who live in glass houses...
So, those LA lawmakers: shouldn't we sue them for their long-running failure to solve Los Angeles traffic problems? They've been failing a lot longer than Google has been causing any problem.
On the post: DOJ Investigating AT&T, Verizon for Making It Harder To Switch Wireless Carriers
Re: Re: I know I'm just playing to the trolls
On the post: Following Questionable Election, Honduran Government Debuts New Censorship Law
Re: Re: The best excuse, ever
On the post: Democratic National Committee's Lawsuit Against Russians, Wikileaks And Various Trump Associates Full Of Legally Nutty Arguments
How it's done
On the other hand it's good to know that system breaking, theft of private documents and consequential character assassination of political parties is legal if you use a foreign cut out. I'm sure that will be useful information in 2018.
On the post: Democratic National Committee's Lawsuit Against Russians, Wikileaks And Various Trump Associates Full Of Legally Nutty Arguments
Re: Re: His Name Was Seth Rich
1. For deniability. 2. Give them plausible deniability. 3. It wouldn't make it less dodgy, but it would give them plausible deniability. 4. It makes it difficult to prove. 5. Deflects attention from the real guilty party.
On the post: Following Questionable Election, Honduran Government Debuts New Censorship Law
The best excuse, ever
On the post: After Removing US From Negotiating Process, Now Trump Suddenly Wants US Back In TPP
Swamp Critters
On the post: UK Police Use Zipcode Profiles, Garden Size And First Names For AI-Based Custody Decision System
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Police Use Zipcode Profiles, Garden Size And First Names For AI-Based Custody Decision System
Oppression pap
What a nice way to say, "We want to limit jail-sentence prosecutions to those people who can't afford a high-priced barrister."
On the post: More Drug Lab Misconduct Results In Massachusetts Court Tossing Nearly 12,000 Convictions
Re:
Those people behind bars are crooks. No one cares about them. The only thing regrettable about this situation is that we have to let all these crooks back out on the street. At least: that's the prosecutor's position.
On the post: Another Company Blows Off Breach Notification For Months, Lies About Affected Customers When It's Exposed
Head knocker
On the post: More Governments Granting Themselves Extra Censorship Powers With 'Fake News' Laws
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>