Forum

Proposition 83-Punishment for Sex Crimes, Vote NO

2006-11-02T00:47:00.000-08:00

Hello all, after a long time of no posts. I want to explore Proposition 83, the ballot measure concerning sex offenders in the state of California.

The summary basically states-

" Increase penalties and restrictions for people convicted of sex crimes. Some sex offenders would have longer prison terms and longer paroles. Registered sex offenders would never be allowed to live near a school or park. Felony sex offenders would be monitored with electronic devices for the rest of their lives. More sex offenders could be kept in state mental hospitals."-From www.easyvoter.org
The full text of the proposition is online if you wish to read it. Here is an additional detail about the schools and parks provision: Registered sex offenders would not be allowed to reside within 2,000 feet of a school or park.

First and foremost, I want to state that I am not pro-sex offender, and I do not discount the gravity of sex offenses. There are provisions in prop 83 which I do not agree with. Be aware that opposition to prop 83 will be very delicately done, and that parents with younger children comprise one of the strongest voting blocs after senior citizens. Candidates would be hard pressed to upset that voting bloc.

83 calls for lifetime monitoring of felony sex offenders. Is this not overkill? Registration of sex offenders is one thing, but an electronic monitoring device stays on the person physically, and is more invasive. For many sex offenders who serve their sentences, it does not seem fair to impose a lifetime sentence of monitoring, I will explain more of this below in the example. I agree that some violent sex offenders and habitual ones are dangerous and should be monitored, but to impose it on all felony sex offenders seems overkill. Monitoring devices are used in sentencing other types of criminal, both violent and not. While sex offenses are destructive, why single all of them out among other violent crimes for lifetime monitoring? I do not oppose increasing prison sentences.
Another provision calls for a 2,000 foot exclusion zones around schools and parks. I agree with not allowing offenders very close to schools and perhaps parks. However, 2,000 feet is almost half a mile. With a half-mile radius around each school and park, this will force many sex offenders out of cities entirely, which is excessive. The exclusion zone essentially bans offenders from larger swaths of cities, it's excessive if the aim is to keep schools and parks with some safety zones.
Those were some of the provisions which bothered me, but the scope of the bill is beyond reasonable measure. Prop 83 doesn't leave more discretion to distinguish between people who made stupid one-time mistakes, and violent habitual offenders. It is unfair and unrealistic to track every registered sex offender, remember a one-time act merits registration.
*Let's take the example of statutory rape. Assume a very young adult made the mistake of having sex with a minor, even if not forcible this offense can be treated as a felony. This young adult now, convicted of statutory rape would face, for the rest of his life, the same penalty of a monitoring device, and the 2,000 foot exclusion zone as a more dangerous violent rapist, or child molester. This is unfair. Consider also how inefficient this proposition is, if the goal is to contain this type of behavior, it would be better to have more discretion for whom to focus resources on.

My friend did mention that 83 increases penalties all around. While I support increased penalties, mentioned below, this proposition is not the way to achieve this. I state above, that specific provisions in 83 bothered me, and made the entire proposition excessive.

What I do support:
I do support longer prison sentences, especially more for the violent/habitual as*holes, and child predators. I support exclusion zones, but not at nearly half a mile. I still support registration of all sex offenders, and increased penalties for those failing to follow registration requirements.

Prop 83 is overkill, please feel free to comment.

TV shows

2006-05-03T18:00:00.000-07:00

Here are my favorite Television Shows this Season.

In no particular order:

SOUTH PARK- What's funny for ten years running? What pisses of Tom Cruise? What has critiques of social issues? South Park, so awesome.

West Wing- An intense election season, the addition of Alan Alda as the Republican canidate was a fine casting choice.

24-This season is amazing, and there is no shortage of support for this show. Keifer Sutherland will soon be the highest paid actor in a Drama Series ($40mil). Season 4 was a little ridiculous, the plot now is good.

Scrubs- Still love this show, even if a few episodes just fall flat.

Navy NCIS- Yes a crime show, but the character interactions in this show are fairly crisp, very entertaining. Mark Harmon is great too as the lead.

The Unit- A Military Show about Special Forces and the strain on their respective families. Dennis Haysbert ( President Palmer from 24) and Scott Foley (Felicity) turn out very strong performances.

Alias-While this show markedly declined in quality, the series is ending, Alias has become interesting again.

While I watch other shows, the ones mentioned above I actually keep up with.

Please feel free to comment on your favorite shows!

P.S.- CSI and all it's spawn are getting old.. boooo. Except CSI Miami

Slobo bobo Slobodan Milosevic

2006-04-04T17:32:00.000-07:00

Hello. This post is in response to my friend Abhi's blog, which can be found at: www.achandrasekhara.blogspot.com
If you read his post concerning Slobodan Milosevic, then all of the stuff i'm saying may make more sense.

He discussed the event of Slobodan's death during the trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia. Abhi asks the important questions concerning whether or not justice was still served, and other aspects of the trial.

People responded to abhi's post with various views. One of my good friends wrote " I don't see the point of trying him if he is dead. Even symbolically. He is dead. End of story. "

I'm going to have to disagree with good friend on this one, sorry.

Yes the man is dead, but to say he's symbolically dead is not true. Slobo's memory and "legacy" live on through people who supported his ideas, and his victims.

Let me digress, there was a man named Adolph Hitler. Have you heard of him? I believe it is comforting to think that his physical death spelled the end of symbols that Hitler projected. There's a menacing memory of him present: White Power Movements, even Iranian Presidents making a statement with Holocaust denial. The symbols of hate Hitler stood for are not dead with him, and I mean there are many people who prescribe to Hitler's work with awe and reverence. Obviously Hitler's directed genocide program was much larger than Slobodan's, but the latter directed a brutal Bosnian Genocide. Forgotten symbols?

Back to Slobodan. There is the legal principle of trying a case IN ABSENTIA of the defendant, meaning the defendant is not present. While I know this probably doesn't apply to the dead, why not allow a case to be tried posthumously? The International Criminal Tribunal isn't constructed from one country's legal framework. The International Court is sitting their with its thumbs up it's ass anyways because its very existence causes problems with issues of sovereignty and the rights therein of states (i.e. should U.S.Soldier be tried by an international court, or have the right to military court marial proceedings?) If it's going to be a unique body let it make some interesting changes.

One may crticize my idea of trying cases with the defendant deceased, because it would open up a can of worms of trying dead individuals throughout history. Place a special statute of limitations that will provide a limited window after the defendant or a suspect dies for whatever reason, except in cases of a guilty plea before the defendant's death. This will prevent people for trying individuals from years ago. Basically, keep the spirit of the statue to apply to the recently dead. The court doesn't put on Crimes against humanity trials for small events, a significant crime may "allegedly" have been committed (e.g. Charles Taylor). I know there are other painful events in history, but my intent for the court is to specifically provide some continuity and judgement if special circumstances arise concerning the death of a suspect on trial, or the death of a suspect abroad after accusations have been formally place in the court.

That formality seems important to us humans when it comes to matters of public records, judgements rendered from a courts, and other constructs. Slobodan still carries a following of supporters with him, his victims and their families though will carry indignation in their hearts.

Nations honor heroes posthumously, I argue for the converse position in principle. Render judgement to the atrocities committed. Some may say, that in the most technical sense the trial was to punish the individual that is Slobodan Milosevic for his actions. The public judgement of his actions is important for many people to be left for dead.

Please feel free to comment

Walls caving in, George?

2005-10-07T16:06:00.000-07:00

The latest AP/Ipsos poll numbers show that George W.Bush has a 39% approval rating. Let me just say, that's not good for those thinking " oh that's almost 40%."
There is a deeper component to this disapproval as well. The key groups of Bush's coalition : Republican Women, Southerners, and even Evangelicals all show decreased support for their Conservative idol. For Bush, a weakening of this coalition means serious problems to his agenda.
Conflicts within the Republican party between hardcore conservatives and moderates especially over Miers nomination to the Supreme court could hurt the GOP during midterm elections.
Let's add to this the more general populace, which for the roughly 2/3 part not conservative. More than 66% of the country feels America is headed in the wrong direction, while only 28% percent disagree. It's not surprising with record fuel prices, inflationary pressures, two hurricanes, and a war with nearly 2,000 dead and seemingly little progress that the public is on edge.
Miers nomination to replace Supreme court Justice O'Connor, actually pissed of a very key group, The Hispanics. Courting all hispanic voters with his broken Spanish, Bush hoped to gain Republican inroads with America's largest and fastest growing minority group. By skipping over Attorney General Gonzales, and other Hispanic canidates for the Supreme court, Bush has acutely upset the Hispanic vote. Leaders and luminaries in the Hispanic community felt Bush skipped over them. This could also translate into a problem for Republicans seeking this growingly important vote in the future.
This Administration will probably not reverse it's Iraq policy because that would imply an error on its part, and the war on terror is the Bush Administration's centerpiece. However, there is likely to be some appearance of being a LITTLE more moderate on other issues. This is a counundrum since being more moderate to lift sagging poll numbers will irritate the conservative base. "Staying the Course" is obviously not with popular opinion either.
All this may spell a weakening of the Conservative agenda, without broader Republican support, and a big wall to whatever Bush seeks to leave behind as his "legacy"

Sorry for not posting

2005-09-03T18:07:00.000-07:00

I'm sorry for not putting up any posts lately. I've had a terrible week with a psycho roomate.

The Squirrel Which Was.... Which was

2005-08-24T16:36:00.000-07:00

I was walking back to my apartment from Safeway today during the middle of the day, and was stopped by a curious squirrel (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=squirrel). Since I did not perform a scientific observation of its sex, I will refer to the squirrel as "it" for the sake of convienience.

It looked something like this.

Continuing with my tale, as I was about 50 feet from my front door, this squirrel ran into my path and blocked me. It got up on its hind legs and stared at me for a solid 5 seconds at least. Usually these creatures scurry off in fear, but this magnificient beast backed off two feet and returned to the same spot in front of me. I surmised it may have sought some food, unfortunately I'm not an expert. Soon it encircled me, as if inspecting my super strong human form, and then rested its front paws? on the tip of my sandals.

At this point, I was scared of this fearless squirrel which had stared me down and had basically said " your move, punk human." Fearing rabies or some animal disease, I started to back away and leave. I was actually on the phone with Anne during this insane encounter, and when I was backing away the squirrel starting chasing me at a moderate pace. Anne heard some crazy running over the phone, and the panting only the adrenaline of fear provides. Luckily I reached the safety of my door.

Next time you think " Awwww, how cute" remember, they are all not timid.

This is Anne's Weblog, check it out.

2005-08-24T16:31:00.000-07:00

Death becomes her

The girlfriend

2005-08-24T16:17:00.000-07:00

Yes that title is catchy, and I'm an attention whore, just kidding.

This Post is dedicated to my girlfriend, Anne. I see her as a companion, more than just the term " girlfriend." We've been going out almost two years now, and she is still refreshing. Relationships are not terribly easy, because as cliche as it sounds they are about communicating on on common points which may be difficult to find. The hard work, and right amount of chemistry makes it worth it though, and I guess sheer f*cking luck is a subset of chemistry also. Sorry, that I can't provide some hard and fast rules that are guaranteed to work, so it's a powerful experience that is really yours.

Here's to Anne, I won't muddy this up with a 10 page post, " love you"
Having a great time with you.

Note: Yes, my Blog will contain personal posts.

Downloading

2005-08-24T06:22:00.000-07:00

I want this post to work a little differently. After my own little tirade, I will pose some questions you can choose to laugh at or answer in the comments section.

Take a look on my hard drive and you will see that I'm a prolific downloader. I gather about 5 to 6 gigabytes of material a week. Someone out there is itching to launch a "how do you watch all that porn?" joke, perhaps he/she can save it for another time. What the f*ck could I possibly be getting then, you ask?

Since I left the nourishing cable-equipped abode of home, I've been too cheap to pay the modest $54 a month Comcast asks for, so I download television shows. Am I being a moron by confessing online for the record? Well the problem of tv downloading is still in its hazy stages. A handful of shows are a welcome diversion from the regular pounding I get from college/work throughout the year.

Here's the kicker. Most of the shows I watch are freely available on network television. I'm getting the benefits of what "TiVo" would offer; freedom to watch the show whenever, and ability to not watch commercials. Of course, one could also watch these shows freely with an antenna.

I don't think cable prices are reasonable, and Sattelite Television is not a real serious competitor into Cable's mammoth market share. While I harbor no hatred towards these providors, I think they're constipated about offering real content over broadband, just like Record Labels dragged their respective foots fighting Napster until installing a paid solution years later. I'm willing to pay a fee to get my tv fix online, and so are many many others.

I will have to pick on Record Labels and Online Distribution enterprises to illustrate my point. ( Sorry)

Do you remember record labels reps predicting a dismal life for online distribution with rampant piracy? Well Itunes recently hit the 50 million songs mark ( averaging 500,000 songs a week before the platform was released for PC also) , Yahoo and others are offering different kind of pay-to-download schemes. Marketing gurus are throwing in free songs with beer, pepsi, and even toothpaste to name a few. These distributors are still slow on the uptake though.

What does Itunes have in common other download services? Well, most of these songs can be burnt to an audio CD for a small fee. The similarities end there. There are problems with different databases and availability of songs on the different services, the compatibility of a downloaded song playing on another service's software, and cross compatibility of the legally downloaded songs playing on the plethora of Mp3 players on the market.

Trying to splinter the customer's choices in this fashion is dangerous. How many Betamax ( sony's dumbass attempt at their own video format) movies did you and your parents rent or buy during the early 90's? Just in case my point isn't coming across, here is an example:

Timmy that couldn't.

Timmy buys a song from the new Legal Napster. Timmy get an ipod for Chistmas and nearly shits himself with joy. http://www.napster.com/compatible_devices/not_ntg_compatible.html

He visits that link when his songs won't work on the ipod, because the #1 mp3 player ( in sales and market share) in the universe doesn't support the WMA 9 format required to take Napster songs on portable devices. There are some obscure cracks timmy could use, but why put the burden on Timmy the consumer on matching compatibility and formats?

In fact, portable players all play the regular unsecured Mp3 format, which people either took the effort to rip or download illegally. Note, the songs on Itunes are actually not Mp3's, they are Mp4 protected audio files.

You would think alienating and unduly confusing the customer would work ( how many Betamax tapes did you own?). Legal Movie Download sites have a poor selection to choose from, and are stacked with the same format wars with other services since some require you to download a special media player to view the file you just purchased.

The industry behavior all mentioned above would likely be the same for trying to distribute television shows over broadband connections. Studios, in the greed which will actually blind them from smart business decisions, will fight over which format to use, wether or not to offer a show season package or pay per episode basis. In this fight several individuals like me will be confused and picking our noses. Younger individuals other who also frequently change residences (e.g. college students) will be voting with their disposable income. Set-up and deal with Comcast's terrific customer service every year, sign a 12 month contract for satellite every year, or download some tv shows? Sorry for the rudeness.

**Lastly, you may ask: But Raghu, how about TV Show seasons on DVD?**

Well, I have to agree with Bill Gates stating DVD distribution will be obsolete within a decade. It's annoying to have expend my energy to go get that physical copy. Second, there is quite a delay in the airing of a show and release onto dvd. Third, DVD distribution still leaves me here picking my nose with my fast internet connection ( I do not have a home theatre). DVD's have several benefits, and the vast majority of consumers use them as media for movies today; however, I'm trying to paint a little bit beyond the near future.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is your position on illegally downloading music, movies, and televison? ( Can answer in parts).

Do you have any format horror stories to share?

Do you believe there is significant competition to Cable?

How responsive do you feel content distributors have been to your needs?

-Please feel free to ask questions-
-YOU DON'T have to answer any or all of these questions-

Energy and Aviation?

2005-08-23T22:30:00.000-07:00

The 50% plus rise in oil and gasoline costs has focused some attention onto the future of conventional automobiles, this is understandable considering that 40% of American oil is consumed by passenger cars, certain types of trucks, and SUV’s. This is a full and rich discussion in and of itself, but I wish to discuss what rising fuel prices may to do more a most unique mode of travel, large-scale aviation.
I am sure that almost everyone reading this post has flown on a passenger airliner during his/her life. What is now an accessible and convenient transportation was formerly the domain of the wealthy. Perhaps, most civilian experience in aircraft involved wartime activity until the 1960’s when Jet Airliners and larger air travel infrastructure came online in large scale to service people and goods.

Benefits of large-scale aviation today:

1) Provide reasonably affordable and fast transportation for individuals, and businesses.
2) Movement AIRMAIL, and general shipment of all kinds of consumer goods.
3) Transportation of time-sensitive medical supplies such as radioactive isotopes.
4) JOBS

The list is much longer, but this gives you an idea that aviation is not a fringe technology or mode of transport for goods and people.

Basic Physical Requirements:
While alternative fuels can ostensibly power ground vehicles, a box with wheels, these fuels can’t produce any real flight. Consider the power requirements of a passenger airliner:

1) The turbofan jet engines depending on the size of the craft needs to produce thousands, or tens of thousands of pounds of thrust to take off and stay airborne.
2) Radar and other onboard electronic devices require power.
3) Life support for pressurized Cabins requires power and heat from the engine to warm the sub-freezing air at high altitudes.

Here’s the problem. Existing battery technology does not have the same energy density found in those chemical bonds of fossil fuel used by aircraft. Weight is a vital factor for aircraft safety and performance, and alternative technologies cannot provide the same power/weight ratio. The performance of alternative combustibles such as alcohol fuels is questionable, and those fuels take more energy to produce than potential output. Rocket technology does not have the stamina to power craft in atmosphere for long duration.

Effect of Fuel Prices:
Aviation fuel will cost $6 billion more than it did this year for a beleaguered U.S. Airline industry struggling to maintain profitability and avoid bankruptcy. The rising prices will be passed down to the ticket buyer in increasing fares and fuel surcharges. U.S. Carriers and passengers are not solely at risk either. My parents had to pay a $300 fuel surcharge for a flight route to India, and the cost of the ticket excluding the charge was $1,200. That’s a 25% premium to pay just for fuel!
Businesses that rely on air shipping will see sharp hikes in cost to ship per unit of weight, even by regular first class mail. Airline companies will continue to struggle if fuel prices keep rising, and will affect the jobs and pay of pilots, crewmembers, aircraft mechanics, and the entire niches dependant on the flight of that plane.

Future Scenario:
Finally I come to what will happen past the near future, when and after world oil production peaks. After that point, the price of oil can increase exponentially. Large-scale passenger and business aviation may not be able to function profitably. Passenger aviation may revert to the “early days” in which only the wealthy can possibly afford to fly. As fuel gets scarcer, military aircraft and other vital customers will have priority.
I can’t foresee another technology, which can push and keep 200,000 pound airliners into sky.
May innovation save us.

First Post

2005-08-23T22:07:00.000-07:00

Welcome. This blog will cover... possibly anything.

Feel free to comment on my posts, and all I suggest is you address the posted material, not my personal mental state. Note that is a suggestion though, you can say whatever you want.