Quake3World

andyman wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvt-xPlj4M0

R00k wrote:http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/39_say_u_s_legal_system_too_worried_about_individual_rights_over_national_security

39% Say U.S. Legal System Too Worried About Individual Rights Over National Security

I honestly had no idea it was this bad.

R00k wrote:[Link is too long damnit]

39% Say U.S. Legal System Too Worried About Individual Rights Over National Security

I honestly had no idea it was this bad.

Oklahoma's Tulsa World newspaper reports on a bizarre scuffle this past week after a highway patrol officer pulled over an ambulance that was carrying a patient headed for the hospital, but didn't have its siren on. The patrolman apparently intended to issue a 'failure to yeild' citation to the ambulance driver, and was angered when he believed one of the paramedics gave him a middle finger.

Despite being told that the woman in the ambulance needed to get to the hospital, the trooper insisted that one of the paramedics be detained in his car. When he tried to handcuff a paramedic, a fight ensued, which was filmed by the husband of the patient.

The Great Australian Firewall will try blocking websites that host or sell video games not suitable for children under the age of 15.

DTS wrote:T-Power - Police State - Prospects For Democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nanrEg55g2M

GONNAFISTYA wrote:What's this crap I hear about the Brits putting video cameras in people's homes to ensure that their kids "are eating, sleeping and doing their homework"?

From what I read there are currently over 1000 homes with the cameras already installed with a plan for 20,000 more.

Posted by: benry | 08/3/09 | 1:09 pm

The mistake you have made is to take anything written by the Daily Express at face value. Perhaps it is a while since you were in the UK, but you should be aware that they print total and utter bollocks most of the time.
Firstly this story is at least a year old (and the trial scheme started in 1995), and secondly the most restrictive regime (with the monitors etc) is for a very small handful of families (not 2000) who cause extensive and very real misery to the lives of people around them and who have been escalated through the system. These are the real families from hell, “known” to social services, the police, the courts, just about everyone.
There are a small number (about 5 or 6) semi-secure units in the country (called “core residential units”) which house these extremely difficult families and are used as part of behaviour management programme. The most extremely disruptive families are moved to these units.
Most families that are part of these family intervention projects are dealt with by a combination of key workers and use of sanctions. They do not have CCTV installed in their homes
The alternative to these family intervention projects is jail - so this is a better regime than that.