It’s supposedly illegal to take photographs in public spaces

I've previously read accounts of photographers being harassed. This smart guy turned on his camera's video function and recorded the outrageous conversation with a security guard. She was pleasant, but instructed him about a "policy" that is utterly bizarre (because this policy, to my knowledge, doesn't really exist in the law). Keep in mind that, according to this security guard, it's illegal for a tourist to snap any photos of the historic buildings in Washington D.C. without special clearance. I'd like to reserve this post as a place for anyone else to post comments if they or someone they know has been warned to not take photos in public spaces, prevented from taking such photos or had their camera(s) confiscated.

Continue ReadingIt’s supposedly illegal to take photographs in public spaces

Defense Department to review policy banning photos of flag-draped coffins

From DemocracyNow:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has ordered a review of the Pentagon policy banning media from taking pictures of flag-draped coffins of military dead. The military has said the policy is meant to protect the privacy of the families of the dead soldiers, but critics say barring photographers is a political maneuver meant to sanitize the war.

Related post: What would happen if we freely published the images from Iraq for one week?

Continue ReadingDefense Department to review policy banning photos of flag-draped coffins

Time to stop the drug war

Johann Hari sums it up at Huffpo: Which country was just named by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff as the most likely after Pakistan to suffer a "rapid and sudden collapse"?

Most of us would guess Iraq. The answer is Mexico. The death toll in Tijuana today is higher than in Baghdad. The story of how this came to happen is the story of this war -- and why it will have to end, soon.

When you criminalize a drug for which there is a large market, it doesn't disappear. The trade is simply transferred from pharmacists and doctors to armed criminal gangs. In order to protect their patch and their supply routes, these gangs tool up -- and kill anyone who gets in their way. You can see this any day on the streets of London or Los Angeles, where teenage gangs stab or shoot each other for control of the 3,000 percent profit margins on offer. Now imagine this process on a countrywide scale, and you have Mexico and Afghanistan today.

How bad have things gotten in Mexico?

In 2007, more than 2,000 people were killed. In 2008, it was more than 5,400 people. The victims range from a pregnant woman washing her car to a four year-old child to a family in the "wrong" house watching television. Today, 70 percent of Mexicans say they are frightened to go out because of the cartels.

Writer Christina Gleason sums up some of the carnage here in the U.S.:

According to the Department of Justice, over half of all sentenced federal prisoners are drug offenders. Over 80% of the increase in the federal prison population was due to drug convictions between 1985 and 1995. In addition, a 2006 report claimed that 17% of State prisoners and 18% of Federal prisoners committed their crimes in order to obtain drug money. According to a 2001 report, the average sentence for all offenses was 56.8 months. The average sentence for drug offenses was 75.6 months, while the average sentence for violent offenses was 63.0 months. Someone is arrested for violating a drug law every 17 seconds. Someone is arrested for violating a cannabis law every 38 seconds.

What's the solution? Hari quotes Terry Nelson a former U.S. drug enforcement officer who has seen the light:

Legalizing and regulating drugs will stop drug market crime and violence by putting major cartels and gangs out of business. It's the one surefire way to bankrupt them, but when will our leaders talk about it?

Why do most people reject this solution? They are afraid that the people who are already getting drugs will continue getting drugs, I suppose. They are failing to consider the extent of the violence and the fact that the drug war is taking valuable money out of the economy to accomplish next to nothing. If you doubt me, go watch a drug court docket. Talk about meaningless rubber stamping. People with drug records as long as your arm simply revolve through the system. In state court, judges struggle to find ways to keep from filling our prisons with nothing but drug offenders. That is the extent of the problem.

Continue ReadingTime to stop the drug war

Richard Dawkins discusses natural selection with Randolf Nesse

Richard Dawkins has recently released a new set of videos packaged under the title "The Genius of Charles Darwin." This series features physician Randolph Nesse, who is the author of Why We Get Sick: The New Science of Darwinian Medicine, a book I've discussed in previous posts. This video is the first of a series of five uncut videos featuring Nesse that Dawkins has made available (see Youtube.com for the next four videos). You can also view the entire series straight through from the site of Richard Dawkins. In this video, you'll hear Dawkins and Nesse discussing "design" (including poor design), randomness (note the example of the jar of only copper coins), Darwinian medicine, the toxic environment we've created for ourselves and path dependence. Nesse would like every medical textbook to have an extra paragraph of explanation regarding each human illness or frailty (e.g., back pain): how was it that natural selection left this condition as it did? In this video, Nesse also explains that the body is not a machine. He comes to this conclusion because the body does not have "blueprints." There is no such thing as a "normal genome." A genome is merely a collection of genes that work. Thus, the genome is not a blueprint and the body is thus not a machine. For more on this metaphor, see here.

Continue ReadingRichard Dawkins discusses natural selection with Randolf Nesse

Stephen Colbert tries to understand how we decide

Stephen Colbert mixes it up with Jonah Lehrer, author of "How We Decide." The disjointed conversation does have its serious moments, with the focus being the emotional self versus the rational self. Sometimes I wonder whether Colbert is tempted to drop his character for ten minutes and just have a good conversation with a thoughtful guest. This might have been one of those times.

Continue ReadingStephen Colbert tries to understand how we decide