Before you protest the latest U.S. massacre of innocents in Afghanistan . . .

Here's merely the latest reported massacre caused by U.S. troops in Afghanistan:

An American soldier opened fire on villagers near his base in southern Afghanistan Sunday and killed 16 civilians, according to President Hamid Karzai, who called it an "assassination" and furiously demanded an explanation from Washington. Nine children and three women were among the dead.
Perhaps you're considering going to Washington D.C. to protest this abominable behavior, especially since it has been reported that this massacre was done in your name (in that you are an American) and since the American soldiers doing the shooting were drunk, and because your government has no reason for this ten-year occupation of Afghanistan. Better watch your step if you decide to protest anywhere near the White House, near a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or near a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance. You see, according to a newly passed federal law [H.R. 347], you could be thrown in federal prison for up to a year, even if you aren't carrying a weapon and even if no one is injured as a result of your protest. If someone is injured as a result of the protest, you could (even though your own intentions were peaceful and you didn't cause any injuries) be thrown in federal prison for up to ten years. This law was signed by President Obama on March 8, 2012.

Continue ReadingBefore you protest the latest U.S. massacre of innocents in Afghanistan . . .

My limited time on the planet

It wasn't that long ago that I learned that I have a terminal condition and that I will only be around for a limited time. With that in mind, I've been trying to savor every moment, and to work hard to keep my chin up and avoid being maudlin. In that context, today was a good day. Given my quickly dwindling time here on planet Earth, I have been keeping a look-out for time saving devices. I finally took the plunge and bought an iPad2 (I wasn't convinced that the brand new version offered anything I needed). The iPad 2 has an excellent screen and lots of potential uses for me at work and at home (I'm already using an app called Note Taker, which allows me to use a stylus to scribble on pdfs on the fly. I uploaded the Kindle app, and I'm delight to say that I have a new tool for reading and reviewing books. The Kindle offers a function for capturing passages of books as "notes," and then accessing those notes as a batch. I loaded up quite a few other apps that will help me at work, including Drop Box and Jump. Twenty years ago, I wanted to be on the cusp of technology. These days, I'm thrilled to be one step behind, because time seems to be one of my most precious commodities. I'll let others screw with the newest and greatest, while I sneak in behind the commotion and enjoy things that have been out long enough that most of the bugs are worked out. I'm still exploring the iPad and the Kindle, but I think this will be a great way to absorb and review books. Last night I foolishly bought a stylus at Target for $20, when I could have bought a 3-pack on line for $10. You've got to watch out for those accessories. Then again, I can't take it with me . . . [Notes . . . ]

Continue ReadingMy limited time on the planet

How a law student could have failed a property law class in 1994

Imagine the following law school exam question asked in a property law class in 1994, prior to securitization, when the laws of Missouri were substantially the same as they are today regarding real estate transaction recording, foreclosures and unlawful detainer proceedings: Joe buys a house from Bank A. Bank A…

Continue ReadingHow a law student could have failed a property law class in 1994

Proposed laws aimed at male sexual issues

Hannah Levintova of Mother Jones has collected quite an impressive set of Insane Sex Laws inspired by Republicans.

As Republican lawmakers have pushed ever more intrusive and expansive uterus-related legislation, some of their colleagues across the aisle have fired back with intentionally and equally ridiculous counterproposals. From mandatory rectal exams for guys seeking Viagra to prohibitions on sperm-stifling vasectomies, most of these male-only provisions have, unsurprisingly, flopped. But they've scored big as symbolic gestures, spotlighting the inherent sexism of laws that regulate only lady parts.

Continue ReadingProposed laws aimed at male sexual issues