StrangeSox

Interesting piece here on the growing music industry. Another article explains the disconnect between the concept of the "declining" music industry and the reality of a growing one:

I would guess that most climate science funding comes in the form of government grants. This would mean that governments around the world would have to be colluding for decades to fund pro-AGW science and shut out anything pointing in the other direction.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 1, 2012 -> 08:38 AM) The fact that all those commodities are of limited supply is the very reason why alternatives would be every bit as much, if not more lucrative as the current fossil fuels. The fossil fuels themselves are not the valuable commodity here. The valuable commodity is the behaviors and the way of life those fossil fuels have allowed for us. But there's not some giant multi-trillion dollar extant market heavily funding research that happens to lead to the conclusion that AGW is real.

The financial interests are really secondary and were just brought up to point out just how biased/terrible the WSJ article's arguments were, anyway. What matters isn't that sort of ad hominem attack based on funding sources but on what the science actually says. And the science is unequivocally on the side of AGW is real, is significant and will have serious impacts around the globe in the next several decades.

balta rollin' in the grant money-->

QUOTE (farmteam @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 09:22 PM) I agree with most of what you've said in this thread, particularly the part about having +- buffer that would supersede the age of consent, but the trouble I have with this scenario is that usually, a person who gets into a bar using a fake ID is 18+ anyway (don't have any data on this, but it seems like a fair assumption). Right, I'm not sure how often statutory cases arise from someone picking up a minor in a bar. I think it comes down to not being able to outsource your personal responsibilities of age verification to someone else, like the bartender checking Id's. You're still responsible for your own actions. It goes back to the idea (well-supported imo) that minors are incapable of consent. These sorts of issues can definitely be interesting discussions.

That's a pretty awful move and the foundation's stated reason is transparent bulls***.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 08:45 PM) Separate teams by sex, not one team. Honestly, softball shouldn't even exist in a competitive youth format. It's a game that is played by people who would rather be playing baseball if given the option. Women should play baseball on their own teams and softball as a sport should be delegated to the YMCA/church/beer leagues. hey man my college co-ed intramural softball team was awesome.

some random googling brought up several law blogs that explained that the onus is on the adult and that ignorance isn't a defense. An adult is aware that fake ID's exist and can't outsource age verification to the bouncer at a bar. Nothing forces or compels you to sleep with a random stranger whose age you cannot readily verify, keeping in mind that official documentation is forgeable. I understand the concerns you're raising here and think that sometimes statutory laws are overly strict and do not allow enough individual judgement for unique and unexpected cases, but I think removing any and all bright line distinctions creates far more problems than it solves.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 07:38 PM) Tex, There is no definitive answer, I just know which to me is preferable. This is the fact pattern that scares me: 16 year old can uses a fake id to get into a bar, they go home with someone they met at the bar and have consensual sex (for the sake of argument lets just say there is no question that its consensual). The next day dad of the 16 year old finds out, calls the police and the police charge the person over 21 with a statutory sex crime. If you follow the law of many states, the 21+ year old is guilty, no questions asked. I just cant agree with such a black and white rule, which is why I generally dont like statutory laws. Can you find a case where someone was convicted under those circumstances? And juries can always nullify.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 06:11 PM) Man, can't we all just be happy for this guy? I'm not sure we know how old the student was or that it was a he (posting from phone, maybe article does specify male student).

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:57 PM) Youre entitled to your opinion, but not every state is like Illinois that has at least some different variations. (edit) Not to mention that each state has different laws, so you could be committing a crime in Illinois but not Indiana. Is this an endorsement of stronger federalism?

and apparently the judge dismissed the charges so the system worked!

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:50 PM) Steve, Unfortunately the reason I brought it up was because of this: http://jonathanturley.org/2011/11/25/famil...playing-doctor/ This is why statutory crimes are stupid. that is a dumb law and should be changed. that doesn't necessarily mean laws forbidding 12 year olds from sleeping with 30 year olds are wrong. edit: the prosecutor had discretion for "common sense" and chose to prosecute. She didn't have to.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:45 PM) Strange Sox, A jury can determine that a 12 year old didnt have the ability to consent to sex. The jury can also determine if its 2 7year olds and they were playing a game of Dr that it wasnt actually statutory rape. But if the law says, it is illegal for anyone to touch someone under the age of 16, then you get the ruling that one of the 7 year olds committed a sex crime because that is how the law is written. It is the epitome of stupidity. I believe cali's laws are like that, and I agree it's stupid. Age+2 or something similar works for me and eliminates those issues. I don't believe a jury is sufficiently well-informed to determine the many issues, both philosophical and physiological, that go in to determining one's ability to consent based on age.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:42 PM) Strangesox, Sure if you care more about consistency than common sense, I agree that having bright line rules will result in more consistent crimes. If your 16 and 364 days and you have sex with someone who is 18, the 18 year old should go to jail, no questions asked, right? Because that is what happens when you have bright line statutory rules. Mitigating circumstances dont matter. I'm in favor of age difference allowances so that scenario would be cool. I can't imagine the system you propose being anything other than a giant, inconsistent mess, and to me that result isn't "common sense"

the last episode wasn't terrible in and of itself, but several leading up to it were and the fact that so many plot lines (ultimately, wtf was the point of Dharma or the others or Penny's dad looking for the island etc.) were just dropped.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:31 PM) I seem to recall you saying vote fraud didn't exist. Not voter ID fraud. I readily admit this had nothing to do with requiring an ID. But is IS vote fraud. No, we've said that in-person voting fraud is damn near non-existent and we don't need Voter ID laws disenfranchising millions of legit voters to solve a non-problem. edit: well, there is a real problem these Voter ID laws solve, and that's poors voting for Democrats.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:37 PM) If the risk assessment isnt formed until 20s, then why can people under 20 consent? It's forming until your 20's. I'm not a neurologist but there's substantial differences in the decision-making capacity of a child's brain, a young adult's (17) brain and an adult's brain. where the final line is drawn is. I can't distinguish between two close shades of gray, but I can tell if something is on the black end or the white end. What criteria could a jury possibly judge the ability of a 12 year old to consent by?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:36 PM) No. Im saying that regardless of what age you pick its entirely arbitrary, so why not just look at the facts of the situation and determine whether its a crime? As opposed to our current system of calling it a crime regardless of what the facts are. That to me just seems strange. Jurors need some criteria to judge against. Ultimately, any legal age restriction line is arbitrary but it'd lead to a hell of a lot clearer and consistent system than a case-by-case determination.

The risk-assessing part of your brain isn't fully formed until your early 20's. Physiologically, a 12 year old just isn't capable of the same careful considerations that even a 16 or 17 year old is.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:20 PM) I dont think you can change the law for guys or girls. That being said, age of consent is usually a state law and different states have drastically different laws. I personally think that the law easily could be changed to avoid such a nonsensical situation. If the "victim" states there was consent, then there is no crime. If the "victim" is silent on consent or says there was no consent, then you can move forward on the case. The fact is, people have been convicted when the "victim" absolutely consented and even at trial testifies that they wanted it to happen. That situation is just stupid. QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:20 PM) I dont think you can change the law for guys or girls. That being said, age of consent is usually a state law and different states have drastically different laws. I personally think that the law easily could be changed to avoid such a nonsensical situation. If the "victim" states there was consent, then there is no crime. If the "victim" is silent on consent or says there was no consent, then you can move forward on the case. The fact is, people have been convicted when the "victim" absolutely consented and even at trial testifies that they wanted it to happen. That situation is just stupid. does a 12 year old have the mental capacity to really consent? And the younger you go the bigger the issue of power exploitation becomes.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 05:01 PM) Do we know yet the age of this gentlemen? I'm assuming he's 17 based on the comments section. And this is not a recent article. It looks to be at least 3-4 weeks old. I'm not interested in this enough to go more in depth. If he was at least 16, there's nothing wrong here. I'm 100% in favor of a ban on teacher-student sexual relations at all ages, if not legally then ethically and contractually. But a random 17 yo and a random 26yo? Don't see a problem.

Romney's going to win Florida and he's going to take the nomination. Maybe Gingrich drags this out for a while, but he doesn't have nearly the national infrastructure that Clinton did to prolong 2008. Then, if he loses the general, conservative Republicans will again be clamoring for a ultra-hard-right candidate, convinced that they lost 1996, 2008 and 2012 because they nominated a RINO.