Author: ERIK GRUENWEDEL egruenwedel@questex.com Posted: November 25, 2005
How should Blockbuster Inc. retool itself? Observers say the No. 1 video rental chain can emerge from its dire state by slashing dated business practices. Overstaffing and the chain’s reluctance to ditch the “superstore” concept, among other missteps, have resulted in bloated stores with significantly higher-than-needed operating expenses. Blockbuster may enjoy a healthy 60 percent gross margin (70 percent rental, 20 percent merchandise), which puts it in the same league as Starbucks. But Blockbuster’s overhead — officially known as sales, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses — tops 51 percent of revenue (59 percent for Movie Gallery) compared to 43 percent and 35 percent for Starbucks and McDonald’s, respectively, analysts and observers note. That’s not good. The idea is to get maximum revenue from retail space. If store-operating expenses (rent, personnel, utility costs, etc.) are relatively fixed, the more sales generated with those costs result in a lower SG&A as a percentage of sales. Analysts and observers contend that if Blockbuster gets its SG&A expenses below 40 percent, even with the current contraction in the industry, its market capitalization could increase dramatically. “You have to visit Tiffany’s to get store operating expenses anywhere close to those of video stores,” said Bill Fischer, VP of corporate development for DVD Station, a San Francisco-based operator of proprietary kiosks. “And Blockbuster has neither Carrera marble nor chandeliers.” Blockbuster spokesperson Randy Hargrove reiterated the company intends to lower its cost structure through a combination of reduced marketing spending, overhead reductions (above the store level) and the elimination of operational costs associated with non-Blockbuster-branded assets. “Our plan is to lower SG&A by more than $100 million in 2006 and by an incremental $50 million in 2007,” Hargrove said, adding this is in addition to cost reductions announced earlier this year. Analysts and observers say the average Blockbuster store occupies about 6,000 square feet and is staffed by 11 full-time employees during a 12-hour business day. The central retail space of Blockbuster stores (about 60 percent) is not particularly productive. Only about 11 percent of rentals come from this area, compared to 89 percent from primarily new releases on the back wall. “You have 5,000 square feet of real estate that is dedicated to 11 percent of the business,” Fischer said. “It just doesn’t make sense.” Analysts and observers say Blockbuster should adjust staffing to reflect key peak periods. Big Blue also should eliminate large-format stores and raise the a la carte rental price 25 cents. “I don’t know why they don’t do that,” said Michael Pachter, media analyst with Wedbush Morgan Securities in Los Angeles. “People who rent do so out of habit and wouldn’t say anything about a price increase.” Fischer said DVD Station contacted Blockbuster and Gallery about implementing automated cash transactions and kiosk-style library shelf storage. He said the switch could reduce Blockbuster’s staffing 50 percent. Pachter likes DVD Station’s 500-to-700-square-foot kiosk business model and believes Blockbuster could begin implementing kiosks as present stores come off lease. “I think that concept only makes sense in high-traffic, expensive real estate like in New York,” Pachter said. He said Blockbuster could enter traditionally cost-prohibitive areas such as office buildings by emulating Starbucks’ business model and strength of brand by establishing rental and sellthrough kiosks in major downtown lobbies and walkways for impulse consumption. Pachter also said Blockbuster could sublet unproductive retail space to third-party businesses, including cell phone providers, coffee shops and fast food eateries. “Those are the kind of things they should be talking about,” he said.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Spurned husband testifies for polygamist 'prophet'
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Stranded airline passengers push for federal legislation
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Passengers are at the mercy of the jetliner pilot when the plane is stuck on the tarmac, and activists say Congress should pass a mandatory "Bill of Rights" to limit waiting in such situations to three hours.
At a demonstration Tuesday on the National Mall, organizers hoped to show what it is like to be trapped in a closed jetliner cabin with overflowing toilets, screaming babies, and little food or water.
Using a portable vinyl carport painted to resemble the outside of a jetliner, volunteers sat in closely packed folding chairs as a recording of crying children played in the cramped quarters.
A pilot for one of the major airlines told reporters that airport gates are often filled with other planes, leaving no place to return, park and let people off. The pilot, Bruce Hedlund, also noted that today's jetliners typically do not have their own stairs that passengers could use away from a gate.
"Airlines have not provided an infrastructure that would include stairs and buses to provide me, as the captain, with additional options to get you safely off of my aircraft," Hedlund said.
He also said that a plane loses its place in line if returns to the gate instead of waiting through a backed-up departure.
Rep. John Hall, D-New York, co-sponsor of an amendment to a federal funding bill, said that airlines have failed to make good on a promise to voluntarily "create their own standards for behavior" and that "there will be no effective protections for passengers until the government steps in and forces the issue."
He told CNN the legislation would see to it that "if you are on the tarmac for three hours, it would let you come back to the gate, get off the plane, and not lose your place in the takeoff line."
As it stands, Hall said, "you're basically a prisoner."
He said he was recently stuck on the tarmac at New York's LaGuardia airport for three hours. "You have no idea how long it will be until you take off."
The plan would assign delayed takeoffs in the order they were originally scheduled.
The proposal, which is an amendment to a budget proposal for the Federal Aviation Administration, is scheduled to come up in the House on Friday.
At a demonstration Tuesday on the National Mall, organizers hoped to show what it is like to be trapped in a closed jetliner cabin with overflowing toilets, screaming babies, and little food or water.
Using a portable vinyl carport painted to resemble the outside of a jetliner, volunteers sat in closely packed folding chairs as a recording of crying children played in the cramped quarters.
A pilot for one of the major airlines told reporters that airport gates are often filled with other planes, leaving no place to return, park and let people off. The pilot, Bruce Hedlund, also noted that today's jetliners typically do not have their own stairs that passengers could use away from a gate.
"Airlines have not provided an infrastructure that would include stairs and buses to provide me, as the captain, with additional options to get you safely off of my aircraft," Hedlund said.
He also said that a plane loses its place in line if returns to the gate instead of waiting through a backed-up departure.
Rep. John Hall, D-New York, co-sponsor of an amendment to a federal funding bill, said that airlines have failed to make good on a promise to voluntarily "create their own standards for behavior" and that "there will be no effective protections for passengers until the government steps in and forces the issue."
He told CNN the legislation would see to it that "if you are on the tarmac for three hours, it would let you come back to the gate, get off the plane, and not lose your place in the takeoff line."
As it stands, Hall said, "you're basically a prisoner."
He said he was recently stuck on the tarmac at New York's LaGuardia airport for three hours. "You have no idea how long it will be until you take off."
The plan would assign delayed takeoffs in the order they were originally scheduled.
The proposal, which is an amendment to a budget proposal for the Federal Aviation Administration, is scheduled to come up in the House on Friday.
Bloodied 70-year-old woman cuffed for having a brown lawn
OREM, Utah (AP) -- A 70-year-old woman arrested in a dispute over her brown lawn pleaded not guilty Tuesday, then stood by as a Los Angeles lawyer waved handcuffs for the cameras outside court.
Betty Perry is charged with resisting arrest and failing to maintain her landscaping, both misdemeanors.
She was arrested July 6 after failing to give her name to a police officer who visited her home.
During a struggle, Perry fell and injured her nose. She spent more than an hour in a holding cell before police released her.
"I ask the citizens of Orem: How many of you would like to have your great-grandmother taken from her home with bruises and blood and placed in handcuffs for failing to water her lawn?" attorney Gloria Allred said.
"Let's bring sanity back to law enforcement," she said.
The mayor and City Council apologized, and the police department said the situation could have been handled differently. But the city attorney still is pressing charges, and Perry is due back in court next month.
A state investigation found that Officer James Flygare acted properly in arresting Perry after trying to get her to cooperate.
Perry's water had been turned off for about nine months, at her request, although she was living at the house at the time of the arrest. Orem has a shutoff policy for people who are away for extended periods.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press
Betty Perry is charged with resisting arrest and failing to maintain her landscaping, both misdemeanors.
She was arrested July 6 after failing to give her name to a police officer who visited her home.
During a struggle, Perry fell and injured her nose. She spent more than an hour in a holding cell before police released her.
"I ask the citizens of Orem: How many of you would like to have your great-grandmother taken from her home with bruises and blood and placed in handcuffs for failing to water her lawn?" attorney Gloria Allred said.
"Let's bring sanity back to law enforcement," she said.
The mayor and City Council apologized, and the police department said the situation could have been handled differently. But the city attorney still is pressing charges, and Perry is due back in court next month.
A state investigation found that Officer James Flygare acted properly in arresting Perry after trying to get her to cooperate.
Perry's water had been turned off for about nine months, at her request, although she was living at the house at the time of the arrest. Orem has a shutoff policy for people who are away for extended periods.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press
Whites vs Blacks in Jena
CNN) -- A Louisiana appeals court ruled it was too early to consider a motion to release an black teenager who allegedly took part in beating up a white classmate in Jena, Louisiana, last year.
The Tuesday ruling is the latest turn in the racially charged saga of a group known as the Jena 6 -- six black teens initially charged with attempted murder after they allegedly knocked out classmate Justin Barker and stomped him during a school fight. Five of the teens were charged as adults.
Civil rights groups and other organizations have marshaled thousands of people to march on Jena on Thursday, a day originally slated for 17-year-old Mychal Bell's sentencing hearing on battery and conspiracy convictions.
However, a district judge earlier this month tossed out Bell's conviction for conspiracy to commit second-degree battery, saying the matter should have been handled in the juvenile court. On Friday, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Lake Charles did the same with Bell's battery conviction.
A three-judge panel ruled Tuesday, however, that it would not consider a motion to free Bell from prison.
"The motion for release from custody, filed by the defendant in this court, is premature," the panel ruled without setting a date for considering the motion.
The future of Bell's case is up to the district attorney, who must decide whether to refile the charges in juvenile court, Bell's attorney Bob Noel said last week.
Charges against four of the teens -- Bell, Carwin Jones, Theodore Shaw and Robert Bailey -- have been reduced to battery and conspiracy. Shaw and Jones have not gone to trial. Bailey has pleaded not guilty to the charges and his trial is scheduled for November 26.
Bryant Purvis and an unidentified juvenile remain charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.
Advocates of the Jena 6 say the story began well before the December 4 beating. They say it began in September when three white students decided to hang nooses from a tree on campus.
In September 2006, a black student asked the vice principal if he and some friends could sit under an oak tree where white students typically congregated.
Told by the vice principal they could sit wherever they pleased, the student and his pals sat under the sprawling branches of the shade tree in the campus courtyard.
The next day, students arrived at school to find three nooses hanging from those branches.
According to The Town Talk in nearby Alexandria, the school's principal recommended expulsion for those behind the nooses. Instead, the newspaper reported, a school district committee suspended three white students for three days for hanging the nooses, a gesture written off as a "prank."
Racial tensions flared. The district attorney was summoned to address the student body. Off-campus fights were reported. On November 30, someone torched the school's main academic building. The arson remains unsolved, but many suspect it was linked to the discord.
Four days after the arson, several students jumped Barker, knocking him unconscious before stomping and kicking him.
Parents of the Jena 6 say they heard Barker was hurling racial epithets. Barker's parents insist he did nothing to provoke the beating.
Barker was taken to a hospital with injuries to both eyes and ears as well as cuts. His right eye had blood clots, said his mother, Kelli Barker. He was treated and released that day.
Bails for the Jena 6 were set at between $70,000 and $138,000. All but Bell posted bond. The judge has refused to lower his $90,000 bail, citing Bell's criminal record, which includes four juvenile offenses -- two simple battery charges among them.
The Tuesday ruling is the latest turn in the racially charged saga of a group known as the Jena 6 -- six black teens initially charged with attempted murder after they allegedly knocked out classmate Justin Barker and stomped him during a school fight. Five of the teens were charged as adults.
Civil rights groups and other organizations have marshaled thousands of people to march on Jena on Thursday, a day originally slated for 17-year-old Mychal Bell's sentencing hearing on battery and conspiracy convictions.
However, a district judge earlier this month tossed out Bell's conviction for conspiracy to commit second-degree battery, saying the matter should have been handled in the juvenile court. On Friday, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Lake Charles did the same with Bell's battery conviction.
A three-judge panel ruled Tuesday, however, that it would not consider a motion to free Bell from prison.
"The motion for release from custody, filed by the defendant in this court, is premature," the panel ruled without setting a date for considering the motion.
The future of Bell's case is up to the district attorney, who must decide whether to refile the charges in juvenile court, Bell's attorney Bob Noel said last week.
Charges against four of the teens -- Bell, Carwin Jones, Theodore Shaw and Robert Bailey -- have been reduced to battery and conspiracy. Shaw and Jones have not gone to trial. Bailey has pleaded not guilty to the charges and his trial is scheduled for November 26.
Bryant Purvis and an unidentified juvenile remain charged with attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder.
Advocates of the Jena 6 say the story began well before the December 4 beating. They say it began in September when three white students decided to hang nooses from a tree on campus.
In September 2006, a black student asked the vice principal if he and some friends could sit under an oak tree where white students typically congregated.
Told by the vice principal they could sit wherever they pleased, the student and his pals sat under the sprawling branches of the shade tree in the campus courtyard.
The next day, students arrived at school to find three nooses hanging from those branches.
According to The Town Talk in nearby Alexandria, the school's principal recommended expulsion for those behind the nooses. Instead, the newspaper reported, a school district committee suspended three white students for three days for hanging the nooses, a gesture written off as a "prank."
Racial tensions flared. The district attorney was summoned to address the student body. Off-campus fights were reported. On November 30, someone torched the school's main academic building. The arson remains unsolved, but many suspect it was linked to the discord.
Four days after the arson, several students jumped Barker, knocking him unconscious before stomping and kicking him.
Parents of the Jena 6 say they heard Barker was hurling racial epithets. Barker's parents insist he did nothing to provoke the beating.
Barker was taken to a hospital with injuries to both eyes and ears as well as cuts. His right eye had blood clots, said his mother, Kelli Barker. He was treated and released that day.
Bails for the Jena 6 were set at between $70,000 and $138,000. All but Bell posted bond. The judge has refused to lower his $90,000 bail, citing Bell's criminal record, which includes four juvenile offenses -- two simple battery charges among them.
Saturday, September 01, 2007
The Virginia Tech Killings: When Privacy Laws Do More Harm Than Good
Okay, I've read the 260 pages filed by the review panel that investigated the Virginia Tech shootings, and I understand that the university should have stepped in to help Seung Hui Cho but didn't, that Cho's parents should have alerted the college to his condition but didn't and that the state mental health system should have acted more decisively but didn't.
Here's what I don't get. In the hundreds of interviews the panel conducted, why didn't they ask all those people whose job it is to care for students one question: How would you have handled Cho if you had let your conscience, not privacy laws, guide you?
Maybe they didn't ask because we all know the answer, and it is a most discomfiting one. If the mental health professionals, police and college administrators who saw or knew about Cho's disturbing actions had acted as if their own child were involved, there might not have been any need for an investigation.
Boil down the report, cast aside the pointless second-guessing of police tactics, and you're left with this: Virginia Tech failed to intervene to help Cho because we as a society have trapped ourselves inside rules that stigmatize mental illness and paralyze our natural instinct to reach out and help someone in need.
This is no theoretical exercise in hindsight. This is a direct comparison between what some people did and what others didn't. At Virginia Tech, students who were frightened by their encounters with Cho took action. They told adults in positions of authority. The responsible adults then met and, in the words of the report, "did nothing." Why? "Lack of resources, incorrect interpretation of privacy laws and passivity," the panel concludes in its report.
Now compare what the Fairfax school system did and what Virginia Tech failed to do. In 1999, when Cho was in eighth grade, his teachers noticed, as Tech professors would later, that the youngster was thinking seriously about suicide and homicide. The boy wrote, the report says, that he "wanted to repeat Columbine."
Fairfax acted. The middle school asked Cho's parents to get him counseling. A psychiatric evaluation led to a diagnosis and treatment, which enabled Cho to perform well in school.
Again in high school, Fairfax stepped in and developed a plan for dealing with Cho's silences and other unusual behaviors. With therapy, he improved.
From there on, a lack of openness hid Cho's illness and prevented the care that might have averted disaster. No information about Cho's condition moved with him from Fairfax to Virginia Tech. The university, unlike many colleges that look at essays, recommendations and other subjective material, doesn't require much beyond test scores and grades to assess applicants. The admissions staff, the report says, "did not see the special accommodations that propped up Cho and his grades."
The culprit here is the culture of privacy that we have allowed to pervade certain areas of life, especially health and education. We have done this even as we have relied on openness to lead us into enormous change in other social realms. Does anyone doubt that it was transparency that led to deep and lasting shifts in American attitudes toward disability, race, religion and sexuality? We grew to accept people unlike ourselves because of greatly increased familiarity with and exposure to others. We came to see that we had something in common.
But in the name of protecting the mentally ill, the law stigmatizes their condition. By walling off mental illness, we prevent the power of light from reaching those who are suffering.
Privacy laws leave everyone from health workers to college administrators confused and defensive about what they may do and say. They react by doing less than they would if left to their own empathy and common sense.
"The current state of information privacy law and practice is inadequate," the report concludes. "The privacy laws need amendment and clarification."
Colleges require students to submit immunization records, yet records of emotional problems are sealed. The intent is to protect the mentally ill from discrimination in the admissions process. But that doesn't justify hiding information that can make the difference between success and failure in a student's career. "Perhaps students should be required to submit records of emotional or mental disturbance . . . after they have been admitted but before they enroll," the report says. "Maybe there really should be some form of 'permanent record.' "
"I hate this!" Cho wrote in an English paper the university did not disclose until The Post's Sari Horwitz revealed its existence. "I hate all these frauds! I hate my life. . . . This is it. . . . This is when you damn people die with me."
Lots of kids write provocative, even incendiary fiction. Nothing should discourage that. But as panel member Roger Depue, a longtime FBI profiler, says: "Just writing fantasies isn't the problem. It's the combination of disturbing writing and all the other danger signs."
Ultimate responsibility for the shootings rests squarely on Cho. But that does not absolve others of the need to act when something goes very wrong. Parents, as Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine said, cannot "just drop your child off on campus." Rather, they must seek out resident advisers and counselors and say, "Let me tell you about my precious child." And colleges must exhibit the same care toward young adults that parents, friends or good bosses do -- no matter how much the law may seek to separate us from our human obligations.
Here's what I don't get. In the hundreds of interviews the panel conducted, why didn't they ask all those people whose job it is to care for students one question: How would you have handled Cho if you had let your conscience, not privacy laws, guide you?
Maybe they didn't ask because we all know the answer, and it is a most discomfiting one. If the mental health professionals, police and college administrators who saw or knew about Cho's disturbing actions had acted as if their own child were involved, there might not have been any need for an investigation.
Boil down the report, cast aside the pointless second-guessing of police tactics, and you're left with this: Virginia Tech failed to intervene to help Cho because we as a society have trapped ourselves inside rules that stigmatize mental illness and paralyze our natural instinct to reach out and help someone in need.
This is no theoretical exercise in hindsight. This is a direct comparison between what some people did and what others didn't. At Virginia Tech, students who were frightened by their encounters with Cho took action. They told adults in positions of authority. The responsible adults then met and, in the words of the report, "did nothing." Why? "Lack of resources, incorrect interpretation of privacy laws and passivity," the panel concludes in its report.
Now compare what the Fairfax school system did and what Virginia Tech failed to do. In 1999, when Cho was in eighth grade, his teachers noticed, as Tech professors would later, that the youngster was thinking seriously about suicide and homicide. The boy wrote, the report says, that he "wanted to repeat Columbine."
Fairfax acted. The middle school asked Cho's parents to get him counseling. A psychiatric evaluation led to a diagnosis and treatment, which enabled Cho to perform well in school.
Again in high school, Fairfax stepped in and developed a plan for dealing with Cho's silences and other unusual behaviors. With therapy, he improved.
From there on, a lack of openness hid Cho's illness and prevented the care that might have averted disaster. No information about Cho's condition moved with him from Fairfax to Virginia Tech. The university, unlike many colleges that look at essays, recommendations and other subjective material, doesn't require much beyond test scores and grades to assess applicants. The admissions staff, the report says, "did not see the special accommodations that propped up Cho and his grades."
The culprit here is the culture of privacy that we have allowed to pervade certain areas of life, especially health and education. We have done this even as we have relied on openness to lead us into enormous change in other social realms. Does anyone doubt that it was transparency that led to deep and lasting shifts in American attitudes toward disability, race, religion and sexuality? We grew to accept people unlike ourselves because of greatly increased familiarity with and exposure to others. We came to see that we had something in common.
But in the name of protecting the mentally ill, the law stigmatizes their condition. By walling off mental illness, we prevent the power of light from reaching those who are suffering.
Privacy laws leave everyone from health workers to college administrators confused and defensive about what they may do and say. They react by doing less than they would if left to their own empathy and common sense.
"The current state of information privacy law and practice is inadequate," the report concludes. "The privacy laws need amendment and clarification."
Colleges require students to submit immunization records, yet records of emotional problems are sealed. The intent is to protect the mentally ill from discrimination in the admissions process. But that doesn't justify hiding information that can make the difference between success and failure in a student's career. "Perhaps students should be required to submit records of emotional or mental disturbance . . . after they have been admitted but before they enroll," the report says. "Maybe there really should be some form of 'permanent record.' "
"I hate this!" Cho wrote in an English paper the university did not disclose until The Post's Sari Horwitz revealed its existence. "I hate all these frauds! I hate my life. . . . This is it. . . . This is when you damn people die with me."
Lots of kids write provocative, even incendiary fiction. Nothing should discourage that. But as panel member Roger Depue, a longtime FBI profiler, says: "Just writing fantasies isn't the problem. It's the combination of disturbing writing and all the other danger signs."
Ultimate responsibility for the shootings rests squarely on Cho. But that does not absolve others of the need to act when something goes very wrong. Parents, as Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine said, cannot "just drop your child off on campus." Rather, they must seek out resident advisers and counselors and say, "Let me tell you about my precious child." And colleges must exhibit the same care toward young adults that parents, friends or good bosses do -- no matter how much the law may seek to separate us from our human obligations.
Russia Announces Plans for Space Program
Russia will send a cosmonaut to the moon by 2025 with the intention of opening a lunar base by 2032, according to Russian news agency RIA Novosti.
That may only be the beginning for the former communist nation, whose officials indicate they will send a manned flight to Mars after 2035. By the end of this year, its total number of satellites in orbit around earth will jump from 95 to 103, RIA Novosti reported.
Click here to read the RIA Novosti report.
The bold new initiatives by the Russian space program are funded mainly by tourist flights to the international space station, which are going for about $30 million a pop. Five wealthy tourists have been shipped to space since 2001, according to RIA Novosti.
That may only be the beginning for the former communist nation, whose officials indicate they will send a manned flight to Mars after 2035. By the end of this year, its total number of satellites in orbit around earth will jump from 95 to 103, RIA Novosti reported.
Click here to read the RIA Novosti report.
The bold new initiatives by the Russian space program are funded mainly by tourist flights to the international space station, which are going for about $30 million a pop. Five wealthy tourists have been shipped to space since 2001, according to RIA Novosti.
Texas signs new self-defense by gun law
By Ed Stoddard
DALLAS (Reuters) - Criminals in Texas beware: if you threaten someone in their car or office, the citizens of this state where guns are ubiquitous have the right to shoot you dead.
Governor Rick Perry's office said on Tuesday that he had signed a new law that expands Texans' existing right to use deadly force to defend themselves "without retreat" in their homes, cars and workplaces.
"The right to defend oneself from an imminent act of harm should not only be clearly defined in Texas law, but is intuitive to human nature," Perry said on his Web site.
The new law, which takes affect on September 1, extends an exception to a statute that required a person to retreat in the face of a criminal attack. The exception was in the case of an intruder unlawfully entering a person's home.
The law extends a person's right to stand their ground beyond the home to vehicles and workplaces, allowing the reasonable use of deadly force, the governor's office said.
The reasonable use of lethal force will be allowed if an intruder is:
- Committing certain violent crimes, such as murder or sexual assault, or is attempting to commit such crimes
- Unlawfully trying to enter a protected place
- Unlawfully trying to remove a person from a protected place.
The law also provides civil immunity for a person who lawfully slays an intruder or attacker in such situations.
Texas joins several other states including Florida that have or are considering similar laws.
Sympathy for violent offenders and criminals in general runs low in Texas, underscored by its busy death row. The state leads the United States in executions with 388 since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 by the U.S. Supreme Court.
A conservative political outlook and widespread fondness for hunting also means Texans are a well-armed people capable of defending themselves with deadly force.
It is easy to acquire guns over the counter in Texas and lawful to carry a concealed handgun with a permit.
DALLAS (Reuters) - Criminals in Texas beware: if you threaten someone in their car or office, the citizens of this state where guns are ubiquitous have the right to shoot you dead.
Governor Rick Perry's office said on Tuesday that he had signed a new law that expands Texans' existing right to use deadly force to defend themselves "without retreat" in their homes, cars and workplaces.
"The right to defend oneself from an imminent act of harm should not only be clearly defined in Texas law, but is intuitive to human nature," Perry said on his Web site.
The new law, which takes affect on September 1, extends an exception to a statute that required a person to retreat in the face of a criminal attack. The exception was in the case of an intruder unlawfully entering a person's home.
The law extends a person's right to stand their ground beyond the home to vehicles and workplaces, allowing the reasonable use of deadly force, the governor's office said.
The reasonable use of lethal force will be allowed if an intruder is:
- Committing certain violent crimes, such as murder or sexual assault, or is attempting to commit such crimes
- Unlawfully trying to enter a protected place
- Unlawfully trying to remove a person from a protected place.
The law also provides civil immunity for a person who lawfully slays an intruder or attacker in such situations.
Texas joins several other states including Florida that have or are considering similar laws.
Sympathy for violent offenders and criminals in general runs low in Texas, underscored by its busy death row. The state leads the United States in executions with 388 since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 by the U.S. Supreme Court.
A conservative political outlook and widespread fondness for hunting also means Texans are a well-armed people capable of defending themselves with deadly force.
It is easy to acquire guns over the counter in Texas and lawful to carry a concealed handgun with a permit.
Judge Strikes Down Iowa Gay Marriage Ban
Friday August 31, 2007 1:31 PM
By DAVID PITT
Associated Press Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Less than two hours after a judge struck down Iowa's decade-old gay marriage ban, two Des Moines men applied for a marriage license as bride and groom, and county officials said they expected to see more same-sex couples doing the same on Friday.
``I started to cry because we so badly want to be able to be protected if something happens to one of us,'' said David Curtis Rethmeier, 29, who was listed as the bride on that first marriage form, with Gary Allen Seronko, 51, as his groom.
Polk County Judge Robert Hanson cleared the way for the two men on Thursday when he ruled that a state law allowing marriage only between a man and woman violated the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection.
The judge ordered local officials to process marriage licenses for the six gay couples who sued. With the ruling, gay couples across the state can now apply for a marriage license in the central-Iowa county.
County attorney John Sarcone said the county would appeal to the state Supreme Court, and he immediately sought a stay from Hanson that would prevent gay couples from seeking a marriage license until the appeal is resolved.
A hearing on the stay motion is likely next week, said Camilla Taylor, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a New York-based gay rights organization.
In the meantime, Deputy County Recorder Trish Umthun is taking calls from gay couples, five of them in the first hours after the judge filed his ruling Thursday afternoon.
The office's web site explaining how to apply for a marriage license still began with the words, ``Marriages in Iowa are between a male and a female ...,'' on Friday morning, but Umthun expected a rush of applications through the day. The marriage license approval process takes three business days.
Republican House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, said the ruling illustrates the need for a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
``I can't believe this is happening in Iowa,'' Rants said. ``I guarantee you there will be a vote on this issue come January,'' when the Legislature convenes.
Gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and nine other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples. Nearly all states have defined marriage as being solely between a man and a woman, and 27 states have such wording in their constitutions, according the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Dennis Johnson, the lawyer for the six gay couples who sued in 2005 after they were denied marriage licenses, had argued that Iowa has a long history of aggressively protecting civil rights in cases of race and gender.
The Defense of Marriage Act, which the Legislature passed in 1998 declaring marriage to be between one man and one woman, contradicts previous rulings regarding civil rights and is simply ``mean spirited,'' he said.
Roger J. Kuhle, an assistant Polk County attorney, argued that the issue is not for a judge to decide.
---
Associated Press writer Henry C. Jackson contributed to this report.
By DAVID PITT
Associated Press Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Less than two hours after a judge struck down Iowa's decade-old gay marriage ban, two Des Moines men applied for a marriage license as bride and groom, and county officials said they expected to see more same-sex couples doing the same on Friday.
``I started to cry because we so badly want to be able to be protected if something happens to one of us,'' said David Curtis Rethmeier, 29, who was listed as the bride on that first marriage form, with Gary Allen Seronko, 51, as his groom.
Polk County Judge Robert Hanson cleared the way for the two men on Thursday when he ruled that a state law allowing marriage only between a man and woman violated the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection.
The judge ordered local officials to process marriage licenses for the six gay couples who sued. With the ruling, gay couples across the state can now apply for a marriage license in the central-Iowa county.
County attorney John Sarcone said the county would appeal to the state Supreme Court, and he immediately sought a stay from Hanson that would prevent gay couples from seeking a marriage license until the appeal is resolved.
A hearing on the stay motion is likely next week, said Camilla Taylor, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a New York-based gay rights organization.
In the meantime, Deputy County Recorder Trish Umthun is taking calls from gay couples, five of them in the first hours after the judge filed his ruling Thursday afternoon.
The office's web site explaining how to apply for a marriage license still began with the words, ``Marriages in Iowa are between a male and a female ...,'' on Friday morning, but Umthun expected a rush of applications through the day. The marriage license approval process takes three business days.
Republican House Minority Leader Christopher Rants, said the ruling illustrates the need for a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
``I can't believe this is happening in Iowa,'' Rants said. ``I guarantee you there will be a vote on this issue come January,'' when the Legislature convenes.
Gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and nine other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples. Nearly all states have defined marriage as being solely between a man and a woman, and 27 states have such wording in their constitutions, according the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Dennis Johnson, the lawyer for the six gay couples who sued in 2005 after they were denied marriage licenses, had argued that Iowa has a long history of aggressively protecting civil rights in cases of race and gender.
The Defense of Marriage Act, which the Legislature passed in 1998 declaring marriage to be between one man and one woman, contradicts previous rulings regarding civil rights and is simply ``mean spirited,'' he said.
Roger J. Kuhle, an assistant Polk County attorney, argued that the issue is not for a judge to decide.
---
Associated Press writer Henry C. Jackson contributed to this report.
10 Years After Princess Diana's Death/Murder
MOHAMED AL-FAYED has angrily rejected a plea by the Bishop of London for the memorial service for Diana, Princess of Wales, to mark the end of skirmishing over her.
The Harrods owner dismissed Richard Chartres as a “stuffed shirt” after he urged the congregation, including the Queen, Prince Charles and members of Diana’s family: “Let it end here.”
In a clear sign that next month’s inquest into her death in a 1997 Paris car crash will be a bitter affair, Fayed, whose son Dodi died with Diana, accused Chartres of “hijacking” Friday’s memorial service.
“Prince Harry had the grace to acknowledge the suffering of other families who lost someone that night . . . This stuffed shirt of a clergyman should take lessons from the 22-year-old prince in how to behave. He certainly shouldn’t have hijacked a memorial service dedicated to Diana, Princess of Wales, to let us know various of his personal opinions - for that’s all they were.
“He preached at us to let her memory rest, but how can that happen when the truth is still being covered up? As a religious man the bishop has no right to interfere in the court process which will establish what happened that night.”
Fayed’s legal team will allege at the inquest that Diana, Dodi and their driver Henri Paul were murdered in an MI6 plot orchestrated by the Duke of Edinburgh.
The duke and Diana’s closest friends firmly reject the claim. Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, concluded in a report last year that they died in a tragic accident caused by Paul driving while he was over the drink limit.
In a statement yesterday Fayed said he could not understand why Chartres, an executor of Diana’s will, appeared to want to dismiss his search for the truth.
“That’s all I’ve ever wanted. Anyone who loses a child in such a horrific way should be allowed to know what really happened and I am not resting until I uncover the murderers who took the life of two beautiful people.
“A poll today says 89% of people think their deaths were not an accident. I get hundreds of letters of support each week. We need justice, for my family’s sake, and for the sake of the princes.”
Meanwhile, a surgeon who operated on Diana after the car crash has claimed that medical treatment that could have saved her life was delayed because her fame caused doctors and paramedics to be overcautious.
Dr Leonardo Esteves Lima, a Brazilian cardiologist who treated Diana at the Hospital Pitié-Salpêtrière, said: “They spent 30 to 40 minutes at the place of the accident when she could have been brought directly to the hospital. It was a tragic occurrence and perhaps she paid a price in part for her celebrity.”
The Harrods owner dismissed Richard Chartres as a “stuffed shirt” after he urged the congregation, including the Queen, Prince Charles and members of Diana’s family: “Let it end here.”
In a clear sign that next month’s inquest into her death in a 1997 Paris car crash will be a bitter affair, Fayed, whose son Dodi died with Diana, accused Chartres of “hijacking” Friday’s memorial service.
“Prince Harry had the grace to acknowledge the suffering of other families who lost someone that night . . . This stuffed shirt of a clergyman should take lessons from the 22-year-old prince in how to behave. He certainly shouldn’t have hijacked a memorial service dedicated to Diana, Princess of Wales, to let us know various of his personal opinions - for that’s all they were.
“He preached at us to let her memory rest, but how can that happen when the truth is still being covered up? As a religious man the bishop has no right to interfere in the court process which will establish what happened that night.”
Fayed’s legal team will allege at the inquest that Diana, Dodi and their driver Henri Paul were murdered in an MI6 plot orchestrated by the Duke of Edinburgh.
The duke and Diana’s closest friends firmly reject the claim. Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, concluded in a report last year that they died in a tragic accident caused by Paul driving while he was over the drink limit.
In a statement yesterday Fayed said he could not understand why Chartres, an executor of Diana’s will, appeared to want to dismiss his search for the truth.
“That’s all I’ve ever wanted. Anyone who loses a child in such a horrific way should be allowed to know what really happened and I am not resting until I uncover the murderers who took the life of two beautiful people.
“A poll today says 89% of people think their deaths were not an accident. I get hundreds of letters of support each week. We need justice, for my family’s sake, and for the sake of the princes.”
Meanwhile, a surgeon who operated on Diana after the car crash has claimed that medical treatment that could have saved her life was delayed because her fame caused doctors and paramedics to be overcautious.
Dr Leonardo Esteves Lima, a Brazilian cardiologist who treated Diana at the Hospital Pitié-Salpêtrière, said: “They spent 30 to 40 minutes at the place of the accident when she could have been brought directly to the hospital. It was a tragic occurrence and perhaps she paid a price in part for her celebrity.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)