“Politically Charged” iPhone App Denied?

It appears, according to the App’s developer, that the App known as “iSinglePayer” has been denied by Apple for being “politically charged.  (Lambdajive via Daring Fireball via Engadget)  I’m not sure what to make of it, as the purported developer (I think it’s Floatopia?) has a website, floatopia.org, and the App doesn’t show up there.  But whatever, the story goes like this: iSinglePayer purports to show Americans what we pay in health costs versus other countries, and provides a location-aware Congressional contact mechanism.  And that appears to be just about it.

Renewable Energy Roundup

As I mentioned yesterday, I went to the Renewable Energy Roundup in Fredericksburg, Texas over the weekend.  While I’m keenly interested in renewable energy and in the Roundup’s focus on sustainability education as a general matter, I attended specifically because my brother was an exhibitor there.

My brother is co-owner of REVOLT Custom Electric Vehicles, LLC, and REVOLT demonstrated a 2008 Mazda3 that they converted from running on gasoline to running solely on electric power.  (Full disclosure: REVOLT is a client of mine.  However, I received no direct compensation for this post.  REVOLT is a registered trademark of REVOLT Custom Electric Vehicles, LLC.)

In addition to REVOLT’s display were the Austin Area Electric Automobile Association’s display cars, including a really neat VW Beetle conversion, and the University of Texas’s solar-powered car.

Electric cars, however, were not the only thing on display.  There were a great deal of wind turbines on display, all of which were quite interesting.  I heartily recommend the Roundup to anyone.  Fredericksburg is a fun little town, with interesting things to do, such as the Nimitz Museum, a lot of antiquing opportunities, and, of course, the Fredericksburg Brewery, which has delicious beer and sausage.

(Note:  the images have been obscured somewhat to avoid infringing trademarks and likenesses.)

LRADs in Pittsburgh

Looking at Gizmodo yesterday, I saw that the LRAD (Long Range Acoustical Device) was deployed on the protesters of the G-20 summit.  Most of the news reports say that it’s the first time the device has been deployed against US civilians (it’s been used against the Somali pirates and elsewhere).  I could have sworn they were actually used in New York during the 2004 RNC, but I could be mistaken.  No matter, it’s been used, and it’s making headlines.

The LRAD–like tasers, various chemicals, and directed energy weapons–are supposedly nonlethal.  But–like tasers, various chemicals, and directed energy weapons–nonlethal weapons can often end up killing civilians.  (See this Alternet article on tasers, and this NY Times article on the Russian use of fentayl), though I suppose that the LRAD–which can incite nausea, disrupted vision, and hearing damage–is the least lethal of these so-called nonlethal weapons.

The military acknowledges that nonlethal doesn’t actually mean nonlethal.  In a 2003 MTTP for the tactical employment of nonlethal weapons, the Joint Nonlethal Weapons Directorate notes:

The term “nonlethal” does not mean zero mortality or nonpermanent damage; these are goals and not guarantees of these weapons. NLW can add flexibility to combat operations and enhance force protection by providing an environment in which friendly troops can engage threatening targets with reduced risk of noncombatant casualties and collateral damage.

According to a report cited in an article by the Federation of American Scientists, a non-lethal chemical weapon is one that incapacitates 98% of the target population while causing fewer than 0.5% fatalities.  Klotz, Lynn et al., Beware the Siren’s Song: Why Non-Lethal Incapacitating Chemical Agents are Lethal, March 2003 at 6, citing Kenny, J. M., The human effects of non-lethal weapons. Human Effects Advisory Panel presentation to to the  committee for an Assessment of of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology, April 30, 2001. Viewgraphs. ONR-NLW.239. National Academy of Sciences.

Fleet Foxes–Seven Word Review

Perfect music for driving into the Rockies.

Paying Society’s Debts

On the way home from Fredericksburg, Texas yesterday (I was attending the Renewable Energy Roundup, which I’ll discuss later), I was listening to a pregame show on the radio.  The host was talking about Michael Vick, and how he should be allowed to play for the Eagles, in part because Vick had paid his debt to society.  He was charged, convicted, and spent his time in federal prison.

Which is all well and good.  I certainly agree that a person who has spent time in prison and is released should be allowed to say that he’s paid his debt to society, and it’s a sentiment that generally gets little argument on a theoretical basis.  For example, this blog on USA Today echoes the sentiment:  “He is a black man who committed a crime, paid his debt to society and is trying to return his life to some normalcy.”  And Pittsburgh Steelers head coach Mike Tomlin has said the same thing (source), and so has the owner of the Atlanta Falcons, Arthur Blank (source).

I wonder, though, what these commentators think about things like sex offender databases?  Or the fact that a regular every day citizen being charged with a crime essentially finds his or her ability to find lucrative employment drastically hampered.  Or the fact that the United States has the highest prison population in the world (both in terms of sheer numbers and on a per capita basis).  (Some reports have the United States at a 1% incarceration rate, others have it slightly lower.)  And this doesn’t even count the sheer number of people who go through the courts and don’t end up in prison, either having their cases dismissed, receive probation, or get something like deferred adjudication or a suspended imposition of sentence.  In other words, there are an awful lot of people in this country for whom a criminal record is a hindrance to being able to succeed.

The problem is exacerbated for individuals who get arrested but never get convicted, whether it’s through an acquittal at trial, having the case dismissed, or getting put on deferred adjudication community supervision.  Arrest records are public records and prospective employers can gain access to them.  In the case of dismissals and acquittals, the records can be expunged in certain circumstances.  For deferred adjudications, one needs to file a petition for nondisclosure.  This is because a deferred adjudication only means that a conviction will not be entered on the offense; the records will still be available until they are essentially sealed to the public.  Other states may have other processes for sealing records, with some–such as Massachusetts–allowing records to be sealed after a certain period of time, regardless of whether that person received a final conviction.  (Check with a Massachusetts lawyer if that’s what you are interested in.)

But to go back to my main point, for far too many people, paying society’s debts never ends.  Jobs are foreclosed, and in some circumstances, such as getting a drug conviction, you can’t even get money to go to college.  So, while it feels nice to say that Michael Vick has paid his debt to society, a broader view would be appreciated, and keep those who haven’t made millions of dollars playing a game for a living in mind while you say it.

Equilibrium–Eight Word Review

We’ve come a long way since The Matrix.

Observe and Report–Seven Word Review

A bit more disturbing than I expected.

Terrorism Charges

As expected, according to the AP, one of the individuals arrested last week in Denver for making false statements has apparently been indicted in New York on conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction charges.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 2332a, it is a crime to conspire to use a weapon of mass destruction against, among other things, any person or property in the United States.  It is a crime punishable by up to life imprisonment.  A couple of really important caveats about this charge, though.  First, if the alleged target is a person or property located in the United States, some jurisdictional requirements need to be satisfied; one of the following must be shown:

• the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;
• such property is used in interstate or foreign commerce or in an activity that affects interstate or foreign commerce;
• any perpetrator travels in or causes another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce in furtherance of the offense; or
• the offense, or the results of the offense, affect interstate or foreign commerce, or, in the case of a threat, attempt, or conspiracy, would have affected interstate or foreign commerce;

Second, “weapons of mass destruction” does not mean what many think it means.  Yes, it means the nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons which were the supposed reason for invading Iraq.  But it has a much broader definition than just the nasty stuff.  It also includes a destructive device as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921:

• a bomb,
• a grenade,
• a rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,
• a missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
• a mine, or
• a device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses.

It also means a rifle (other than a shotgun) having a barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter.  Antique rifles are exempted from this particular definition, however.  Flare guns, too.

Sen. Franken and the Fourth Amendment

The Washington Independent is reporting that Senator Al Franken read the text of the Fourth Amendment to Assistant Attorney General (National Security Division) David Kris.   Apparently, at some point of the proceedings, Mr. Kris muttered that the line of questioning was “surreal.”

Pretrial Detention

I mentioned the other day that certain individuals had been arrested in Denver for allegedly making false statements to investigators.  According to Agence France-Presse, two of the men have been ordered to be detained pending further review, while a third has been released on bond.

Pretrial detention hearings are a crucial part of the federal criminal process, occurring at the time of the individual’s initial appearance.  During the hearing, the magistrate judge makes a determination of two things: whether the individual is a flight risk, and whether the individual poses a danger to the community.  See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b) (“The judicial officer shall order the pretrial release of the person … unless the judicial officer determines that such release will not reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community.”)

In making this determination, the magistrate judge has certain statutory considerations he must take into account, including the nature and circumstances surrounding the charge, specifically, “whether the offense is a crime of violence, a Federal crime of terrorism, or involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device.”  Id. § 3142(g)(1).  And here’s where things get a little sticky, because as far as I’ve seen, the only charges levied at this point are false statements, albeit false statements involving terrorism.  So, facially, one wonders whether false statements involving terrorism is a “Federal crime of terrorism.”  It may become a moot point, as it appears from most news accounts that the individuals were arrested on a criminal complaint in the anticipation that an indictment would issue shortly, which indictment might even get superseded with even more charges.

It also is important to note that the standard Rules of Evidence that apply to trials do not apply to detention hearings.  Magistrate judges may hear hearsay evidence, and can hear evidence about activities which don’t necessarily apply to the specific charges.