Indian Teen Kills Self After Police Pres

Indian Teen Kills Self After Police Pressure Her to Marry Rapist http://bit.ly/YskvSd Amid the ongoing uproar over the gang-rape of a student on a bus in New Delhi earlier this month, the latest case has again shone the spotlight on the police’s handling of sex crimes. A 17-year-old Indian girl who was gang-raped committed suicide after police pressured her to drop the case and marry one of her attackers, police and a relative said on Thursday. Amid the ongoing uproar over the gang-rape of a student on a bus in New Delhi earlier this month, the latest case has again shone the spotlight on the police’s handling of sex crimes. One police officer has been sacked and another suspended over their conduct after the assault during the festival of Diwali on November 13 in the Patiala region in the Punjab, according to officials. Inspector General Paramjit Singh Gill said that the teenager had been “running from pillar to post to get her case registered” but officers failed to open a formal inquiry.The teenager was found dead on Wednesday night after swallowing poison. “One of the officers tried to convince her to withdraw the case,” Gill, the police chief for the area, told AFP. Before her death, there had been no arrests over her case although three people were detained on Thursday. Two of them were her alleged male attackers and the third was a suspected woman accomplice. The victim’s sister told Indian television that the teenager had been urged to either accept a cash settlement or marry one of her attackers. “The police started pressuring her to either reach a financial settlement with her attackers or marry one of them,” her sister told the NDTV network. The woman and her husband later brought the case to the attention of a more senior officer and a hunt has now been launched for her attacker, an auto rickshaw driver.Meanwhile, the Press Trust of India reported that a police officer has been suspended for allegedly refusing to register a rape complaint in the northern state of Chhattisgar. Official figures show that 228,650 of the total 256,329 violent crimes recorded last year in India were against women. The real figure is thought to be much higher as so many women are reluctant to report attacks to the police. During an address to the chief ministers of India’s states on Thursday, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pledged to bring in new laws to cover attacks on women.

Mathematically speaking … Why those call

Mathematically speaking … Why those calling for gun control are dead wrong http://bit.ly/U4opRe (Bernie Suarez) In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown Connecticut many liberals, NPR news listeners, Associated Press readers, Michael Moore followers and un-awakened corporate mainstream media believers are calling for gun control. They have succumbed to the bombardment of corporate media lies, propaganda and sensationalism that comes with the global government primary goal of destroying the second Amendment. Many of us have heard the Michael Moore arguments that the second Amendment was intended by the founding fathers only in the context of the guns that were available then; that being the large barrel single-shot musket available at the time. Liberals and rejuvenated anti-gun advocates are raising this issue as an excuse to eliminate all rifles, shot guns if not all guns all together. This is the argument they are clinging to in order to demonize gun advocates, but is there any logic to this strawman argument? Let’s examine this argument logically and mathematically: The basis of this Michael Moore/Bob Costas strawman argument that so many zombies throughout America are echoing is that there is ‘no need’ for Americans to have semi-automatic weapons or weapons that are larger than ordinary handguns; some argue that no guns should be legal at all. They ignore the fundamental purpose of the Constitution; that unilateral government force is dangerous and that protection from large highly armed government comes from, among other things, an armed responsible civilians population willing to keep the concept of revolution and individual freedom alive and viable. They ignore the ideologies and concepts of individualism, the importance of individual sovereignty and freedom, the danger of over-reaching large government, fascism and tyranny and the known end results of what happens when individual citizens allow the government to have all the power and weapons. This strawman argument that the Michael Moore audience is presenting as proof that guns should be controlled is solely based on this fallacious argument of ‘context of fire power relative to the times the constitution was written’. However, if one applies a little logic and math one can quickly see the fallacy in this argument. Did the founding fathers feel that if the government had more than just muskets that the people should stop at muskets and allow the government to arm itself uncontrollably? Did the founding fathers feel that is was okay to have an exponentially wide gap of fire power between the government and the people; even if it meant that the guns available to the people were futile and irrelevant? Would any of the authors of the Constitution have endorsed such gap of fire power knowing well what would happen with that gap? Were any of them confident that if the fire-power gap made the second Amendment irrelevant, that the sovereign citizens would have nothing to worry about? Did the founding fathers ever express this lack of concern? All attempts to assume that the founding fathers would have been okay with government exponentially stronger fire power (therein defeating the spirit of the very second amendment they drafted) is based on lies, wild assumption and fallacy. That’s the logic, but what about applying some numbers? It is mathematically a fact that 99.99 percent of Americans who do own higher-powered guns and small arms will never go on a shooting rampage and kill innocent people. This level of violence in humans is so rare that it can be said with a high degree of mathematical confidence that this level of violence is essentially non-existent in the human race. Human essentially don’t resort to this level of violence unless they are under pharmaceutical drugs, are victims of mind-control and/or working for government entities with clear political agendas as we have seen in numerous recent shootings in the U.S.. In other…

Government report: ‘TSA’s main concern

Government report: ‘TSA’s main concern isn’t safety, it’s self-preservation’ http://bit.ly/VgdgPm A traveler walks through a metal detector at a security check point in John F. Kennedy Airport in New York.(Reuters / Andrew Burton) T o maintain control of airport security the TSA ditched a program to hire private employees to conduct improved operations. Despite ongoing complaints about the TSA, 15 million passengers will be forced to endure their screenings this holiday season. As millions of Americans board planes to visit friends and family for Christmas and New Year’s, they will undergo security screenings by an agency whose conduct is constantly criticized by angry passengers treated poorly by its officers. Despite the constant criticism, the Transportation Security Administration stopped a program that would give airports the option of having private employees conduct security screenings. These employees would have greater workplace flexibility and be held to higher standards, thereby improving customer service. TSA was given the power to decide which locations could participate, but between 2002 and 2011 it only allowed 16 out of 440 commercial US airports to hire these employees. TSA Administrator John S. Pistole terminated the program last year, returning full power of airport security to his agency by eliminating the competition. TSA claims that this was done to reduce airport costs, but in 2011, these private screeners – which are paid for by the airport, not TSA – only cost three percent more than the agency’s own employees. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report shows the severity of TSA’s faults on the American public. More travelers are choosing to drive or take a train to their destination, in part to avoid the security mess that the TSA is in charge of. The agency has suffered continuous criticism, with passengers accusing employees of stealing their belongings, groping them inappropriately during security screenings, and detaining them without valid reason. “Passengers who have negative encounters with the screening process generally associate their experiences with the specific airport,” the GAO report said. But regardless of the complaints specific to the agency, TSA has refused to compare its employees to private contractors to compare the quality of the services. “TSA has not conducted regular reviews comparing private and federal screener performance and does not have plans to do so,” the report states. The GAO report also described TSA efforts to block distraught passengers from filing complaints. Angry passengers undergoing screenings at Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington DC are never given forms they can turn in documenting their complaints. They are simply provided with small pieces of paper containing the TSA website and mailing address, the Washington Times reports. Deborah McElroy, executive vice president of policy and external affairs at the Airports Council International-North America, a Washington-based trade group, told Bloomberg News that the decision to replace TSA employees with private ones should lie with the airport – giving airports alternatives if they have negative experiences with the agency. “We strongly believe that airports should make the decision,” she said. “If the airports decide to do it, there shouldn’t be barriers.” Even though private contractors cost an airport three percent more than TSA employees, TSA’s mistakes have cost the agency millions of dollars. Facing numerous lawsuits, it is often forced to compensate passengers maltreated by their employees, thereby procuring additional expenses. Additionally, the TSA has wasted money by purchasing faulty equipment. The agency recently bought $29.6 million worth of ‘puffer’ machines meant to detect explosives, which ultimately failed to detect anything at all. Nevertheless, US airports no longer have an alternative option to TSA screeners. The agency will continue to have full control over the…