Minor Thoughts from me to you

It used to be that DUI citations were given out for actually driving while under the influence of alcohol. Increasingly, they're being given out for simply being "under the influence". This strikes me as a gross violation of civil liberties. Since when did it become illegal to simply have alcohol in your system?

The first story comes from Hamburg, New Jersey.

A New Jersey appellate court yesterday upheld the principle that convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) can be imposed on individuals who were not driving. David Montalvo, 36, found this out as he responsibly tried to sleep off his intoxication in his GMC pickup truck while safely stopped in the parking lot of the Market Place Deli on a cold February morning last year. At around 5am he awoke to see a Hamburg Police Department patrolman standing over him. The officer had opened the door of Montalvo's truck to rouse the man and insist that he take a breathalyzer test. Montalvo refused.

For his attempt to follow the law and drive responsibly, David Montalvo now owes the city more than $4000, plus legal fees. Punishing people for doing the right thing in an effort to motivate them to do the right thing. I think New Jersey has discovered an entirely new principle of human behavior.

Next up, Rochester New Hampshire. Dover man arrested for taping his DWI investigation

A 48-year-old Chestnut Street man was arrested early this morning for wiretapping for allegedly recording police while they were investigating him for driving while intoxicated.

Police say they were patrolling the downtown area at 2:54 a.m. when they discovered Christopher A. Power of 52 Chestnut St. sitting in the driver's seat of a vehicle with its motor running at the Rochester Common.

After speaking with Power, police began investigating him for driving while intoxicated and arrested him. During the arrest an audio recording device was discovered.

Not only is it apparently illegal to sit in a parked car while alcohol is in your blood, it's also illegal to record police in the performance of their duties.

Err, since when? They work for the public, in the public good. Shouldn't the public be allowed to monitor that that's actually what they're doing? What are the police trying to hide? I thought the government line was that only criminals should be afraid of surveillance. Are the New Hampshire police hiding something?

ACLU sues DEA on behalf of truck whose money was seized | Houston Chronicle

A trucker has sued the Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking to get back nearly $24,000 seized by DEA agents earlier this month at a weigh station on U.S. 54 in New Mexico north of El Paso, Texas.

Anastasio Prieto of El Paso gave a state police officer at the weigh station permission to search the truck to see if it contained "needles or cash in excess of $10,000," according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the federal lawsuit Thursday.

Prieto told the officer he didn't have any needles but did have $23,700.

Officers took the money and turned it over to the DEA. DEA agents photographed and fingerprinted Prieto over his objections, then released him without charging him with anything.

Border Patrol agents searched his truck with drug-sniffing dogs, but found no evidence of illegal substances, the ACLU said.

DEA agents told Prieto he would receive a notice of federal proceedings to permanently forfeit the money within 30 days and that to get it back, he'd have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.

They told him the process probably would take a year, the ACLU said.

The ACLU's New Mexico executive director, Peter Simonson, said Prieto needs his money now to pay bills and maintain his truck. The lawsuit said Prieto does not like banks and customarily carries his savings as cash.

He has to prove that he wasn't doing anything illegal before he's allowed to keep his money? Shouldn't the government have to prove that he was doing something illegal before they can take his money in the first place? I seem to remember reading something in the constitution about that very issue.

I'm eager to see which Presidential candidates will step up to condemn this Constitutional outrage.

Back in the day, America had a federal government. That meant that the national government was responsible for national defense, foreign policy, and not much else. That meant that states were free to govern themselves as they saw fit. That meant that states were free to act in the best interests of their citizens.

Sadly, that's all changed. Now Washington D.C. exercises more and more control over what states can -- and cannot -- do. Case in point: North Dakota.

Sober North Dakotans Hope to Legalize Hemp - New York Times

But no place has challenged the government as fiercely as North Dakota. Its legislature has passed a bill allowing farmers to grow industrial hemp and created an official licensing process to fingerprint such farmers and a global positioning system to track their fields. This year, Mr. Monson and another North Dakota farmer, with the support of the state's agriculture commissioner, applied to the Drug Enforcement Administration for permission to plant fields of hemp immediately.

This battle is decidedly, and Midwesternly, pragmatic. In 1993, scab, a fungus also known as Fusarium head blight, tore through this region, wiping out thousands of acres of wheat, a prized crop in North Dakota, where agriculture remains the largest element of the economy. Hard rains left water pooling in fields, giving scab an opening. The fungus has turned up in varying degrees ever since, even as farmers searched for a cure.

But hemp, Mr. Monson argued, offered an alternative for North Dakota's crop rotation. Its tall stalks survive similarly cool and wet conditions in Canada, just 25 miles north of here, where it is legal. And it suits the rocky soil left behind here by glaciers, soil that threatens to tear up farm equipment for anyone who dares to plant crops like beets or potatoes beneath ground.

Years and studies and hearings later, few here have much to say against hemp "” a reflection, it seems, of the state's urgent wish to improve its economy. Recent hemp votes have passed the legislature with ease, though some questions linger. How big a market would there really be for hemp? What about the worries of drug enforcement officials, who say someone might sneak into a farmer's field of harmless hemp and plant a batch of (similar-looking) marijuana?

Roger Johnson, the state's agriculture commissioner, said hemp fields would be the worst places to hide marijuana. Under state rules, Mr. Johnson said, such fields must be accessible for unannounced searches, day or night, and crops would be tested by the state. Also, he said, a field of hemp and marijuana would cross-pollinate, leaving the drug less potent.

"We're not wide-eyed liberals,"" Mr. Johnson said. "The D.E.A., they're the crazy ones on this. This sort of illogical, indefensible position is not going to prevail forever."

Summary: North Dakota desparately needs a new cash crop. Hemp is safe and usable in thousands of different products -- much like the venerable peanut. The D.E.A. gets the willies about marijuana -- a drug that's safer than nicotine and alcohol. Result: North Dakota can go pound sand, the central government reigns supreme.

That's tragically infuriating. It's time for states to take back the authority that they've been quietly ceding to Washington.

Algerian women are slowly doing what women in few Islamic countries are able to do -- they are gaining independence from the men in their lives. I couldn't be happier.

Women make up 70 percent of Algeria's lawyers and 60 percent of its judges. Women dominate medicine. Increasingly, women contribute more to household income than men. Sixty percent of university students are women, university researchers say.

How is this happening? Well, mainly through the laziness and apathy of Algeria's men.

Algeria's young men reject school and try to earn money as traders in the informal sector, selling goods on the street, or they focus their efforts on leaving the country or just hanging out. There is a whole class of young men referred to as hittistes -- the word is a combination of French and Arabic for people who hold up walls.

University studies are no longer viewed as a credible route toward a career or economic well-being, and so men may well opt out and try to find work or to simply leave the country, suggested Hugh Roberts, a historian and the North Africa project director of the International Crisis Group.

Algerian women have been quick to take advantage of the opportunity. They have also learned to use traditional Islamic dress as a tool to further their goals.

Sociologists and many working women say that by adopting religion and wearing the Islamic head covering called the hijab, women here have in effect freed themselves from moral judgments and restrictions imposed by men. Uncovered women are rarely seen on the street late at night, but covered women can be seen strolling the city after attending the evening prayer at a mosque.

As a result, they may be able to do more to modernize Algeria than anyone ever dreamed.

Women may have emerged as Algeria's most potent force for social change, with their presence in the bureaucracy and on the street having a potentially moderating and modernizing influence on society, sociologists said.

Many of today's Algerian women have a decidedly Enlightened view of religion and work.

"I don't think any of this contradicts Islam," said Wahiba Nabti, 36, as she walked through the center of the city one day recently. "On the contrary, Islam gives freedom to work. Anyway it is between you and God."

Ms. Nabti wore a black scarf covering her head and a long black gown that hid the shape of her body. "I hope one day I can drive a crane, so I can really be financially independent," she said. "You cannot always rely on a man."

This is the perspective, attitude, and action that American feminists cannot endure. Rather than violently overthrowing the "patriarchy" and "men's religion", Algerian women are working through religion and the patriarchy to achieve their goals. If they succeed, they can be model to Muslim women everywhere. They will also be another crack in the wall of traditional Muslim barbarism and oppression.

Go, go, go!

Police officials in North Platte, Nebraska are moving dangerously close to an act of pure insanity:

In response to a recent report from the U.S. Surgeon General about the dangers of second-hand smoke, local police officials report they are preparing to crack down on drivers who expose their children to second-hand smoke.

The report shows second-hand smoke is particularly harmful to young children whose developing bodies are especially vulnerable. Second-hand smoke can cause a number of life-threatening childhood illnesses such as asthma.

"With that in mind, we are researching to determine whether law enforcement has probable cause to arrest anyone exposing children to second-hand smoke inside a vehicle," Gutschenritter said. He added the police department is working with the county attorney to determine if smoking in a vehicle with children present would be considered child abuse.

Child abuse in Nebraska is punishable by a year in jail and / or a $1000 fine. Failing to buckle-up your child is punishable by a $25 fine.

Says Michael Siegel

Do you mean to tell me that to prevent the mere risk of some ear infections and respiratory infections, the Lincoln County Tobacco Coalition is willing to support the imprisonment of parents, removing them from their kids for a period of up to one year? You can't be serious. It is far more devastating, to be sure, for children to have a parent removed from them, than for the child to be at increased potential risk of an ear or upper respiratory infection.

There's no other way to put it. If the North Platte police department goes ahead with this, they will prove themselves to be complete idiots. Second-hand smoke is nowhere near as dangerous as these "experts" make it out to be. I should know. My parents are not smokers, but my aunt is. Some of my fondest childhood memories involving going outside with my aunt, while she smoked. She smoked while driving me around town on many occasions. My lungs have suffered no ill effects. Whatever risk of heart disease I may face is due to my weight -- not to her cigarettes.

It is (or should be) absolutely unbelievable that her behavior is worthy of either an immense fine or jail time. "The land of the free" is being destroyed by these hysterical public health "experts". How else do you describe a country where you have the freedom to do anything except for that which might possibly harm you in some ill-defined manner?

Please don't tell me that I actually have to explain why this is a bad idea:

Scott Silverman, Chairman of the Board of VeriChip Corporation, has proposed implanting the company's RFID tracking tags in immigrant and guest workers. He made the statement on national television on May 16.

Silverman was being interviewed on "Fox & Friends." Responding to the Bush administration's call to know "who is in our country and why they are here," he proposed using VeriChip RFID implants to register workers at the border, and then verify their identities in the workplace. He added, "We have talked to many people in Washington about using it...."

The VeriChip is a very small Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tag about the size of a large grain of rice. It can be injected directly into the body; a special coating on the casing helps the VeriChip bond with living tissue and stay in place. A special RFID reader broadcasts a signal, and the antenna in the VeriChip draws power from the signal and sends its data. The VeriChip is a passive RFID tag; since it does not require a battery, it has a virtually unlimited life span.

RFID tags have long been used to identify animals in a variety of settings; livestock, laboratory animals and pets have been "chipped" for decades. Privacy advocates have long expressed concerns about this technology being used in human beings.

(Hat tip to Southern Appeal.)

The California Legislature thinks you're too dumb to own an ultrasound machine. Here's why:

"I've seen the images, and they are amazing," Mr. Lieu, referring to ultrasound pictures, said in a telephone interview after the Assembly vote. "I could watch for hours. That's the problem. Someone could leave it on the belly all day long and do harm without even knowing it."

Some studies have shown that when used improperly, the ultrasound machine can heat internal organs and the fluid inside a womb, possibly causing neurological damage to a fetus, Mr. Lieu said.

Is Mr. Lieu afraid that he's a moron or that the voters are morons? I trust that the American populace is smart enough to use ultrasound machines responsibly. Mr. Lieu just thinks you're an idiot who will strap one on and leave it running for the next 8 hours.

Fortunately, one California legislator actually uses his brain:

"We can't legislate everything, and this is certainly one of those things that we're going down the path of just really binding our society with a billion little laws," said Assemblyman Dave Cogdill, a Republican from the Central Valley.

Would that the rest of the legislators took a hint. Wouldn't it be simpler to just outlaw everything and force voters to ask for permission before doing anything? It sure looks like that's the road we're headed down.

In no particular order:

• Tibetan monks, who overstayed their immigration visas, were arrested by a SWAT team. A SWAT team? For Tibetan monks? It's not enough that they get visited by paramilitary Chinese troops? They have to get raided by paramilitary Americans as well?

• Frank Miller is writing "Holy Terror, Batman!", a story that chronicles Batman's fight against al-Qaeda. Says Miller:

I'm doing this mainly as an explosion from my own gut in reaction to what's happening now, but also as a reminder to people who've seem to have forgotten that we're up against an utterly ruthless existential foe who is as vile as any we've ever faced. I'm appalled at the equivocations, and I wish that the entertainers of our time had the spine and the focus that the ones who faced down Hitler did. Superman punched out Hitler. So did Captain America. That's one of the things they're there for. These are symbols of our people, of our country. These are our folk heroes. It just seemed to be kind of silly to be chasing around the Riddler when you've got al-Qaeda out there.

• Kevin Robke is selling DoubleUps, sheets designed to end the problem of sheet-stealing, forever.

• Rule changes for figure skating have had some unintended consequences: skaters are skating uglier, less artistic programs because falling is more valuable than skating clean.

• Ever wondered about the origins of ethnic slurs? I have. Callimachus has the answers.

• Who is more objective about reporting: the "real" reporters or the bloggers? Take a look at reactions to the Gillette Fusion Razor and see for yourself.

• The New York Times reports favorably on the many ways that capitalists are solving societal needs like poverty, literacy, and the environment.

• David Friedman thinks that police officers should execute search warrants in the nude. He has good reasons too.

• Did you know that your parking spot is worth more than your car?

• Most people talking about the trade deficit are criminally clueless. (I'm looking at you, Lou Dobbs.)