I don’t think the law works that way, but let’s just say: Yes. The people who didn’t try to overthrow the government with the help of hillbillies and the Gravy Seals want to lock him up for trying to overthrow the government with the help of hillbillies and the Gravy Seals.
While I understand the science behind the release of the wastewater; I also really do understand why people are so willing to ban this.
It doesn’t matter if it is safe to eat or not. People have a right to not partake in fish from the Fukushima area. Nobody should have the right to conceal origin information about food items in general, particularly not when food may contain things that are potentially impactful to a person’s health.
40 μSv might be a “Safe” exposure over time; but that doesn’t mean it’s completely without health impacts. People are within their rights to avoid that extra dose if they feel the risk is unnecessary; no matter how small that risk may be.
I agree wholeheartedly about not concealing origin information when food may contain things potentially impactful to their health. The difference is that even drinking straight tritiated water (at the Japanese release concentration) as your only beverage for an entire year is 1/10th the exposure you would get from a single mammogram. There is zero potential for any health impacts from this release of tritiated water. I direct your attention to this well-sourced chart from Randall Munroe to give a good visual on different relative radiation doses. One year of drinking tritiated water at a concentration of 1500 Bq/L (the concentration its being released at, and about 1/10th of the WHO limit) gives a dose of approx. 40 μSv, the same as the cross country flight in the above graphic.
You literally get more radiation exposure flying from LA to NYC than you would from spending a year with your only beverage being water they are releasing. I don’t see you advocating for people to not fly cross country in order to reduce their exposure. Sounds like we got a shill for Big Plane right here.
I consider myself a liberal gun nut. What the hell are we doing teaching kids that young to shoot? Was she a particular mature 4 year old? I doubt she has the attention span or critical thinking required to safely operate a firearm.
I blame the parents first and the crappy firearms instructor second. The parents are the one who thought this person was qualified and didn’t do their due diligence. The kid was innocent in all of this and died for no good reason.
Ghost guns are a thing in meth land. All they need is a table-top CNC machine and some blank stock to make AR receivers without serial numbers. Criminals and convicts pay a high price for them.
I read your comment and thought, “Oh wow, I didn’t know they illegally acquired information.” So I decided to check out the article and the closest thing I found was, they didn’t…
From the article, “The raids came after a local restaurant owner accused the newspaper of illegally accessing information about her. A spokesman for the agency that maintains those records has said the newspaper’s online search that a reporter did was likely legal even though the reporter needed personal information about the restaurant owner that a tipster provided to look up her driving record.”
Can you please elaborate on what you are talking about. The accusation of illegality came from the person who the information is about, and I must emphasize, with no evidence. Where is the evidence of illegality?
A spokesperson for the agency said it was likely legal. I don’t see how.
The section at issue as cited in the warrant is 18 USC 2721. See sections (b)(1)-(14).
I frequently have to certify to that list of uses for certain research associated with law practice. I know the two options I’ve ever used. Looking through the list, I don’t see one that applies to journalist.
Also, the newspaper admitted to police it accessed the records improperly, and implied ones of its employees impersonated the subject of the records.
It wasn’t about a driving record. It was tax documents if memory serves, from the Department of Treasury.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.