colorado law

About Today’s Net Neutrality Vote

Ooc: This is in regards to the Net Neutrality repeal. I know it’s long, but please, please read it. This is something we need to hear.

I understand that the vote on the Net Neutrality repeal is disheartening. I know it feels hopeless now, we’re all worried the worst could happen. But here is what you need to understand, what you need to remember: You cannot, cannot, give up. It’s not yet over.

I came across an article that came out during the announcement on the repeal vote. The link for it is here. I want to bring to your attention a particular paragraph:

“The good news is the internet won’t change overnight, if it all. Blake Reid, a clinical professor at Colorado Law, says the big broadband providers will wait to see how the inevitable legal challenges to the new FCC order shakeout. They’ll probably keep an eye on 2018 and even 2020 elections as well. The courts could shoot down the FCC’s order, or, given enough public pressure, Congress even could pass new net neutrality laws.”

This means that this repeal can be overturned by Congress, and the court cases that are indeed inevitable, especially how Ajit Pai handled the situation regarding the public comments. The courts could even block this repeal, just as they have with the bans the administration previously attempted. It’s going to be a long, rough road for this repeal still, and we can still fight it.

Stay vigilant, demand to know what your Internet Service Providers plan to do. You are the customer, you are giving them your money, you deserve to know. Keep putting pressure on them. If they try to do any of the things warned like bundling, tiered services; come together and show outrage, don’t let them hear the end of it until they back down. Treat this like how EA tried to do with Loot boxes.

If Americans are good at one thing, it’s raising Hell when we get slighted. Trust me, these corporations will back down when millions of their customers are angrily threatening their money. We’ve been fighting for our rights before the internet even began and succeeded, we can still fight and can still prevail yet again. They cannot take away our rights promised to us by the Constitution, no amount of money or lies can take that away from us, nor stop us from fighting.

Keep the pressure on your Congress too. Call them, email them, tell them you want them to do anything and everything in their legislative power to keep Net Neutrality alive. You cannot give up. You owe it to yourself to keep fighting. We have what they don’t: numbers. If we come together and push relentlessly, we will prevail.

Don’t give up. The fight isn’t over yet.

npr.org
Amid Charges By Former Law Student On Gender Equality, Former Clerks Defend Gorsuch
A student who took an ethics course under Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch at the University of Colorado Law School said he expressed controversial views on questions of gender discrimination.

A former law student of Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, alleges that in a course she took from Gorsuch at the University of Colorado Law School last year, the judge told his class that employers, specifically law firms, should ask women seeking jobs about their plans for having children and implied that women manipulate companies starting in the interview stage to extract maternity benefits.

Dear America,

As your Canadian neighbour I can not understand your complete and utter refusal of firearm restrictions and law alterations regarding firearms given what has occurred. The sheer number of lives lost over the past few years due to mass shootings in your country should not only have every single one of you begging for these laws to be changed, but willingly handing over and surrendering your firearms. You can no longer claim that a gun is your right, you can no longer claim a gun is for your personal safety when they have taken more lives in more instances than yours has protected you. Get a can of bear spray if you need a weapon so badly and grow the fuck up.  

For those of you who continue to argue and oppose stricter gun laws you disgust me, it is partly your fault that so many people die each year in mass shootings in your country. You may not be the one pulling the trigger, but their blood is still on your hands. It is your responsibility as a nation and as a community to rectify problems that result in loss of life, so quit arguing and get fixing.

Sincerely,

One of the Thousands of Canadians,

Sincerely,

A 22yr old female Canadian who successfully and safely owns a rifle by passing a government regulated Hunting and Gun course. Who has submitted a government regulated gun application form that checks ones personality, mental health, background, and contacts family and 3 non-family related persons that have to have known you for a select number of years. Who has 2 government ID cards- one for hunting and one that I have to present to buy a gun called a Possession and Aquisition License aka a PAL. Who follows all new firearm mandates and laws whether I like them or not because MY FEELINGS DONT COME BEFORE SOMEONE ELSES LIFE!

yahoo.com
US Supreme Court to rule on wedding cake that split America

When Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig entered the “Masterpiece Cakeshop” bakery in a Denver suburb on July 19, 2012, they were giddy about choosing their wedding cake.

The two men could not for a moment imagine that their cake-shopping excursion would wind up before the US Supreme Court five years later and spark a national debate about fundamental rights.

“We sat down with the owner of Masterpiece, and he instantly asked us who the cake was for, and as soon as we told him it was for us, he informed us that would not make a cake for a same-sex wedding,” Mullins told AFP…

The dispute would have ended there were it not for the international buzz triggered by a Facebook post from Mullins and Craig.

The two young lovers learned that a Colorado state law bars businesses open to the public from engaging in any form of discrimination.

They decided to file a lawsuit, the start of a lengthy battle that eventually led them to the highest court in the land, with a hearing set for December 5 in Washington…

The couple won their first court case and then the subsequent appeal, before the Supreme Court decided at the end of June to take up an appeal lodged by the baker. That was when a local struggle took on the dimensions of a national battle.

The appeal has become the most important case involving gay rights to reach the country’s top court since it approved same-sex marriage in June 2015. And legal experts argue it will cut to the quick on some of the most basic issues in US society.

The nine judges will have to rule on whether to come down on the side of religious freedom or sexual equality.

theguardian.com
Under siege by liberals: the town where everyone owns a gun
Nucla, Colorado, was founded by socialists before becoming a mining town. Now, as wealthy liberals with different values encroach, the town is fighting for its economic survival
By Lois Beckett

At a Blues in the Park night in Naturita, a stranger visiting the town, red-faced and somewhat inebriated, cornered me and began ranting about freeloading immigrants and American values.

“This country wasn’t built by socialists!” he told me.

“Actually,” I said politely, “this area, right here, this was built by socialists.”

In 1893, a financial crisis devastated thousands of companies and caused the unemployment rate to spike above 10% for several years. Workers lost their homes and families went hungry. According to one history of the town, a group of Denver families who had become homeless and who were “united in their wish to escape tyrannical landlords” provided the impetus. In 1894, a group of 10 idealists in Denver formed the Colorado Co-Operative Company, with the goal of moving into the wilderness to create a new community – a place “where equality and service rather than greed and competition should be the basis”.

The utopians spent nearly10 years digging an 18-mile irrigation canal through the arid landscape to bring water from the San Miguel river to the dry hill where they planned to build their colony. Money was tight, food scarce and the workers labored for shares in the eventual water rights in the canal they were digging by hand. To outsiders, the whole plan seemed like madness: how could anyone build a major irrigation canal without any capital?

To expand their group of workers and supporters, the cooperative society established a newspaper, the Altrurian, to share news about their progress nationwide. It covered the day-to-day debates, including updates on the type of cabbages and lettuces that had been planted to feed the workers, as well as features on vegetarianism, marriage and violent labor strikes in other states.

The paper advertised in-person cooperative club meetings across the country, including in Brooklyn, and was not too proud to beg for subscription pennies. “If you have received one cent’s worth of information from this week’s Altrurian, and are not already a subscriber, can you not afford to be a subscriber?” it prompted.

When the ditch was finished, the utopians named their town Nucla after the word nucleus, a strange premonition of the town’s nuclear future. Socialism broke down only a few years later. In 1914, Nucla voted down its “single tax” system, in which the cooperative company owned all the land in town and paid one tax on it to the government, in favor of private ownership.

also the pictures in this article confirm easy pete exists irl

Taylor Swift Must Face Jury Trial Over DJ's Contract Interference Claim

The pop star will be in Colorado in August to face off against former KYGO radio host David Mueller.

Taylor Swift has a date with a jury in August.

The pop star accuses former KYGO radio host David Mueller of groping her at a backstage meet-and-greet. “It was completely intentional, and I have never been so sure of anything in my life,” testified Swift at a deposition.

In turn, Mueller denies the assault and battery claim and contends that Swift and her team got him fired for no good reason.

Both versions will be heard by a jury at a nine-day trial beginning on August 7 as a Colorado federal judge on Wednesday partially rejected Swift’s summary judgment bid to defeat Mueller’s claims. Mueller won’t move ahead on slander, but he’s being given the opportunity to make a case for tortious interference.

“Having reviewed these evidentiary materials, the Court finds that the central and genuine dispute remains,” writes U.S. District Court judge William Martinez in the opinion (read here). “Certain witnesses’ testimony tends to corroborate Swift’s version of events, and Mueller points to other evidence that he argues shows inconsistencies in Swift’s story. None of this changes the reality that if a jury accepts Mueller’s version of the facts, then it must substantially reject Swift’s version, and vice versa. In ruling on summary judgment, it is not the Court’s role to resolve this dispute.”

However, the judge did have to weigh whether Mueller presented enough evidence to meet the elements of a proper claim of intention interference with contractual relations.

Martinez writes that given the Swift team’s familiarity with KYGO, a jury could conclude that she and other defendants — her mother, Andrea, and Swift’s radio promotions director, Frank Bell — reasonably should have known that Mueller had some form of employment contract.

The judge then examines communications between Swift’s camp and KYGO and finds a jury could come to the conclusion they acted with an intent to cause his termination. As for whether there was any improper interference via economic pressure, the judge nods to deposition testimony that KYGO may have feared action by Swift and says a jury should decide this question.

“Second, treating Mueller’s testimony as true, a jury that found he was wrongly accused might, as a consequence, also conclude that Defendants acted with reckless disregard for the veracity of their accusations, or based on a grossly inadequate investigation,” writes the judge.

Martinez adds, “To be clear, the Court views this as a close question. There would appear to be nothing improper about Swift—or any other person—making an honest report to an entity with which she does business that one of its employees assaulted or harassed her. Indeed, in the undersigned’s view, the policy of the law should encourage the reporting of actual assaults, not attach liability to it… Nevertheless, in considering the present record, the law requires the Court to treat Mueller’s version of the facts as true at this stage of litigation, and therefore to view the entire record from a standpoint that views Mueller as having been wrongly accused.”

The judge also rejects the argument at this stage that Swift can’t be held liable for Mueller’s termination because she was not the cause of it. Swift argued that it was KYGO’s independent investigation that triggered the firing, but Martinez says when viewing the evidence most favorably to Mueller, “the record does not reflect a truly independent investigation,” and that under Colorado law, proximate cause needn’t be a prerequisite to liability for intentional interference with contract.

Swift does get one victory (or two, if one wants to be generous to her).

The judge decides to throw out Mueller’s separate claims for slander per se and slander per quod.

The radio DJ put forward in an amended complaint that Swift’s statements about his conduct were false and how those statements caused harm to his reputation, profession and standing in the community. The problem for him is that there was a one-year statute of limitations on slander claims. Mueller argued that after Swift filed her own claims, it gave him another shot.

“Put another way, Mueller asks the Court to treat his slander claims as ‘counter-counterclaims,’ responsive to Swift’s assault and battery claims,” writes the judge, who thinks that’s a bad idea because it will allow clever lawyers to beat time limits. “[T]he Court rejects Mueller’s interpretation because it would invite undue litigation gamesmanship, allowing parties to file successive rounds of ‘revived’ counter- claims, counter-counterclaims, counter-counter-counterclaims, etc., even they were asserted further and further outside the applicable limitations period. That perverse result would be contrary to the recognized purposes of enforcing limitations periods.”

The judge is also requiring all parties — including Swift — to be present during the entirety of the jury trial. Expect Swift in Colorado this August.

THR
Colorado Cops Switch Message To Safe Marijuana Use

Breaking from decades of “Just Say No”-type messaging about marijuana use, Colorado law enforcement officials are starting a new campaign designed to promote safe marijuana use.The revised campaign starts this weekend, when tens of thousands are expected at public rallies and concerts in observation of the 4/20 marijuana holiday. A few things to know about the new effort, along with some backstory:

GOING TO THE SOURCE

The Colorado Department of Transportation is taking its campaign to the demographic most likely to use pot and then drive, according to surveys. That’s men aged 21 to 34.The agency will be at cannabis festivals, concerts and celebrations this weekend. But instead of handing out warnings, they’re handing out snacks branded with reminders to munch, not drive, after smoking pot.The state Department of Transportation also installed free arcade games at dispensaries loaded with messages not to drive after smoking.

NO ONE KNOWS EXACTLY HOW BAD THE PROBLEM IS

It’s far from certain whether legalizing marijuana leads to more stoned drivers on the road. The data is so limited that both opponents and supporters of legalization are forced to make generalizations.Colorado didn’t track marijuana-related impaired driving arrests before the drug was made legal in 2012.

Twelve percent of DUIs issued statewide last year were for marijuana impairment, not alcohol or other drugs, according to the Colorado State Patrol. And of the 440 automobile fatalities in Colorado, 54 drivers tested positive for marijuana. (A positive result meant the driver had used marijuana recently, but not necessarily that they were driving while impaired. Pot can be detected by drug tests for weeks, whereas water-soluble alcohol dissipates in the blood within hours.)

Nationally, more drivers appear to be using marijuana and other drugs. In the nationwide 2013-14 Roadside Survey for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 8.6 percent of weekend nighttime drivers tested positive for marijuana’s psychoactive ingredient, THC. That was a 48 percent increase from 2007. State-by-state data was not available.

WHY COLORADO IS CHANGING

Colorado safety campaigns launched last year to coincide with the beginning of recreational marijuana sales offended some marijuana users as condescending scare tactics. Especially irritating to them was a public-health campaign aimed at minors. Using the tag line “Don’t Be a Lab Rat,” the campaign consisted of giant cages stationed outside schools and libraries. At least one school district refused to allow the installation, joining critics who said the campaign was reminiscent of Drug War-era “Just Say No” messages.

Colorado authorities have since scrapped the “lab rat” campaign and started a series of education ads thought to be the first pot-related government messages not to discourage using the drug. Instead, those ads tell marijuana users not to use the drug in public or take it out of state.

2

October 18, 2016

Ask yourself this most important question!

Why were GMOs very quietly but deliberately unleashed onto America’s grocery shelves in the mid 1990’s without OUR knowledge and consent?

I have yet to find a legitimate answer to this question, no matter how much I get trolled by Monsanto’s minions on social media.

It is no coincidence that big biotech, major food corporations, and government agencies like the FDA, USDA and EPA are no longer trusted by a majority of Americans. Would you rely on people that have intentionally poisoned you for decades? Why would anyone blindly put their trust in corporations and governments who have proven beyond all reasonable doubt that they are paid liars like the media that sells those lies to you every second of every day?

Where are the most basic questions about GMO health and environmental safety that any rational individual can ask? I can tell you that the answers are NOT found in any 90 day, short-term rat health study that big biotech like Monsanto passes off to the FDA for rubberstamp approval! Why were these GMOs so quickly approved by a government agency that is supposed to protect us?

What about our Congress? The DARK Act was passed by both the senate and house. Then, the backstabbing of consumers (that’s all of us) was given a final jab at the hearts of all Americans when our Traitor-in-Chief signed the DARK Act that our elected leaders passed, despite the fact that about 90% of Americans wanted and still want transparent GMO labeling. You will hear the same old, tired excuses from food companies that it costs too much to change a label, but they do it whenever they ship their GMO, poison-laden food products overseas. They have to; otherwise, their GMO junk will never make it further than a Boston tea party.

Why don’t the corporations that ship food and beverages to foreign countries every day at least label these genetically modified products that are made in the U.S.A.? Doesn’t it seem a bit suspicious to you that these same major corporations, like Coca Cola and Kraft, funneled millions of dollars to the Grocery Manufacturers Association, or GMA, to defeat GMO labeling laws in Colorado, Washington State, Oregon and California (twice)? In the meantime, biotech brat Monsanto stole Vermont’s GMO labeling law, and turned it into a weak federal labeling law (the DARK Act) that has the same eight, glaring loopholes in it that Vermont’s state GMO labeling bill had before our elected leaders and president deserted us, again, by signing this sinister act of American betrayal.

I am sure you are wondering at this point how much of what I stated is true. Where are the facts? They have been in front of you the entire time. I repeatedly point them out in my articles and social media posts. Other basic human rights activists have been doing the same for years. For big biotech, big Ag and big food, this is all just a money game. The losers in the end are the confused consumers who willingly keep shoving “glyphotoxic” (glyphosate and genotoxic) crap down their throats and also into the mouths of their children and grandchildren.

So, ask yourself all of the questions that I asked again, starting with the first one. Can you come up with any simple answers?

Or, maybe you already have that bitter taste of betrayal that consumes America’s barely beating heart.

John Loeffler
-Calling Out Corruption

Excerpted from 'A Mother's Reckoning: Living in the Aftermath of Tragedy' by Sue Klebold, published by Crown.


CHAPTER 1

“There’s Been a Shooting at Columbine High School”


APRIL 20, 1999, 12:05 P.M.

I was in my office in downtown Denver, getting ready to leave for a meeting about college scholarships for students with disabilities, when I noticed the red message light on my desk phone flashing.

I checked, on the off chance my meeting had been canceled, but the message was from my husband, Tom, his voice tight, ragged, urgent.

“Susan—­this is an emergency! Call me back immediately!”

Read at your own risk and be spoiled under the cut.  :)

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

What did Jeff Kass do to annoy the Klebolds? Did he ask certain questions that were 'too far'- and if he did shouldnt (Atleast a few) tough questions be asked to understand a disturbed teenagers intentions?

Because Jeff Kass did some seriously aggressive research and reporting and ultimately offended the Klebolds for all his snooping around. They felt he crossed the line and was far too intrusive.  Kass went back to Ohio and interviewed a few of Tom and Sue’s relatives as well got their next door neighbors’s opinions about them. He also deeply dug into their historical family records and school year books. If you listen to Sue in her recent Philadelphia presentation [35:23] she mentions “there was one individual in the media who was ruthless” as well as a few instances which dovetails with what Kass spoke of in his book “Columbine: A True Crime Story”  

Kass discovered that Sue had been interviewed for a book on mental health as a teenager in 1969 under a pseudonym.  (The story of this is interesting because it mentions a certain obsessive phobia Sue was plagued with as a teenager which connects in a contrasting manner with Dylan’s depressive and suicidal preoccupations. I will go into detail about it in a separate post.

Excerpts from Kass under the cut

Keep reading