no warrant

washingtonpost.com
‘This is crazy,’ sobs Utah hospital nurse as cop roughs her up, arrests her for doing her job
Police video shows the moment Detective Jeff Payne snapped at nurse Alex Wubbels after she told him hospital policy barred him from collecting blood samples without a warrant or patient consent.

This nonsense is why my Intro to Library Science class had an entire day dedicated to learning about different kinds of search warrants and dealing with police officers. Police officers will always try to muscle or manipulate you into giving them information that they know requires a warrant. I’m so proud of Nurse Alex Wubbels for standing her ground.

2

This has me really, really angry. So I voiced that anger by calling the chief magistrate in Charlottesville. The chief magistrate is the one responsible for issuing warrants in that district. 

The phone was very busy, but eventually I got through. I also sent a letter, which is a great idea if you can’t get through. 

Ms. Cheryl A. Thompson  
Sixteenth Judicial District  
309 East Water Street  
Charlottesville, VA 22902-5108  
(434) 977-0220

Please call or write (or both) ESPECIALLY if you’re from the area. Let your elected officials know that if they support white supremacists, we won’t support them. 

Ok so I really need some new blogs to follow so if you post anything from this, please like this post or something and I will follow you :)

  • Guns N’ Roses
  • Motley Crue
  • Led Zeppelin
  • The Beatles
  • Cinderella
  • Warrant
  • Sixx AM
  • Def Leppard
  • Aerosmith
  • Bon Jovi
  • Santa Cruz
  • Reckless Love
  • Europe
  • Hanoi Rocks
  • Queen
  • any other rock bands from 60s - 90s

or

  • photography
  • nature
  • animals
  • art
  • Lord of the Rings
“So, where’s your LGBT fiction?”

It’s no big secret that a large portion of the LGBT fiction market is online. Many books aren’t even available in print, which I know frustrates some readers (and authors!) who would like to find books in bookstores, libraries, etc. And heck, some people just like paperbacks.

But they aren’t in bookstores. Not in significant numbers, anyway. Even as larger publishers branch out into LGBT, they’re sticking to ebooks.

After talking to publishers, agents, authors, and booksellers over the years, I’ve come to understand one of the primary reasons for this is, quite simply, that queer lit doesn’t sell in bookstores.

With that in mind, I went on a mission this week. I visited five bookstores around Seattle and Portland - Powell’s, Half Price Books, and Barnes & Noble - and I asked the same question: “Where would I find the LGBT fiction?”

Y’all.

Y’ALL.

This is the LGBT Fiction and Non-Fiction section at a Barnes & Noble. The entire section.

But you know what’s extra aggravating?

This is where I found it:

I mean, great. Glad it’s near LGBT & Gender Identity (Though it’s literally the bottom shelf. The top three are Native American and African American non-fiction, which apparently are part of Cultural Studies but don’t warrant a sign despite occupying ¾ of the space…? IDK.)

Signage weirdness notwithstanding, look what section I’m in. I mean, if you’re looking for LGBT Fiction, you’d expect to look…in the….fiction section, right?

No. It’s in the non-fiction section. This is the view of the fiction section from the LGBT section:

Those are Graphic Novels, followed by SFF, followed by Romance. So if you’re in the mood for Gay Romance, you’re not even in the right ZIP code if you start perusing the romance section.

And if I wander over to the fiction section and look toward the LGBT section…

That far wall? The shelf with the LGBT books is perpendicular to that.

See what I’m getting at? There are literally only three ways someone will find the LGBT fiction section at Barnes & Noble:

1. Ask. Which is fabulous for people who are closeted, kids who aren’t comfortable asking, and people who don’t even know the genre exists.

2. Stumble across it. Which you’re totally going to do if you’re looking for a novel because you’d absolutely wander out of the fiction section to find one.

3. Already know where it is.

Can’t imagine why LGBT fiction doesn’t sell.

At Powell’s, the situation wasn’t any better. Powell’s is enormous. It’s multi-level with color-coded rooms because it’s just….huge. I made a valiant attempt to find the LGBT Fiction on my own, but after a full hour of browsing, including scouring all the rooms containing fiction, I finally had to go ask.

There was a reason I couldn’t find it - it wasn’t in any of the rooms dominated by fiction.

It was in the room with all the history books, tucked back behind Military History. Because God knows that’s where I go looking when I want some LGBT fiction.

To their credit, Powell’s had an impressively large section, and it was decorated with a gigantic rainbow sign….but what good does that do anyone if they can’t find the section?

Finally, Half Price Books. Behold, the entire Gay & Lesbian Fiction section:

And yep, that’s the non-fiction section. The Gender Studies and Anthropology section. All the non-queer fiction was downstairs. Not even on the same floor.

So…you know…I think I might’ve figured out why LGBT Fiction “doesn’t sell very well in print,” and what a shock….it’s not because people don’t want to read it.

Everything You Need to Know About Writing Successfully - in Ten Minutes

by Stephen King
(reprinted in Sylvia K. Burack, ed. The Writer’s Handbook. Boston, MA: Writer, Inc., 1988: 3-9)

I. The First Introduction

THAT’S RIGHT. I know it sounds like an ad for some sleazy writers’ school, but I really am going to tell you everything you need to pursue a successful and financially rewarding career writing fiction, and I really am going to do it in ten minutes, which is exactly how long it took me to learn.  It will actually take you twenty minutes or so to read this essay, however, because I have to tell you a story, and then I have to write a second introduction.  But these, I argue, should not count in the ten minutes.



II. The Story, or, How Stephen King Learned to Write

When I was a sophomore in high school, I did a sophomoric thing which got me in a pot of fairly hot water, as sophomoric didoes often do.  I wrote and published a small satiric newspaper called The Village Vomit.  In this little paper I lampooned a number of teachers at Lisbon (Maine) High School, where I was under instruction.  These were not very gentle lampoons; they ranged from the scatological to the downright cruel

Eventually, a copy of this little newspaper found its way into the hands of a faculty member, and since I had been unwise enough to put my name on it (a fault, some critics argue, of which I have still not been entirely cured), I was brought into the office. The sophisticated satirist had by that time reverted to what he really was: a fourteen-year-old kid who was shaking in his boots and wondering if he was going to get a suspension … what we called “a three-day vacation” in those dim days of 1964.

I wasn’t suspended. I was forced to make a number of apologies - they were warranted, but they still tasted like dog-dirt in my mouth - and spent a week in detention hall. And the guidance counselor arranged what he no doubt thought of as a more constructive channel for my talents. This was a job - contingent upon the editor’s approval - writing sports for the Lisbon Enterprise, a twelve-page weekly of the sort with which any small-town resident will be familiar. This editor was the man who taught me everything I know about writing in ten minutes. His name was John Gould - not the famed New England humorist or the novelist who wrote The Greenleaf Fires, but a relative of both, I believe.

He told me he needed a sports writer and we could “try each other out” if I wanted.

I told him I knew more about advanced algebra than I did sports.

Gould nodded and said, “You’ll learn.”

I said I would at least try to learn. Gould gave me a huge roll of yellow paper and promised me a wage of 1/2¢ per word. The first two pieces I wrote had to do with a high school basketball game in which a member of my school team broke the Lisbon High scoring record. One of these pieces was straight reportage. The second was a feature article.

I brought them to Gould the day after the game, so he’d have them for the paper, which came out Fridays. He read the straight piece, made two minor corrections, and spiked it. Then he started in on the feature piece with a large black pen and taught me all I ever needed to know about my craft. I wish I still had the piece - it deserves to be framed, editorial corrections and all - but I can remember pretty well how it looked when he had finished with it. Here’s an example:

(note: this is before the edit marks indicated on King’s original copy)

Last night, in the well-loved gymnasium of Lisbon High School, partisans and Jay Hills fans alike were stunned by an athletic performance unequaled in school history: Bob Ransom, known as “Bullet” Bob for both his size and accuracy, scored thirty-seven points. He did it with grace and speed … and he did it with an odd courtesy as well, committing only two personal fouls in his knight-like quest for a record which has eluded Lisbon thinclads since 1953….

(after edit marks)

Last night, in the Lisbon High School gymnasium, partisans and Jay Hills fans alike were stunned by an athletic performance unequaled in school history: Bob Ransom scored thirty-seven points. He did it with grace and speed … and he did it with an odd courtesy as well, committing only two personal fouls in his quest for a record which has eluded Lisbon’s basketball team since 1953….

When Gould finished marking up my copy in the manner I have indicated above, he looked up and must have seen something on my face. I think he must have thought it was horror, but it was not: it was revelation.

“I only took out the bad parts, you know,” he said. “Most of it’s pretty good.”

“I know,” I said, meaning both things: yes, most of it was good, and yes, he had only taken out the bad parts. “I won’t do it again.”

“If that’s true,” he said, “you’ll never have to work again. You can do this for a living.” Then he threw back his head and laughed.

And he was right; I am doing this for a living, and as long as I can keep on, I don’t expect ever to have to work again.



III. The Second Introduction

All of what follows has been said before. If you are interested enough in writing to be a purchaser of this magazine, you will have either heard or read all (or almost all) of it before. Thousands of writing courses are taught across the United States each year; seminars are convened; guest lecturers talk, then answer questions, then drink as many gin and tonics as their expense-fees will allow, and it all boils down to what follows.

I am going to tell you these things again because often people will only listen - really listen - to someone who makes a lot of money doing the thing he’s talking about. This is sad but true. And I told you the story above not to make myself sound like a character out of a Horatio Alger novel but to make a point: I saw, I listened, and I learned. Until that day in John Gould’s little office, I had been writing first drafts of stories which might run 2,500 words. The second drafts were apt to run 3,300 words. Following that day, my 2,500-word first drafts became 2,200-word second drafts. And two years after that, I sold the first one.

So here it is, with all the bark stripped off. It’ll take ten minutes to read, and you can apply it right away…if you listen.



IV. Everything You Need to Know About Writing Successfully

1.  BE TALENTED
This, of course, is the killer.  What is talent?  I can hear someone shouting, and here we are, ready to get into a discussion right up there with “what is the meaning of life?” for weighty pronouncements and total uselessness.  For the purposes of the beginning writer, talent may as well be defined as eventual success - publication and money.  If you wrote something for which someone sent you a check, if you cashed the check and it didn’t bounce, and if you then paid the light bill with the money, I consider you talented.

Now some of you are really hollering.  Some of you are calling me one crass money-fixated creep.  And some of you are calling me bad names.  Are you calling Harold Robbins talented?  someone in one of the Great English Departments of America is screeching.  V.C. Andrews?  Theodore Dreiser?  Or what about you, you dyslexic moron?

Nonsense.  Worse than nonsense, off the subject.  We’re not talking about good or bad here.  I’m interested in telling you how to get your stuff published, not in critical judgments of who’s good or bad.  As a rule the critical judgments come after the check’s been spent, anyway.  I have my own opinions, but most times I keep them to myself.  People who are published steadily and are paid for what they are writing may be either saints or trollops, but they are clearly reaching a great many someones who want what they have.  Ergo, they are communicating.  Ergo, they are talented.  The biggest part of writing successfully is being talented, and in the context of marketing, the only bad writer is one who doesn’t get paid.  If you’re not talented, you won’t succeed.  And if you’re not succeeding, you should know when to quit.

When is that?  I don’t know.  It’s different for each writer.  Not after six rejection slips, certainly, nor after sixty.  But after six hundred?  Maybe.  After six thousand?  My friend, after six thousand pinks, it’s time you tried painting or computer programming.

Further, almost every aspiring writer knows when he is getting warmer - you start getting little jotted notes on your rejection slips, or personal letters…maybe a commiserating phone call.  It’s lonely out there in the cold, but there are encouraging voices…unless there is nothing in your words which warrants encouragement.  I think you owe it to yourself to skip as much of the self-illusion as possible.  If your eyes are open, you’ll know which way to go…or when to turn back.

2.  BE NEAT
Type.  Double-space.  Use a nice heavy white paper, never that erasable onion-skin stuff.  If you’ve marked up your manuscript a lot, do another draft.

3.  BE SELF-CRITICAL
If you haven’t marked up your manuscript a lot, you did a lazy job.  Only God gets things right the first time.  Don’t be a slob.

4.  REMOVE EVERY EXTRANEOUS WORD
You want to get up on a soapbox and preach?  Fine.  Get one and try your local park.  You want to write for money?  Get to the point.  And if you remove all the excess garbage and discover you can’t find the point, tear up what you wrote and start all over again…or try something new.

5.  NEVER LOOK AT A REFERENCE BOOK WHILE DOING A FIRST DRAFT You want to write a story?  Fine.  Put away your dictionary, your encyclopedias, your World Almanac, and your thesaurus.  Better yet, throw your thesaurus into the wastebasket.  The only things creepier than a thesaurus are those little paperbacks college students too lazy to read the assigned novels buy around exam time.  Any word you have to hunt for in a thesaurus is the wrong word.  There are no exceptions to this rule.  You think you might have misspelled a word?  O.K., so here is your choice: either look it up in the dictionary, thereby making sure you have it right - and breaking your train of thought and the writer’s trance in the bargain - or just spell it phonetically and correct it later.  Why not?  Did you think it was going to go somewhere?  And if you need to know the largest city in Brazil and you find you don’t have it in your head, why not write in Miami, or Cleveland?  You can check it…but laterWhen you sit down to write, write.  Don’t do anything else except go to the bathroom, and only do that if it absolutely cannot be put off.

6.  KNOW THE MARKETS
Only a dimwit would send a story about giant vampire bats surrounding a high school to McCall’s.  Only a dimwit would send a tender story about a mother and daughter making up their differences on Christmas Eve to Playboy…but people do it all the time.  I’m not exaggerating; I have seen such stories in the slush piles of the actual magazines.  If you write a good story, why send it out in an ignorant fashion?  Would you send your kid out in a snowstorm dressed in Bermuda shorts and a tank top?  If you like science fiction, read the magazines.  If you want to write confession stories, read the magazines.  And so on.  It isn’t just a matter of knowing what’s right for the present story; you can begin to catch on, after awhile, to overall rhythms, editorial likes and dislikes, a magazine’s entire slant.  Sometimes your reading can influence the next story, and create a sale.

7.  WRITE TO ENTERTAIN
Does this mean you can’t write “serious fiction”?  It does not.  Somewhere along the line pernicious critics have invested the American reading and writing public with the idea that entertaining fiction and serious ideas do not overlap.  This would have surprised Charles Dickens, not to mention Jane Austen, John Steinbeck, William Faulkner, Bernard Malamud, and hundreds of others.  But your serious ideas must always serve your story, not the other way around.  I repeat: if you want to preach, get a soapbox.

8.  ASK YOURSELF FREQUENTLY, AM I HAVING FUN?”
The answer needn’t always be yes.  But if it’s always no, it’s time for a new project or a new career.

9.  HOW TO EVALUATE CRITICISM
Show your piece to a number of people - ten, let us say.  Listen carefully to what they tell you.  Smile and nod a lot.  Then review what was said very carefully.  If your critics are all telling you the same thing about some facet of your story - a plot twist that doesn’t work, a character who rings false, stilted narrative, or half a dozen other possibles - change that facet.  It doesn’t matter if you really liked that twist of that character; if a lot of people are telling you something is wrong with you piece, it is.  If seven or eight of them are hitting on that same thing, I’d still suggest changing it.  But if everyone - or even most everyone - is criticizing something different, you can safely disregard what all of them say.

10.  OBSERVE ALL RULES FOR PROPER SUBMISSION
Return postage, self-addressed envelope, all of that.

11.  AN AGENT?  FORGET IT.  FOR NOW
Agents get 10% of monies earned by their clients.  10% of nothing is nothing.  Agents also have to pay the rent.  Beginning writers do not contribute to that or any other necessity of life.  Flog your stories around yourself.  If you’ve done a novel, send around query letters to publishers, one by one, and follow up with sample chapters and/or the manuscript complete.  And remember Stephen King’s First Rule of Writers and Agents, learned by bitter personal experience: You don’t need one until you’re making enough for someone to steal…and if you’re making that much, you’ll be able to take your pick of good agents.

12.  IF IT’S BAD, KILL IT
When it comes to people, mercy killing is against the law.  When it comes to fiction, it is the law.



That’s everything you need to know.  And if you listened, you can write everything and anything you want.  Now I believe I will wish you a pleasant day and sign off.

My ten minutes are up.

9

Florida sheriff Grady Judd, who represents a county in the path of the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the Atlantic, offered a stark warning for anyone thinking about going to a local shelter: If there’s a warrant out for your arrest, you could wait out the hurricane in jail. (source)

PLEASE do not be fooled by the disingenuous lie that he *really* meant to scare pedophiles away—who often do not have outstanding arrest warrants, and who may have innocent children who (surprise) also need shelter from hurricane Irma—if that’s what he meant, he could have said that originally. Sheriff Judd absolutely meant to scare undocumented immigrants away. From seeking shelter. From perhaps the biggest hurricane in history.

What a piece of shit.

And not so incidentally, statistically speaking, undocumented immigrants tend to commit fewer crimes than U.S. citizens, specifically *because* they don’t want to be deported by racist, overzealous police officers like Joe Arpaio and Grady Judd. (source)

I know what Sangwoo’s going to say next. The little cogs in his lunatic mind just turned. He’s going to say that Bum looks the way he does because he just escaped an abusive relationship with his ex. “I thought he was back to hurt bum. I was trying to defend him! But I was mistaken, I’m sorry. I didn’t know it was a police officer.” And with no warrant on Seungbae’s part, no witness (except bum, but he won’t speak up) and a broken window signaling the “surprise intrusion,” his story will check out.

Originally posted by jaydeemorgann

An Analysis of Keith and Lance’s Feelings Towards Each Other.

After season three - and Keith’s Vlog especially - I’ve seen a lot of people complain about how Lance is oblivious to Keith’s true feelings about him (Rather those feeling are platonic or romantic) And yeah, I’m right there with you on wishing he’d recognize his misconceptions about Keith’s feelings towards him, but does that mean that Lance is unjust in the way that he feels? Does that mean Keith’s actions haven’t warranted or perpetuated this false narrative?

As a Lance Stan, of course I’m coming through for my boi. But I also just really like analyzing their interactions. So here we go:

First off, how does Lance actually think Keith views him? This picture shows it best.

Lance thinks that Keith sees himself as above Lance. The framing - which is coming from Lance’s p.o.v - is a great indicator of that. But even without this, Lance himself says:


I’m a big believer in the theory that Lance is projecting he own feelings of self doubt. He undoubtedly has an inferiority complex, but Lance feels inferior to everyone on the team, and it’s only with Keith that he ever shows any type of malice. In fact, I cant remember a time Lance has ever been genuinely angry at someone who isn’t Keith. (I could be wrong here.) So why does he treat Keith so differently than the rest of the team? Maybe because of his internalized gay feelings towards our resident spicy boi?hmmm.

We know for a fact that in episode one Iverson told Lance something like this: ‘You’re only fighter class because Keith, a better pilot, washed out. Now act accordingly’. This doesn’t feel like the first time either, but more of a reminder. So on the surface, it seems clear as to why Lance treats Keith the way he does at first. I mean, I get it. If someone was constantly used to reinforce the notion of how shitty I am, I’d probably have a similar reaction towards them too. (Conditioning is a thing ya’ll) However, from Pidge’s flashback in season one, we know Lance’s animosity isn’t that new.

“Hasta la later, Keith.”

But again, Lance just isn’t such a mean spirited person as to rejoice someone’s failures. Quite the opposite actually. He validates his team even while feeling inferior to them. It just doesn’t feel like Lance. And other than towards Keith, Lance has never been shown to act this way. So I have to believe something occurred to make Lance not like Keith especially. Not saying that’s an excuse, but it is an explanation. Truthfully, what probably happened was that Lance looked up to Keith or tried to befriend him and Keith acted in a way that Lance perceived as rejection. We don’t know though, because the key to this lives within the Garrison years, and we may or may not ever see those.


Sooo, lets move along to something that we do see.


We all know that Lance is antagonistic towards Keith, but Keith isn’t an innocent party in this.

Think back to the first episode when they’re all on the hovercraft. Lance asked “If this thing can move any faster,” which wasn’t a jab at Keith as much as it was a ’holy shit, we’re about to get caught,’ moment. Keith’s reply was something along the lines of: ‘Maybe if we removed some unessential weight.’ (Which, in hindsight, considering how Lance views himself as baggage, a seventh wheel, is some pretty jarring foreshadowing.)

Then he tells Lance he’s the worst pilot ever. (Ouch)

Just to be clear, I love Keith, and I don’t think he meant these comments as maliciously as they may have been taken. They were probably more like offhanded insults, but knowing what we know about Lance, is it so hard to see how these comments could be internalized?

Next we have a scene where Lance jokes about wanting all of the information in his brain to be stored on a spaceship. Keith’s response isn’t teasing, but… mean. It’s meant to hurt Lance by blatantly insinuating that he’s stupid. And in season two, when they’re both going to the pool, it’s Keith who tells Lance to stay far far away from him.

What am I getting at here? IDEK. Lance and Keith don’t hate each other in the slightest. Keith knows he’s bad at people, and he probably notices that Lance treats him differently than literally everyone else on the team. I’m sure that hurts Keith. While with Lance, he looks up to Keith, thinks Keith is better than him, and because of the words of people like Iverson and Keith himself, this idea has been nurtured. We already know that Lance takes the words of his friends to heart. In both season 2 and 3 when Lance expressed doubt, he brought up something Pidge said to him both times.

“I thought I was the team sharpshooter, but I guess nobody else thinks that.”

“Maybe I am just the goofball.”

Neither of them are innocent. It’s a mutual series or misunderstanding, and as sad as it is to see Keith frustrated over his inability to relate to his team, he’s not doing himself any favors when he insults Lance in earnest. Lance isn’t doing himself any favors either, and they’re both just reacting based off of these false narratives they hold about one another.

But that’s apart of what makes their relationship so complex and interesting to watch play out. Season three really paid off. Their development unfolded beautifully and I can’t wait to see how they proceed in the following seasons. I can only hope that any miscommunications they have about each other are addressed and cleared up.