太原痔疮手术价格(太原忻州肛泰肛肠医院) (今日更新中)

Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams disagrees so much with a gun bill making its way through the Colorado legislature that he's willing to go to jail rather than enforce it."It's a matter of doing what's right," he said.He's not the only one who feels so strongly.The controversial "red flag" bill aims to seize guns temporarily from people who are deemed to be a threat to themselves or others.Colorado's state Senate passed the bill Thursday by a single vote, without any Republican support, and the bill is expected to pass the House, possibly this week. With Democratic majorities in both chambers, state Republicans have too few votes to stand in the way.But more than half of Colorado's 64 counties officially oppose the bill. Many have even declared themselves Second Amendment "sanctuary" counties in protest.Failure to enforce a court order to seize a person's guns could mean sheriffs being found in contempt. A judge could fine them indefinitely, or even send them to jail to force them to comply.Reams says it's a sacrifice he'd be forced to make.What is the bill?Colorado's "extreme risk protection order" bill would allow a family member, a roommate, or law enforcement to petition a judge to take someone's firearms if they are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.The push for legislation followed the death of Zack Parrish, the 29-year-old Douglas County sheriff's deputy killed in 2017 by a man with an arsenal of weapons who authorities said had a history of bizarre behavior, including threats to police.Parrish's former boss, Sheriff Tony Spurlock, has been one of the most vocal advocates of the bill and says he believes it could have prevented Parrish's death. Democratic House Majority Leader Alec Garnett, one of the bill's primary sponsors, agrees.The other House sponsor is Rep. Tom Sullivan, whose son, Alex, was killed in the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater shooting in 2012.Garnett says he won't lose any sleep if Reams or another Colorado sheriff opts for jail instead of enforcement of a court order."What I'm going to lose sleep over is, if that's the choice that they make and someone loses their life, someone in crisis goes on a shooting spree, (or) someone commits suicide" because a gun wasn't taken away, he said.What's so controversial?Gun rights activists, and an increasing number of law enforcement leaders, say the bill goes too far.David Kopel, a constitutional law expert who has written extensively about gun policy in the United States, says he thinks the bill is generally a good idea but that he has serious reservations about how it is written -- in part because of outside influence."The gun ban lobbies are getting more and more extreme and aggressive," he said.The bill allows a judge to order a person's guns to be seized before the person has a chance to appear in court. The bill does require a second hearing with the gun owner present to be held within 14 days, where the owner could make a case to keep the weapons -- but if the owner is unsuccessful, a judge could order the guns seized for as long as a year.Kopel said it would be difficult to prevent a nightmare scenario in which someone misuses the law to take guns away from a person they intend to target violently.The burden of proof is low -- "preponderance of the evidence," which is the same standard used in civil cases, and a much lower bar than the criminal standard, "beyond a reasonable doubt."Reams said he also worries about the potential to aggravate an already volatile person by taking their weapons."Going in and taking their guns and leaving the scene, I can't see how that makes them less of a risk. It just takes one tool away," said Reams, arguing that a person bent on hurting someone could do it with a knife or a car.In 2018, 3783

While parts of the Midwest are blinded by whiteout conditions, the Southeast is bracing for torrential rain and flooding.All this spells more nightmares for holiday travelers heading into New Year's weekend."This storm system was always comprised of two threats -- one for blizzard conditions and another for severe weather," CNN meteorologist Gene Norman said.Here's what's happening in different parts of the country:'Our town has come to a complete standstill' in the MidwestAbout 1 million people are under blizzard warnings Thursday in parts of Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota and the Dakotas, CNN meteorologist Monica Garrett said."Snow with high winds and low visibility will make travel in this area dangerous if not impossible at times," Garrett said.In Nebraska, whiteout conditions and crashes forced the closure of Interstate 80 between Lexington and North Platte"Travel in the area is not advised," Nebraska State Patrol said on Twitter.The storm system is expected to dump 6 to 12 inches of snow in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota and the Dakotas, Norman said.Sharon Kay Oelkers captured video of snow blinding her town of Elwood, Nebraska, on Thursday morning."Our town has come to a complete standstill," Oelkers told CNN. "I work at the local grocery store and even we are closed and we never close."Parts of the Southeast could get floodedAbout 24 million people are under flood watches or flash flood watches through early Saturday, Norman said.Those watches cover parts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia and the Carolinas.Atlanta, home of the world's busiest airport, could get up to 6 inches of rain by the end of this weekend -- potentially snarling holiday travel.Fierce storms hit Gulf Coast statesCoastal parts of Texas are getting walloped Thursday after severe weather 1866

When it comes to cancer, doctors will tell you the earlier they find it the better the chances of survival. Often times, that involves complicated and expensive tests. A better alternative may be man’s best friend. This small farm in central Florida may look like a typical rural area, but the dogs that are trained here are anything but typical. “We can train dogs to identify specific types of cancer,” says Heather Junqueria, founder of 453

When Mario Arreola-Botello was pulled over, he didn't understand much of what the Oregon police officer was telling him.Botello, a Latino, non-native English speaker, was stopped for failing to signal a turn and a lane change, his attorney, Josh Crowther told CNN.What happened next sparked a years-long court battle that landed at the state's supreme court. In a November ruling, the court decided officers in the state were no longer allowed to ask questions that were irrelevant to the reason of the traffic stop.It's an issue that's often been tackled in courts across the country, but a University of North Carolina professor says there's never been a decision as "wide-reaching" as this one.And that's a problem because he says young black and Latino men are often targeted disproportionally when it comes to random car searches."It really convinces people that they're not full citizens, that police are viewing them as suspects," UNC-Chapel Hill professor Frank Baumgartner says. "And that's a challenge to our democracy."While the ruling addresses a nationwide issue, it only applies to one state.Drivers are being racially profiled but have to depend on their states to expand protections against racial bias and searches, ACLU attorney Carl Takei told CNN."When the legal regime permits perpetual stops and searches," he says, "It enables widespread practices and harms to the people of color that are involved."The racial disparitiesIn the ruling, Beaverton Police Department officer Erik Faulkner said he asked Arreola-Botello the same questions he usually asks during his traffic stops."Do you have anything illegal in the car? Would you consent to a search for guns, drugs, knives, bombs, illegal documents or anything else that you're not allowed to possess?" Faulkner said, according to the 1820

Virginia lawmakers on Tuesday abruptly adjourned a special session aimed at gun safety that was called following last month's 138

来源：资阳报