济南什么原因引起射精太快济南尿道口红肿痒怎么办,济南那家泌尿专科医院好,济南治疗尿道炎的好办法,济南看前列腺炎济南哪家医院好,济南男生射精快该怎么办,济南总男科医院,济南医院 男科

As Americans protest racial inequality and the death of George Floyd and others at the hands of police, their pleas are being heard in the chambers of the U.S. Capitol. Both Democrats and Republicans have introduced legislation to reform policing in America, but they diverge on some issues.The far-reaching legislative proposal from Democrats, the Justice in Policing Act, would limit legal protections for police, create a national database of excessive-force encounters and ban police chokeholds, among other changes.Republicans say their bill, known as the Justice Act -- one of the most ambitious GOP policing proposals in years -- “will maintain the constitutionally-limited role the federal government plays in local law enforcement decisions while still effecting significant change.” It calls for an enhanced use-of-force database, restrictions on chokeholds and new commissions to study law enforcement and race.Here’s a side-by-side look at some proposals:POLICE MISCONDUCT & USE-OF-FORCE DATABASESMany officers who wind up involved in fatal shootings have a history of misconduct, including Derek Chauvin, the Minneapolis officer charged with murder in Floyd’s death. He had at least a dozen complaints made against him, according to records.But those records are often not made public, making it difficult to know if officers have such a record.President Donald Trump signed an executive order this week requiring the attorney general to create a database tracking terminations, criminal convictions and civil judgments against law enforcement officers for excessive use of force. It encourages participation by providing certain grants only to those agencies that submit the required information.— Democrats’ bill: Calls for a national registry including complaints, disciplinary records and termination records. It also would require states to report to the Justice Department any incident in which force is used against a civilian or law enforcement officer. The proposal would require the agencies to report the reason force was used and the national origin, sex, race, ethnicity, age, disability, English language proficiency and housing status of each civilian against whom a law enforcement officer used force.— Republicans’ bill: Would require state and local governments to report all use-of-force incidents that result in serious injuries or death to the FBI on an annual basis. Municipalities that fail to comply could see a reduction in federal funding.CHOKEHOLDSThere’s a notable difference. The Democrats’ bill would specifically ban the use of chokeholds and carotid holds at the federal level, while the Republican bill incentivizes police departments to ban the practice through grant funding. Trump’s executive order also encourages such bans through financial incentives.— Democrats’ bill: Would ban chokeholds and carotid holds and would condition law enforcement funding for state and local law enforcement agencies on establishing a law to prohibit the use of chokeholds and carotid holds.— Republicans’ bill: Would condition certain Justice Department funds on a police department having specific policies restricting the use of chokeholds, except in situations in which deadly force is authorized.NO-KNOCK WARRANTSThere has been a growing call to ban no-knock warrants since 26-year-old Breonna Taylor was killed in her Louisville, Kentucky, home by officers in March. Democrats have proposed a ban on the practice, typically executed in some of the most dangerous investigations conducted by police departments. A no-knock warrant, as its name implies, is an order from a judge that allows police to enter a home without ringing a doorbell or banging on the door. Critics have said the use has increased dramatically, and some departments use them routinely in cases that don’t merit such an exception.— Democrats’ bill: Would specifically ban no-knock warrants for all federal drug cases and would require local and state law enforcement agencies to prohibit their use to qualify for some federal funding. Oregon and Florida are the only states that have outlawed such warrants.— Republicans’ bill: GOP senators argue there is no conclusive data on how, why and how often no-knock search warrants are used and have proposed requiring state and local law enforcement agencies to report specific data to the Department of Justice each year. The department would then be required to make a public report.FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS LAW— Democrats’ bill: Would amend the federal civil rights law that governs police misconduct to no longer require prosecutors to prove that an officer’s actions were willful, a high burden of proof. The law would allow an officer to be charged for acting with reckless disregard for someone’s life, causing that person’s death.— Republicans’ bill: Would not amend that section of the law.QUALIFIED IMMUNITYPolice officers are generally not held personally liable for anything that happens on the job, including when someone dies. The concept of qualified immunity has long been a way to protect police from unnecessary lawsuits and to give them the freedom to police without fear of unnecessary retribution.— Democrats’ bill: Would amend federal misconduct statutes to make it easier for courts to find officers personally liable for the violation of civil rights. Officers might think twice before abusing their power, but it could make it more difficult to recruit police nationwide. It could also potentially lead to officers being held financially liable.— Republicans’ bill: They say this is a step too far. As an alternative, the lead senator on the bill, Tim Scott of South Carolina, has suggested a “decertification” process for officers involved in misconduct.The president’s executive order instructs the Justice Department to push local police departments to be certified. Under the order, Justice would ensure a department could only be credentialed if its use-of-force policies adhered to federal, state, and local laws.White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Wednesday the qualified immunity provision in the House Democrats’ bill “is a total and complete nonstarter.” 6166

As local municipalities and states decide whether to mandate facial coverings, Starbucks has decided all of their company-owned locations within the U.S. will require them.In a statement posted Thursday, Starbucks said they will require all customers to wear facial coverings beginning July 15.“The company is committed to playing a constructive role in supporting health and government officials as they work to mitigate the spread of COVID-19,” the statement reads. “It is our responsibility to protect our partners and comply with local public health mandates. As such, our partners have the right and responsibility to refuse service to customers who are not wearing facial coverings.”Employees were already required to wear a mask, in addition to other safety and cleaning procedures like taking temperatures, enhanced cleaning procedures, etc. Many locations have closed their indoor seating when social distancing between tables was not possible, asking customers to use their drive-thru, mobile ordering, or curbside pick-up options. 1049

As COVID-19 vaccine research shows promising results, some employers may be able to require workers to get it."You should already have a plan in place before this vaccine even comes available to have those discussions with your employees, it’s best to set the groundwork now." Attorney Rebecca Demaree is a labor and employment lawyer at Cornelius & Collins, LLP. She said it may surprise employees, but it's not unusual during a public health crisis."There are precedents for this especially in the field of healthcare requiring flu vaccines, requiring TB tests, requiring your basic vaccinations," Demaree said.NewsChannel5's Alexandra Koehn asked, “So when a COVID-19 vaccine comes out, for the people who are worried about getting it and aren’t ready, what would you say to them if their employer requires it?”“Well if their employer requires it, you have a few other hoops to jump through," Demaree said.For example, there are religious exemptions and other protective classifications like physical reasons. "You still have the ability as an employee to voice your concerns to your employer, " Demaree said, "In what’s called a joint activity and that’s protected as well."The attorney said she's already had clients in the hospitality and healthcare field reach out to her for guidance about requiring a vaccine.This story was first reported by Alexandra Koehn at WTVF in Nashville, Tennessee. 1411

An announcement by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) that the second debate between President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden would take place virtually set off a chain of public negotiations regarding the status of the remaining debate schedule.For the third time on Thursday, Trump's campaign issued a statement concerning the Oct. 15 debate. The virtual format was likely made with safety in mind, as Trump contracted COVID-19 last week and may still be infected next Thursday. Biden had said earlier this week that debates should not be held while Trump is infected with COVID-19 for the safety of those involved.On Thursday, Trump's physician Dr. Sean Conley said he expects that Trump can resume public activity on Saturday following a 10-day isolation period from the coronavirus. The Trump campaign subsequently said that an in-person debate must move forward on Oct. 15. The campaign also accused the commission of "protecting Joe Biden." 994

An odd white streak across the Phoenix drew lots of interest on social media Monday night. Some viewers said it was just an odd cloud formation, while some speculated that it was possibly a rocket launch from the west coast.PHOTOS: Strange light spotted over West ValleySo far it's unclear what actually caused the light streaking across the sky. Scripps station KNXV in Phoenix is working to figure out what caused the formation and will share any information we are able to get. 498