濮阳东方医院治疗阳痿价格非常低(濮阳东方医院口碑比较好) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Two major law enforcement organizations have dropped their opposition to California legislation that strengthens standards for when officers can use of deadly force, a shift that comes after supporters made changes to the measure.Spokesmen for organizations representing California police chiefs and rank-and-file officers told The Associated Press on Thursday that they won't fight the measure, which was prompted by public outrage over fatal police shootings.As originally written, the measure would bar police from using lethal force unless it is "necessary" to defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to officers or bystanders.That's a change from the current standard, which lets officers kill if they have "reasonable" fear they or others are in imminent danger. The threshold made it rare for officers to be charged following a shooting and rarer still for them to be convicted."With so many unnecessary deaths, I think everyone agrees that we need to change how deadly force is used in California," said Democratic Assemblywoman Shirley Weber of San Diego, who wrote the measure. "We can now move a policy forward that will save lives and change the culture of policing in California."Law enforcement officials did not immediately explain their decision. But a revised version of the bill filed Thursday drops an explicit definition of "necessary" that was in the original version. The deleted language provided that officers could act when there is "no reasonable alternative."The amended measure also makes it clear that officers are not required to retreat or back down in the face of a suspect's resistance and officers don't lose their right to self-defense if they use "objectively reasonable force."Amendments also strip out a specific requirement that officers try to de-escalate confrontations before using deadly force but allows the courts to consider officers' actions leading up to fatal shootings, said Peter Bibring, police practices director for the American Civil Liberties Union of California, which proposed the bill and negotiated the changes."By requiring that officers use force only when necessary and examining their conduct leading up to use of force, the courts can still consider whether officers needlessly escalated a situation or failed to use de-escalation tactics that could have avoided a shooting," he said.Even with the changes, the ACLU considers the bill to have the strongest language of any in the country.Democratic leaders in the Legislature signed on to the revised version, which is set for a key Assembly vote next week. 2634

Right now, dozens of train cars carrying 10 million pounds of poop are stranded in a rural Alabama rail yard. Technically it's biowaste, but to the 982 residents in the small town of Parrish, that's just semantics.They want it gone. The load has been there for almost two months, and it's making the whole place smell like a rotting animal carcass.To add insult to injury, it isn't even their poop. For the last year, waste management facilities in New York and one in New Jersey have been shipping tons of biowaste -- literally, tons -- to Big Sky Environmental, a private landfill in Adamsville, Alabama. But in January, the neighboring town of West Jefferson filed an injunction against Big Sky to keep the sludge from being stored in a nearby rail yard.It was successful -- but as a result, the poo already in transit got moved to Parrish, where there are no zoning laws to prevent the waste from being stored. 922

Richard Overton, the oldest living World War II veteran, turned 112 on Friday.Overton, who is also the oldest man in America, was born in 1906.Wis. Family Thankful Teen Back Home From Paris 197

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom heaped praise on legislators as he revealed his updated 3 billion budget last week.The Democrat who is five months into the job applauded Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon's focus on universal preschool. He called Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Holly Mitchell the champion of increasing grants for low-income families.He even thanked several Republicans, including Assemblyman James Gallagher, who has sought assistance for the city of Paradise that he represents and mostly was destroyed by a wildfire last year.All that goodwill is about to be tested as Newsom and the Legislature enter the final weeks of budget negotiations. Lawmakers must pass a spending plan by June 15 or lose pay, then Newsom has until June 30 to sign it.His proposal released Thursday carries many of the Democrat-dominated Legislature's priorities: more spending aimed at children and the poor, a health care expansion for young people living in the country illegally and the elimination of sales tax on diapers and tampons."It's clear that he has heard from Californians quite frankly, not just us as policy makers, who need their state government to step up and invest in them," Mitchell said.But he also gave the same warnings as his predecessor, Jerry Brown, that the state's strong economy — and the huge budget surpluses it's creating — won't last forever.Newsom has allocated billion to pad state reserves and pay down debt and put cutoff dates on key proposals that Democratic legislators want to make permanent. He also wants lawmakers to take politically painful votes such as putting a tax on water."It's a great starting point," Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego said of Newsom's plan.Her comment neatly encapsulates the situation for many progressive Democrats; they like much of what Newsom is saying but don't necessarily see his plans as an end point.Gonzalez, for example, has pushed for eliminating sales tax on diapers for at least five years. Newsom's proposal ends the cut in 2022.Newsom said he imposed a cut-off in case revenue isn't as robust in future budget years. A so-called sunset provision can make it easier to win support from lawmakers, Gonzalez noted, because the tax break can go away in future years without lawmakers having to take a painful vote to cut it.During budget talks she said she will up the ante and push for permanent revocation of the sales tax on diapers.Newsom isn't giving many clues to lawmakers about which items on his wish-list are the top priorities saying he's done enough negotiations to be cautious about showing his hand."Everything I said matters to me, or I wouldn't have said it," he said. "I'm using the budget in ways to advance things I care deeply about."Assembly Budget Chairman Phil Ting said he hasn't had a conversation with Newsom about priorities. Ting, who worked as San Francisco's assessor when Newsom was mayor, said he wasn't surprised Newsom isn't showing his hand."That sounds exactly like him," Ting said.Ting said overall he was pleased with Newsom's budget proposal, but highlighted some concerns, notably that many of Newsom's biggest spending increases are also slated to expire in two years.Beyond the diaper tax, that includes big commitments to increase rates for providers of Medi-Cal, the state's health program for poor children and adults, along with expanded preschool slots and more services for people with development disabilities.Newsom has proposed several new taxes and fees that would pay for things such as bolstering the state's 911 emergency services and clean up contaminated drinking water in the Central Valley. Those ideas require a two-thirds vote of the legislature, which Ting said will be hard even though Democrats have super-majorities in both chambers."It's not clear where the votes are for all of that," Ting said.Newsom's budget also relies on conforming California's tax law with federal changes pushed by Republican President Donald Trump. Additional revenue it generates will go toward a major expansion of a tax credit for working families. The tax change similarly requires a two-thirds vote.Asked how he'd convince lawmakers to take those votes, Newsom said: "Vote your conscience, do the right thing." Then he turned flippant, noting the tax law changes would decrease what types of expenses people can deduct."I'll remind folks it's about no longer writing off courtside seats at the Kings' game," he said, referring to Sacramento's NBA team.On the water issue, meanwhile, Newsom declared confidently that a deal would be struck. While he's proposed a tax, some lawmakers would rather the state use surplus or other general fund dollars. It likely won't be dealt with as part of the budget package due June 15."I don't want to say 'read my lips' because I don't want to see that clip," he joked. "But we're going to get a water deal." 4930

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Friday the Trump administration acted in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner when it sought to end an Obama-era program that shields young immigrants from deportation.A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2 to 1 that the Trump administration violated federal law when it tried to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program without adequately explaining why. The ruling overturns a lower court ruling a judge in Maryland made last year, which Trump had previously praised via Twitter.Friday's ruling will not have any immediate effect as other federal courts have already ordered that DACA be kept in place.The 4th Circuit ruling said the Department of Homeland Security did not "adequately account" for how ending DACA program would affect the hundreds of thousands of young people who "structured their lives" around the program."We recognize the struggle is not over and there are more battles to fight in the Supreme Court on this road to justice, but our families are emboldened by knowing that they are on the right side of history," said Gustavo Torres, executive director of Casa de Maryland, the lead plaintiff in the case.Trump and his Justice Department have argued that the Obama administration acted unlawfully when it implemented DACA. The Justice Department declined to comment.Preserving DACA is a top Democratic priority, but discussions between Trump and Democrats on the issue have gone nowhere.Trump's latest immigration plan, unveiled Thursday, does not address what to do about the hundreds of thousands of young immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters that "every single time that we have put forward or anyone else has put forward any type of immigration plan that has included DACA it's failed."DACA's fate could be decided by the Supreme Court, which is weighing the Trump administration's appeals of other federal court rulings.The justices have set no date to take action.If the high court decides it wants to hear the appeals, arguments would not take place before the fall. That means a decision is not expected until 2020, which could come in the thick of next year's presidential contest.___Associated Press writer Mark Sherman in Washington contributed to this report. 2362

来源：资阳报