濮阳东方医院男科治早泄评价高(濮阳东方医院妇科收费咨询) (今日更新中)

ESCONDIDO, Calif. (KGTV) - A local driver is warning of an unusual encounter with a dark SUV Saturday night on a North County freeway.Dashcam video captured on Interstate 15 shows an SUV with a light bar across the top. The driver tells 10News she initially thought it was a police vehicle and then spotted the back windshield, which was lit up by blue lights that resembled audio levels.Not long after, she says she heard a siren noise coming from that same SUV, as it approached a red light.MAP: Track crime in your neighborhood10News showed the video to CHP officer Jim Bettencourt who said he believes the blue light, the light bar, and siren are all vehicle code violations."If they were utilizing that to get people to move out of the way or caused a crash that would be another slew of charges," said Bettencourt.Bettencourt said because the SUV didn't have a symbol representing law enforcement, the driver wouldn't face an impersonating an officer charge. 972

ESCONDIDO, Calif. (KGTV) - Escondido restaurant owners made the decision to stay open for indoor and outdoor dining after a court ruled Friday evening they must be take out only.On Grand Avenue, it looked like a time warp. People were back under tents and umbrellas eating and drinking on the patio and some indoors.At Tony Pepperoni Pizzeria, the sign in the window blinked "Open.""The restaurant business isn't something you can say hey close, open, close," Tony Pepperony Pizzeria Owner Joe Locricchio said.That's exactly what he's been dealing with for the last 10 months."We have livelihoods on the line... I have single mothers okay, they need to buy diapers. I have guys that haven't had a job and they're walking out of here with money every night in tips." Locricchio said his 80+ employees are like family.Staying open hasn't come without challenges.He said he was criminally cited by Alcoholic Beverage Control and issued a cease-and-desist order by the City of Escondido.His restaurant on Grand Avenue just opened 17 days ago.When asked what he had to say to critics who think he should close and are worried about the coronavirus killing San Diegans, he said, "listen, my heart goes out to everybody that's passed away, one death is too many. To those critics who have something to say about my decision, listen I respect their decision. I respect that they have the choice to not have to come here they don't have to support me, all I ask is to support my decision."He said strangers have yelled and ranted to him about his decision.He said what is more compelling, is how the community has shown their support, "it's been an overwhelming response. It makes my hair stand up, I'm going to be honest with you, the community has been unbelievable."Other restaurants are staying open too and Locricchio encourages more to follow their lead.This while hospitalizations continue to soar and health officials say it's safest to stay home.Locricchio said the choice is yours.He said the criminal citation means he could have his Liquor License temporarily taken away. He said the District Attorney will determine whether to prosecute. 2149

ENCINITAS (CNS) - A cyclist was killed Saturday when he collided with a vehicle at an Encinitas intersection, authorities said.The collision happened at about 11:49 a.m. when a cyclist was struck by a vehicle that was turning right from westbound Leucadia Boulevard to Moonstone Court, according to Deputy Eric Rader of the San Diego County Sheriff's Department.Bystanders gave medical aid to the victim, Rader said.The injured cyclist was taken by ambulance to Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla, where he died of his injuries, the deputy said.Deputies with the department's Traffic Accident Reconstruction Team are investigating the accident. 652

Even during this time of strong political divisiveness, lawmakers agree there should be changes to Section 230. Congressional committees have subpoenaed the CEOs and heads of major tech companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google multiple times to answer questions about possible bias, eliminating competition, allowing misinformation to flourish, etc., all trying to get to the heart of what should be done about Section 230.So, what is it?Section 230 refers to a section of just 26 words within the 1996 Communications Decency Act.It reads: “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”This particular section makes it so internet companies are generally exempt from liability for the material users post on their networks.Which means, if a news website article makes false malicious statements about a person, that person can sue the publication for libel. However, if that article is posted on social media and spread to hundreds of thousands of people, the person can only sue the individual who posted the article and cannot hold the social media company responsible for spreading the article.The wording of Section 230 also allows internet companies, and more specifically social platforms, to moderate their content by removing or censoring posts that are obscene, violent or otherwise violate that specific platform’s terms of service and standards, so long as the social platform is acting in “Good Samaritan’ blocking” of harmful content.This has allowed online social platforms to grow and thrive, offering a space for users to share their thoughts and opinions, without the fear that those thoughts and opinions will get the platform in trouble. The wording for Section 230 came from established case law, including a Supreme Court ruling in the middle part of the 20th Century, which held that bookstore owners cannot be held liable for selling books containing what some might consider obscene content. The Supreme Court said it would create a “chilling effect” if someone was held responsible for someone else’s content.“Today it protects both from liability for user posts as well as liability for any clams for moderating content,” said Jeff Kosseff, who wrote a book about Section 230 and how it created the internet as it is today.President Donald Trump in May signed an executive order that would clarify the scope of the immunity internet companies receive under Section 230.“Online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse,” the order reads.One of the issues raised in the executive order is the question of when does a social platform become a so-called “publisher” by making editorial decisions about the content on the platform. Those decisions include controlling the content allowed on the platform, what gets censored, and creating algorithms that spread certain content further or faster.Content publishers are held to different rules and responsibilities by the Federal Communications Commission. News publishers can be held liable for the content they share on their platform, either in print or online.The president’s executive order came after Twitter started adding a fact-check warning to his tweets that contain false or misleading information. The executive order does not allow the president to change the law, but rather encourages his administration to take a look at Section 230.Lawmakers on both sides have concerns about how social platforms are abusing the protection they receive under Section 230, and have held several committee meetings.Many experts agree Section 230 cannot just be removed.If social platforms are suddenly held responsible for the content on their sites, there could be a whole new level of moderation and censorship as they clamp down on anything remotely controversial and unproven - possibly including some of the president’s own posts.Instead, lawmakers are investigating what changes, if any, could be made to Section 230 to offer clarity for both users and internet companies, as well as set boundaries for potential liability. 4178

ESCONDIDO (KGTV) – An Escondido couple is out thousands of dollars after falling for a sophisticated truck scam“You hear about it everywhere, but you’re like it’s not going to happen to me,” Terha Newby said.   Terha and her husband, Chris, found the perfect truck for sale on Craigslist back in September. Someone from El Monte was selling a Chevy Silverado 2600 HD for about ,000. “The registration matches the pink slip, the VIN, everything. You’re like, 'Its good!'” Terha said.  But it was far from good.It turns out the truck was stolen out of Orange County last year. Afterwards, someone replaced the VINs on the truck with a duplicate VIN of a truck that someone owns in Texas. They even had matching paperwork to go with it. But the VINs set off an alarm for the DMV when the Newbys went to get their new truck registered.“The VIN that was in the vehicle belonged to truck in Texas, and it was on a lien,” Terha said. “These guys are professionals, they’re out there, and that’s all they do for a living.”Chris said the seller gave them a Carfax report, but it was a fake one. He now regrets not getting their own. “From now on, for a fee, Carfax would have prevented it,” Chris said.The stolen Silverado was impounded and went back to the insurance company of the truck’s original owner. Luckily, they sold it back to the Newbys for about ,000, which they gladly agreed to.“They told us this is not something we do, but they felt bad for our situation,” Tehra said. “Still tough we had to re-buy anything.”“I’m just glad I have a car,” Chris said.The CHP gave these car-buying tips when buying from a third person private party. 1700

来源：资阳报