濮阳东方医院割包皮口碑很好价格低(濮阳东方医院看早泄评价好收费低) (今日更新中)

ALPINE (CNS) - San Diego County will open an erosion control center in Alpine tomorrow to help businesses and homeowners prevent debris flows in the areas burned by the Valley Fire.The center, at 2914 Tavern Road, will offer free sandbags, fiber rolls and other items to help residents stabilize properties before rains arrive. and potentially trigger mudslides and debris flows, county officials said.Starting Thursday, the center will be open to business and property owners from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily Monday through Saturday, and from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Sundays. Appointments are not required this weekend, but will be required starting on Monday.Residents and business owners can schedule an appointment to pick up erosion control materials by calling the county's stormwater hotline at 888-846-0800.Staff will be available to advise on how to protect properties, homes, garages, sheds and other structures. Staff can also visually inspect properties and offer information on best practices to protect structures.As of Wednesday morning, the Valley Fire remained at 17,665 acres and was 90% contained, according to a Cleveland National Forest incident page.The conflagration, which broke out early on the afternoon of Sept. 5 off Spirit Trail and Carveacre Road in Japatul Valley, ultimately destroyed 30 residences and 31 outbuildings, damaged 11 other structures and left three firefighters injured, according to Cal Fire. 1438

A white Arkansas man faces up to 20 years in prison after being found guilty in the beating of an African-American man during racially charged protests last summer in Charlottesville, Virginia.Jacob Scott Goodwin, 23, was among a group of attackers captured on widely shared cell phone video in the August 12 beating of DeAndre Harris in a parking garage during the Unite the Right rally.Goodwin was found guilty of malicious wounding by a Charlottesville Circuit Court jury Tuesday evening. He remains in the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail and will face sentencing on August 23.The charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. The jury recommended a sentence of 10 years and a ,000 fine, according to prosecutor Nina-Alice Antony.Phone calls to Goodwin's attorney were not immediately returned.Goodwin was the first of four alleged attackers to face a trial in the beating of Harris. Jury selection is set to begin Wednesday in the trial of Alex Michael Ramos, 34, who also faces a malicious wounding charge for his involvement in the attack.Two other men, Daniel Borden, 18, and Tyler Watkins Davis, 49, have trial dates set for the summer.Vonzz Long, a friend of Harris', told CNN the two of them were part of a group of people staging counterprotests that day against neo-Nazis and white supremacists. He said they got into an argument with people from hate groups who threw things and shouted racial slurs at them, and he and Harris got separated during the ensuing chaos.When Long eventually found him, Harris was surrounded by neo-Nazis in the garage and being beaten bloody, he said.Harris had faced an misdemeanor assault charge after a white protester claimed he had struck him in the head with a flashlight moments before the parking garage beating. But a judge acquitted him of the charges in March.  1849

According to President Donald Trump, the tragic Texas church shooting that left 26 people dead was "a mental health problem at the highest level."If you ask mental health researchers, such mass shootings are much more complicated than that.On Sunday, 26-year-old Devin Kelley sprayed bullets across the sanctuary of First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, about 30 miles east of San Antonio. The youngest killed at the church was 17 months old; the oldest was 77 years old."We have a lot of mental health problems in our country, as do other countries, but this isn't a guns situation," Trump said during a joint news conference Monday in Tokyo."This is a mental health problem at the highest level," he said. "It's a very, very sad event."Trump's response to the Texas church shooting echoed previous comments he has made on gun violence. In 2015, Trump said he was opposed to tightening gun laws in the United States but was in favor of addressing mental health to prevent shootings.Yet various epidemiological studies over the past two decades show that the vast majority of people with severe mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or severe depression, are no more likely to be violent than anyone else.Rather, people with severe mental illnesses are more than 10 times more likely to be victims of violent crime than the general population. And, only about 3% to 5% of violent acts can be attributed to individuals living with a serious mental illness, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.But those statistics have "almost nothing to do with mass casualty shootings," said Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University who specializes in gun violence and mental illness.So exactly how are mental health and gun violence intertwined, and what is needed to end the violence?Gun violence and mental illness are public health problems "that intersect at the edges" but have very little overlap, Swanson told CNN last year.There's no doubt that America's systems of care for mental health are overburdened, expensive and inaccessible for many who need them, he said. But when it comes to gun violence among this community, suicide tends to occur at higher rates than homicides, he said."If we back up and think about firearm-related injuries and mortality as a public health problem, it turns out there is a mental health-related story, and it's suicide," he said. "If we had better mental health care and could get people better access and break down barriers to care, then yes, we might reduce gun violence by a lot but it would be from reducing suicides."Otherwise, mental illness is just one "highly unspecific" factor that may contribute to gun violence, along with being young, white and male, or a history of violence, Swanson said.Instead of policies that restrict gun access based solely on mental illness diagnoses or because a person has made contact with the judicial system or health care agencies due to mental illness, the American Psychological Association, the National Alliance on Mental Illness and other advocacy groups have called for gun access criteria based on more subtle indicators of potentially dangerous behavior.Those indicators -- such as having past or pending violent misdemeanor convictions or charges, domestic violence restraining orders or multiple DUI convictions -- have been largely informed by the work of Swanson and others.Swanson supports intervention at the point of purchase through comprehensive background checks -- but to make background checks work, criteria for inclusion on the database should be based on other indicators of risk besides mental health history, such as those indicators of aggressive, impulsive or risky behavior."A history of violent behavior is a far better predictor of future violence than mental illness," he said.Calling gun violence a mental health issue is to scapegoat and stigmatize people with mental illness, he said."It's kind of a canard, a convenient explanation that exploits the tremendous fear people have with these horrifying mass shootings," he said. "If people fear those with mental illness they're going to treat them with scorn and support public policies that restrict their liberties."After all, mental illness affects millions of adults across the country.In 2015, there were an estimated 43.4 million adults in the United States with some form of mental illness within the past year, which represented 17.9% of adults nationwide, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.The American Psychological Association recommends prohibiting firearms for high-risk groups, such as domestic violence offenders or persons convicted of violent misdemeanor crimes."Reducing the incidence of gun violence will require interventions through multiple systems, including legal, public health, public safety, community, and health. Increasing the availability of data and funding will help inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence," according to the association's website.Swanson and his colleagues examined the proportion of people in the United States with impulsive angry behavior who own or carry guns and have a diagnosable mental illness in a paper published in the journal Behavioral Sciences & the Law in 2015.They conducted household surveys with 9,282 people from February 2001 to April 2003, excluding people who carried guns for work, resulting in a response rate of 70.9%.An analysis of the survey results estimated that nearly one in 10 adults has access to firearms and has a problem with anger and impulsive aggressive behavior.These people were more likely to be male, younger and married and to live in outlying areas around metropolitan centers rather than in central cities, Swanson and his colleagues wrote in their paper.They were significantly more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for a wide range of mental disorders, including depression, bipolar and anxiety disorders, PTSD, intermittent explosive disorder, pathological gambling, eating disorder, alcohol and illicit drug use disorders, and a range of personality disorders.What's more, despite evidence of "considerable psychopathology" in many of these respondents, only a very small proportion, 8% to 10%, were ever hospitalized for a mental health problem."Because only a small proportion of persons with this risky combination have ever been involuntarily hospitalized for a mental health problem, most will not be subject to existing mental health-related legal restrictions on firearms resulting from a history of involuntary commitment," Swanson and his colleagues wrote in the paper's abstract.As for Texas gunman Kelley, the state denied him a license to carry a gun, Gov. Greg Abbott said, citing the director of Texas' Department of Public Safety."So how was it that he was able to get a gun? By all the facts that we seem to know, he was not supposed to have access to a gun," Abbott told CNN's Chris Cuomo. "So how did this happen?"On Monday, Trump said his "thoughts and prayers" were with the victims and their families but did not suggest plans to take any legislative or other policy action to address the shooting. 7228

A wide array of House and Senate Republicans are not yet ready to endorse President Donald Trump's bid for a second term, a reflection of the deep uncertainty on Capitol Hill over his political standing amid growing problems at home and abroad.In interviews with a cross-section of more than two dozen GOP lawmakers, ranging from rank-and-file members, conservatives and party leaders, many refused to say they'd back Trump's re-election bid -- a surprise declaration given that members of Congress are typically quick to endorse sitting presidents of their own party without hesitation. Hardly any would offer a categorical endorsement of the President."I don't know what the world is going to look like," said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, when asked if he'd endorse Trump for re-election. "But let's say it's not something I've given any thought to."Asked several days later if he had given thought to it, Cornyn demurred."I haven't even thought about that election," said Cornyn, No. 2 in the Senate GOP conference. "I'm worried about the midterm election."He's not alone. Many lawmakers sought to avoid the topic altogether."Look, I'm focused on opioids," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, the veteran Republican from Tennessee, referring to efforts in Congress to deal with the drug epidemic. "And I was just reelected myself three years ago. So, I'm focused on that."And others said they were still uncertain the President would ultimately stand for re-election -- even though the White House and Trump himself have repeatedly said he would do so, as he's hired a campaign manager, has been raising money and holding campaign rallies in anticipation of 2020. Unlike past presidents who have waited to announce their reelection bids, Trump made clear immediately after taking office that he's running again.Still, many Republicans aren't certain he'll do it."That's a little loaded," said Rep. Bill Huizenga of Michigan when asked if he'd support Trump for re-election. "One: we need to make sure that he's actually moving forward and wants to go after this -- so when he makes a declaration, then I think that would be a time to determine whether there are others (who) run or not."The comments highlight the continuing uneasiness many Republicans have over Trump's presidency, and the lingering questions about how the multiple legal battles the President is facing -- from the allegations of hush money to silence an alleged affair with the porn actress Stormy Daniels, the raid of his personal attorney Michael Cohen's properties and special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation -- will eventually shake out. And they also contradict Trump's oft-stated contention that the party has "never" been more united.White House officials did not provide a comment for this story. Trump, however, may have little concern about whether his party in Washington is fully behind him. Few lawmakers backed his primary bid in 2016, and many abandoned him in the general election after the now-infamous "Access Hollywood" tape emerged showing him talking crudely about groping women.Come 2020, things may be no different.The conservative South Carolina Rep. Mark Sanford, when asked about backing Trump's re-election bid, said: "I'm worried about my own race right now."And the moderate Adam Kinzinger of Illinois had a similar refrain."That's 2020 -- pretty far away," he said when asked if he'd back Trump for re-election.  3458

After the Trump Campaign requested the presidential debates be moved closer to the election because some states will begin mail-in voting while the debates are being held, the Commission on Presidential Debates denied the campaign’s request.In a letter addressed to Trump campaign surrogate Rudolph Giuliani, the commission said it will stick with its planned three presidential debates – the first being held on September 29, and final one on October 22.“ In 2016, when the debate schedule was similar, only .0069% of the electorate had voted at the time of the first debate. While more people will likely vote by mail in 2020, the debate schedule has been and will be highly publicized,” the commission wrote. “Any voter who wishes to watch one or more debates before voting will be well aware of that opportunity.”As part of Giuliani’s request, Trump’s team sought an additional debate this fall.The Trump campaign quickly countered the debate commission’s response.“We are disappointed in your response, but appreciate your openness to a fourth, or earlier, debate ‘if the candidates were to agree that they wished to add to that schedule[,]'" wrote Giuliani. “Your reply makes it clear that the idea of an earlier debate is, in effect, locked away in the basement, alone and diminished. We continue to believe that the American people deserve to see their candidates for president compare their records and visions for the United States before actual voting begins.”The general election debates have generally followed the same schedule since 2000, with three presidential debates and a vice presidential debate the month before the election. The schedule for these debates are generally settled nearly a year in advance. 1735

来源：资阳报