割包皮到武清区龙济泌尿外科怎么样武清区龙济泌尿外科怎样,天津武清龙济泌尿外科医院,天津市武清区龙济医院看性功能障碍怎么样,天津龙济医院泌尿男科医院正规吗,天津市龙济医院割包皮手术大概费用,龙济医院做什么车到,天津龙济割包皮手术多少钱

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens believes the students and demonstrators who protested this past weekend for gun control should seek a repeal of the Second Amendment."A concern that a national standing army might pose a threat to the security of the separate states led to the adoption of that amendment," Stevens wrote an op-ed published in The New York Times Tuesday, adding, "today that concern is a relic of the 18th century."A lifelong Republican but considered liberal in his judicial rulings, Stevens pointed to his dissent in the 2008 landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for self-defense within his home. 722

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's Department of Motor Vehicles improperly disclosed private information to seven other government agencies on more than 3,000 people involved in some type of investigation as suspects or witnesses, officials said Tuesday.The department was sending letters Tuesday to the 3,200 people after determining that they are not currently being investigated.The department improperly gave federal, state and county agencies what were supposed to be internal notes, such as whether drivers' Social Security numbers had been checked to see if they were valid or falsified or if the individual was ineligible for a Social Security number.It sent information on more than 3,000 of the individuals to district attorneys in just two of California's 58 counties, San Diego and Santa Clara.Information on fewer than 200 people went to the federal Department of Homeland Security, including six records for immigrants who were in the country illegally but applied for or received special immigrant licenses.Officials said it was unclear if they were used to investigate the drivers' immigration status or for some other purpose.The remainder went to the Internal Revenue Service, inspector generals for the Social Security Administration and U.S. Small Business Administration, and the California Department of Health Care Services.The information could have been used in criminal, tax or child support investigations, including for witnesses in those inquiries, officials said.It's the latest in series of missteps by the DMV, which last year came under fire for long wait times and for potentially botching about 23,000 voter registrations under the state's "motor voter" law, which lets residents automatically register to vote through the DMV.Department spokeswoman Anita Gore said the DMV stopped making the improper disclosures in August after officials decided that they shouldn't have been giving other agencies the internal notes.She said it took the DMV three months to send the letters because it had to ask each of the seven agencies why they wanted the information, review four available years of records, make sure the 3,200 drivers were not being investigated to avoid tipping them off, and then draft individual letters to each driver. 2278

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's attorney general said Tuesday that he won't charge two Sacramento police officers who fatally shot an unarmed black man last year, a killing that set off intense protests.Attorney General Xavier Becerra's announcement follows the Sacramento district attorney's finding this weekend that the two officers broke no laws when they shot 22-year-old Stephon Clark.Officers Terrance Mercadal and Jared Robinet say they mistakenly thought Clark was approaching them with a gun after he ran from them into his grandparents' backyard as police investigated vandalism.Becerra said his review found officers believed Clark was armed and their lives were in danger when they opened fire. Investigators found only a cellphone.RELATED: No charges for Sacramento officers who fatally shot Stephon Clark"Based on our review of the facts and evidence in relation to the law, I'm here to announce today that our investigation has concluded that no criminal charges against the officers involved in the shooting can be sustained," Becerra said.The attorney general emphasized the need for changes and called Clark's killing a "devastating loss." He met with Clark's mother, SeQuette Clark, before announcing his decision. Jamilia Land, a family spokesperson, said SeQuette Clark would speak to reporters later Tuesday.Clark was shot seven times on March 18, 2018, and his killing prompted protests in California's capital city and across the U.S. Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert's decision not to charge the officers has sparked new demonstrations, with more than 80 people arrested Monday in a wealthy Sacramento neighborhood.Clark's family and black community leaders urged Becerra to reach a different conclusion."I would like for the attorney general to prosecute the officers," brother Stevante Clark said Sunday. "I want justice and accountability."Both Becerra and Schubert concluded that the officers feared for their lives when they shot Clark, who they thought was holding a gun. They were pursuing him after receiving calls about someone breaking car windows.The attorney general and district attorney said the evidence showed Clark was advancing toward the officers when they shot him.The decision has increased support from top state officials to change California's legal standard for when police can use deadly force.Lawmakers have revived a measure introduced after Clark's slaying that would make California the first state to allow police to use deadly force only when it's necessary to prevent imminent and serious injury or death and if there's no reasonable alternative, such as warnings or other methods.Strong opposition from law enforcement agencies stalled it last year. 2747

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

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman was accused of inappropriate behavior on a campaign bus days before the Nov. 6 election, a Democratic official said Tuesday, a day after Bauman took a leave of absence.Bauman was among those aboard a bus during a statewide get-out-the-vote tour. Two young women on the bus reported alcohol was consumed and inappropriate sex talk occurred on Nov. 1, said David Campos, chairman of the San Francisco Democratic Party.The bus was scheduled to arrive in San Francisco the next day at an event with U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Her campaign team learned of the incidents aboard the bus and told state party officials that Bauman and the bus should stay away, Campos said.It appeared Bauman engaged in the misbehavior and did not intervene to stop others from acting inappropriately, Campos said.RELATED: Top California Democrat on leave amid sex misconduct inquiry"We felt, and I felt, it was important for us, given we had serious credible allegations, not to have Chair Bauman attend this get-out-the-vote event in San Francisco," said Campos, who first shared details of the allegations with the Bay Area Reporter, a publication serving the LGBT community. Bauman is the party's first openly gay chairman.Allegations of misbehavior by Bauman first surfaced last week in a letter by party Vice Chairman Daraka Larimore-Hall. It appeared on social media and accused Bauman of sexual harassment and assault against unidentified accusers.On Saturday, Bauman acknowledged the party had started an investigation and on Monday he announced he was taking a leave of absence. He provided no details on the allegations. Campos said he doesn't know if Larimore-Hall's letter relates to the alleged incident on the bus or something else, but he said he was not aware of any allegations of sexual assault on the bus."We did not hear anything about possible sexual assault," he said.Larimore-Hall did not respond to multiple emails and a phone message from The Associated Press Tuesday. Jorge Aguilar, executive director of Pelosi's campaign, and Bauman did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.In a statement Monday announcing Bauman's leave, party spokesman Mike Roth said "Bauman believes this decision is the best way to ensure the independence and integrity of the process. The Party is confident that the procedures in place will allow for all parties to come forward freely and provide for a thorough and complete review."Alex Gallardo-Rooker, another party vice chair, is serving as acting chairwoman during the investigation. 2627