宜宾脂肪填充好吗宜宾垫个鼻梁多少钱,宜宾做双眼皮方法有哪些,宜宾韩美激光脱毛多少钱,宜宾割双眼皮对比照,宜宾割双眼皮的价钱,宜宾割双眼皮三点式多少钱,宜宾韩式割双眼皮整容

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 an emergency medical resident physician and Brown University alumni, Kelly Wong, M.D. has spent her life helping others physically. Now, during this presidential election, she’s pivoting and also helping others politically.“We wanted to make a place where patients, family members, health care providers could all access this information really easily,” she said.Wong is the founder of Patient Voting, a nonpartisan, volunteer-based group of medical professionals helping patients vote from hospitals.“It really came to mind during the last presidential election in 2016,” Wong said about starting Patient Voting. “A patient telling me that they would rather leave and risk their life to go vote. That was, like, very emotional to me.”How patients vote by emergency absentee ballot is very different in every state. That’s why Wong says informing patients about their rights is critical to get their votes counted.“They are so focused on their condition when they come into the hospital that sometimes, ‘Oh my gosh, I didn’t realize that I’m going to have to figure out how to vote,’” Wong said of patients. “That doesn’t hit them until the next day and then they’re scrambling.“Patient Voting has volunteers nationwide. Their website gets up to 300 hits a day, a somewhat small number, though political science experts say it could have a big impact.“In 2000, it came down to 600 vote difference in Florida,” said Robert Preuhs, Ph.D., chair of the political science department at MSU Denver.He says the ability to allow people to exercise their right to vote and facilitate that under extreme conditions, like being in a hospital, is completely legal and it’s also crucial for some to have their voices heard.“It’s really hard of course to get out of a hospital bed and go down to a poll,” Preuhs said. “In order to allow people to vote, this is an organization, these laws are in place in order to facilitate that.”Wong says the money to fund Patient Voting comes from a grant from Brown Emergency Medicine, a price she says is well worth the investment during this political season.“I think this is something really important that we can offer them,” Wong said of helping patients vote. “I think they shouldn’t have to choose between their health or their right to vote.” 2286

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (AP) — Cal Fire alleges that fast food chain In-N-Out was responsible for a 2017 wildfire in rural Arroyo Grande, according to a lawsuit filed in San Luis Obispo Superior Court.The San Luis Obispo Tribune reports that Cal Fire claims the September 2017 wildfire was caused by a tractor mowing grass on In-N-Out property, saying it was covered in “dry annual grasses and scattered brush, which created a receptive bed of flammable vegetation.” The agency also claims the tractor was improperly maintained and the driver allowed the fire to spread.Cal Fire is seeking roughly .2 million from the burger chain to recoup costs.The fire burned about 245 acres (99 hectares) in four days. In-N-Out did not respond to a request from The Tribune.___Information from: The Tribune, http://www.sanluisobispo.com 832

ARCADIA, Calif. (AP) — A filly broke both front legs at the end of a workout on the main dirt track at Santa Anita and was euthanized on Thursday, becoming the 22nd horse to suffer catastrophic injuries since Dec. 26.Trainer and owner David Bernstein said the 3-year-old filly named Princess Lili B broke down just past the finish line after a half-mile workout.Bernstein told KTLA-TV that Princess Lili B apparently took a step as she changed leads, which led to her breaking her left ankle and then her right ankle. A lead change refers to which set of legs, left or right, leads or advances forward when a horse is galloping."She was always very sound and we've never had a problem with her," Bernstein said in the interview. "We didn't have to train her on any medication. She's just a lovely filly to be around."Bernstein said the filly's exercise rider didn't indicate any problem with the dirt surface."I think it's one of those things that happens, sadly enough," the trainer told KTLA.Bernstein said he wouldn't hesitate to train another horse on Santa Anita's surface again."I know they've done the best job they can possibly do," he said. "They're hired a number of great experts to handle this surface."Santa Anita had reopened its main track for limited workouts on Monday, with horses limited to jogging and galloping while the surface was monitored for any irregularities that may have caused the deaths of 22 horses since the winter meet began on Dec. 26.This week's workouts were the first conducted under the track's new training protocols, which include two veterinarians observing each horse going to and from the track. 1648

an absolute sweetheart a consummate proa genuine friend a shocking and painful loss.Berta,your housekeepingwas a tad suspect,your "people"keeping was perfect.?????? pic.twitter.com/cJMK8APgQV— Charlie Sheen (@charliesheen) October 13, 2020 263