Bengs distorts in ACLU piece
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/2218759.html

Re "ACLU runs amok in crusade against cross" (Viewpoints, Sept. 26): Margaret A. Bengs rehashed misleading statements about the law and the American Civil Liberties Union's case concerning a cross in the Mojave National Preserve.

It's the government that has shown contempt for free speech, allowing private citizens onto federal land to erect a cross but preventing other private citizens from erecting a Buddhist memorial on the same site. And the ACLU doesn't argue that a land transfer in this case could never be constitutional, only that the proposed transfer has clearly been manipulated so that the cross will remain in exactly the same place.

Many Christians are offended by Bengs' argument that this particular cross is supposedly a nonreligious commemoration of war dead, rather than a symbol of the divinity of Jesus. And thousands of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and members of other faiths who have served their country with honor do not regard the cross as a "universal symbol." That's one reason the military allows soldiers and their families to choose which religious symbol to put on headstones in military cemeteries, a position the ACLU staunchly supports.

URGENT
Tuesday, 9:39 p.m., Sept. 29, 2009
Contact: ACLU press office 916/996-9170

ATTN: News Desk

Sacramento City Council accepts surveillance camera grant Tuesday, but won't implement project until ‘guidelines' are produced by police, says ACLU

SACRAMENTO – The Sacramento City Council – following a presentation by the ACLU of Sacramento warning about the dangers to privacy of surveillance cameras – voted Tuesday evening to require the Sacramento Police Department submit "guidelines" about how 32 new surveillance cameras and four mobile units would be used before they are implemented.

The cameras are funded via a $614,994 grant from Homeland Security to Sacramento, which the City Council accepted Tuesday with the condition that concerns by the ACLU about privacy be addressed.

"We still believe that the cameras will do little to combat crime, as studies show, and that they are a threat to privacy," said Jim Updegraff, chair of the ACLU board of directors in Sacramento. "However, we are pleased that the council, in particular Steve Cohn and Rob Fong, understood that the police - no matter how well meaning - cannot be allowed to utilize these high tech tools without at least guidelines to protect everyone's basic rights."

The ACLU has been asked by the City to work with the SPD to produce the guidelines, he said.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2009
Contact: Cres Vellucci, ACLU/Sacramento 916.996.9170
Rebecca Farmer, ACLU of Northern California 415.621.2493, ext. 374

ATTN: Assignment Desk

ACLU warns of invasion of privacy if City Council approves Homeland Security grant to install cameras on city streets; Vote Tuesday night

SACRAMENTO – The ACLU of Sacramento said the Sacramento City Council risks invading the privacy of average citizens – and doing little to combat crime – if it accepts a grant from Homeland Security for 32 surveillance cameras and four mobile units at its Tuesday meeting.

The hearing is set for City Hall Tuesday, 6 p.m, with an ACLU press briefing at 5:30 p.m.

The Sacramento City Council is expected to be presented with a proposal to accept the grant Tuesday after no real public hearing, something that is bothersome to civil libertarians. The ACLU is recommending a series of community town halls to allow citizens to comment.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, Sept. 28, 2009
Contact: ACLU press office 916/996-9170

ATTN: Assignment Desk

ACLU sets news conference Monday to oppose Mayor Johnson's plan to set up dozens of surveillance cameras in Sacramento; City Council weighs project Tuesday

SACRAMENTO – The ACLU of Sacramento will hold a major news conference here Monday morning – and then hand deliver a letter to Mayor Kevin Johnson – opposing a nearly $615,000 grant by Homeland Security to provide dozens of surveillance cameras to spy on Sacramento citizens.

The briefing will be held at 10 a.m. Monday in front of City Hall.

The Sacramento City Council is expected to be presented with a proposal to accept the grant Tuesday after no real public hearing, something that is bothersome to civil libertarians.

Court’s Steroid Ruling Pumps Up Computer Privacy

By David Kravets

A divided 11-judge federal appeals court panel has dramatically narrowed the government’s search-and-seizure powers in the digital age, ruling Wednesday that federal prosecutors went too far when seizing 104 professional baseball players’ drug results when they had a warrant for just 10.

[Related: Prisons: it’s time to reform and reduce population and Prison officials had warning that a disturbance was likely in Chino]

Supreme Court rejects state's bid for more time on prison order

The U.S. Supreme Court tonight rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s motion to stay a three-judge panel’s order to produce a plan by next Friday for reducing California’s prison population by 40,000 inmates.

A Schwarzenegger spokeswoman said the governor would submit a plan as ordered on Sept. 18.

Ex-state Justice Reynoso to lead probe of Woodland farmworker's killing
hsangree@sacbee.com - Published Thursday, Sep. 10, 2009

A citizens panel headed by former state Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso plans to examine the April killing of Woodland farmworker Luis Gutierrez by sheriff's deputies, Reynoso and supporters announced Wednesday on the Capitol steps.

Reynoso, who was vice chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from 1994-2004, said the panel was needed because of the close-knit nature of Yolo County law enforcement and what he called a lack of responsiveness by elected leaders.

"Nothing supplants the power of citizens looking at the actions of public officials," he told a few dozen activists and onlookers.

[Important questions. Police have a very tough job, but, too often it seems that the most effective disarming device is neglected -- a calm voice of reason]

Why Are Cops Tasering Grandmothers, Pregnant Women and Kids?

By Scott Thill, AlterNet. Posted August 17, 2009.

Police officers are brutalizing innocent civilians with accelerating lunacy. How did this happen? How can we make it stop?

Technology is a double-edged sword, the cliche goes. It can save and even extend your life, but it can also kill you in new and unpredictable ways. In the several years since the Arizona-based Taser International has deployed its terminologically challenging Electronic Control Devices (ECDs), colloquially known as stun guns or simply tasers, what started out as a midrange law enforcement weapon has turned into a surreal nightmare that has gone viral from streets to screens. It's now to the point that only a hyperreal comedian like Stephen Colbert can make sense of it.

"Nation, our gun rights are always under attack from the bleeding hearts," he cracked in late July, "and not just the hearts bleeding from a gunshot wound. Thankfully, there's the taser. It's the perfect weapon for when you really want to shoot someone, but killing them just seems like overkill."

Of course, Colbert milked the footage of accidental and purposeful taser victims, the latter being media and law enforcement members who signed up for shock therapy and provided the world with no shortage of hilarious video. But his point was well-taken: Thanks to the taser's wildfire deployment, classification as non-lethal weaponry and pop-cultural appeal in films, television, comics and even cartoons, cops have nearly lost their minds using it on everyone from children, the elderly, and pregnant mothers to the mentally unstable and physically disabled.