Georgia used to have a child abuse registry. You got notice that you had been placed on it, then you got a hearing in front of an ALJ. It was probably unconstitutional. The Georgia General Assembly passed a law to eliminate it.
DFCS is STILL putting people on the registry. /1
Except now, you no longer get to appear in front of a judge, or have counsel. You are required to speak, by yourself, to the DFCS worker, and explain why you think you should not be on the registry. /2
As far as I know, there is no statutory or regulatory justification for the continuation of this registry, that was eliminated by the General Assembly in 2020. /3
I don't see how we could discuss the end of slavery without talking about the "agony of the civil war" or how we "struggled to achieve our national creed."
There's no reason that the left has to have a monopoly on the joy of ending slavery. The right just needs to end its monopoly on celebrating the confederacy.
If, on a daily or weekly basis, police officers stopped you, put you up against a wall, patted down your pockets, maybe said something casually cruel, do you suppose you'd want to help them do their job?
When places like New York City ended stop and frisk, conservatives gleefully anticipated a catastrophic increase in crime. Instead, it continued to get safer.
Georgia lawmakers: if you are frustrated that Daniel Penny has been charged with manslaughter in New York, please consider that in Georgia, the charge would be felony murder and the minimum penalty would be life in prison without parole for 30 years.
We don't have meaningful degrees of murder for imperfect self-defense, and the result is that we have thousands of people serving life sentences who are not, in any conventional sense, murderers.
Seriously let's get together before next session and talk about how we can distinguish between killing a person on purpose and having your gun go off while you're cleaning it.
Jordan Neely's killing was almost certainly unlawful, but I feel like a lot of people are getting distracted by side issues.
First, was Penny justified restraining him?
Only if he believed Neely was about to hurt someone. Abusive language isn't enough. Here's the instruction
Also important, from the statute. The threat of harm must be "imminent." Imminent means right that second. The immediacy is so important that New York courts have suggested pulling out a gun, without pointing it at someone, might be insufficient for imminence.
Another thing that people are getting wrong is the duty to retreat.
Penny didn't have a duty to retreat before restraining Neely. Passengers were not obligated to go to the next train car.
But we only even get to that question if we decide the initial restraint was ok.