clever title here

Arizona State lawmakers in the Senate approved a measure to get rid of the statute of limitation for victims of child abuse to file lawsuits. However, this lifetime right to sue has one notable exception: for the church and school districts. If you are suing the Church for its failure to act to stop a pedophile, you still only have two years.

The lobbyist for the Catholic Church admits that he has been pushing for the exception.

Church Secures Exemption from Proposed Arizona Law To Eliminate Statute of Limitations for Child Abuse « JONATHAN TURLEY

Humour

A man is in a bar having a drink when he notices a well dressed guy come through the door with 5 beautiful women all over him. He also happens to have an Orange for a head. The man at the bar watches him flirt and buy rounds and flash bankrolls of money and get all the attention in the room for an hour before getting up the nerve to approach the man. “Excuse me, Sir…” he says, “I have to ask…I see you here with all these beautiful women, and all this money, and all this attention…but I noticed you have an Orange for a head. How did all this happen for you?” The man with an Orange for a head replies “Well I was walking on a beach one day when I found a magic lamp. I rubbed it and a genie popped out and granted me three wishes. First, I wished for all the attention from the hottest women in the world. Second, I wished for an unlimited supply of money. Third, and this is where I kind of fucked it up, I wished to have an Orange for a head.”

Antigrams

Whereas anagrams simply transpose the letters in a word to give us a new meaning, antigrams have a more sinister tendency. Rearranging the letters of the words on the page gives a new word or phrase that directly opposes or contradicts it.

• Astronomers — No more stars
• Funeral — Real Fun
• Honestly — On the Sly
• Within Earshot — I won’t hear this
• Medicate — Decimate
• Violence — Nice Love
• Forty-five — Over Fifty
• Earliest — Rise Late
• Commendation — Aim to Condemn
• Antagonist — Not against
• United — Untied
• Parental — Prenatal

Heimlich manoeuvre

Aviva Ziegler: Almost everyone you speak to about a choking treatment will say ‘use the Heimlich manoeuvre’ and on any street, in any country you’ll probably get the same answer. But you might be shocked to learn that the Heimlich manoeuvre appears to have never been accepted practice in Australia. We are one of the only countries in the world where it’s not officially on the books. This is a typical Australian first aid training course held by the St John Ambulance.

Trainer: The learning outcomes for this session is we should be able to firstly identify a person who is choking, if somebody is gagging with something partially obstructed in the upper airway we should ask the person to relax and encourage them to cough. Our research has been proven on a conscious casualty a good cough is generally better than anything else. Now if the good cough is not effective we then have to hit that person, we give them what we call back slaps, he’s leaning forward, in the centre of the shoulder blades in an upwards direction I would give him five nice solid slaps. If that is unsuccessful we should place a hand in the centre of the back on the sternum and we just press down sharply five chest thrusts and if that is unsuccessful we alternate between the two.

Henry Heimlich: Oh well that is ridiculous. I am so amazed to hear that. Back slaps were used for decades back going into the 1960s and every single scientific study had shown that back slaps cause a choking object that is in the airway to go deeper and tighter into the airway and cause death. I am astounded that the manoeuvre is not used for choking.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2010/2768800.htm

You have the right to remain silent.

When the case Miranda v. Arizona reached the Supreme Court in 1966, coercive police interrogation took another blow. Ernesto Miranda had confessed to rape and kidnapping after two hours of interrogation, and the appeal to the Supreme Court alleged that Miranda was not aware of his rights to remain silent (the Fifth Amendment) and to counsel (the Sixth Amendment). The Court ruled in favor of Miranda, and the decision instituted what we’ve come to know as the “Miranda Rights.”

The dollar auction game

I heard about this game on a game theory blog.

The game involves someone auctioning off one dollar. Bidding starts at 5 cents and bids increase by five cent increments.

There are two main components to the auction.

1. The auction ends when no one bids higher. The highest bidder pays the price of his bid and gets the dollar as a prize.
2. The second highest bidder is also forced to pay his losing bid (5 cents less than the winning bid) but gets nothing in return.

When the auction starts, you’re bidding 5 - 30 cents for $1, so you increase your bids because you’re still going to be making money. Once you hit 75c though, you start thinking about what happens if you lose. You still have to pay 75c, but you get nothing. You’re still going to get a bargain though, so you keep bidding. The thing is, the othe person is thinking the same thing, so the bids creep up to $1. You’d think that once you get to one dollar, there’s no point in continuning, but what if you’re not in the lead? You should bid more than $1 to limit your loss.

It is the incentives that dictate this weird outcome. Consider an example when the highest bid is $1.50. Since the high bid is above the prize of $1, it is clear no new bidder will enter. Hence, the second bidder faces the two choices of doing nothing and losing $1.45, or raising the bid to $1.55 to lose only 55 cents if the auction ends.

Read a more thorough explanation from mindyourdecisions.com.