For the first time in decades, the United Nations has declared four of the world’s humanitarian crises a “Level 3 Emergency,” the highest possible rating the organization can assign. The four on the list are Syria, South Sudan, Central African Republic, and Iraq; Iraq was just added to the list on August 14th. From the Islamic State beheading journalists, to the thousands dying from the Ebola virus in Western Africa, from the thousands of civilians fleeing towns in Iraq, to the million malnourished and displaced in South Sudan, as a world, we are collectively in crisis.

According to Nickolay Mladenov, special representative of the United Nations Secretary General, the “Level 3”  emergency designation facilitates “mobilization of additional resources in goods, funds and assets to ensure a more effective response to the humanitarian needs of populations affected by forced displacement.”

The Inter-Agency Standing Committee, a team of UN and other NGO humanitarians, is responsible for determining the level of crisis. Level 3 is given to countries experiencing civil unrest that causes the displacement or removal of thousands of people. Unlike natural disasters, conflicts put humanitarian workers in the crossfire, making relief efforts that much more difficult.

Iraq became a particular concern after the situation on Sinjar Mountain escalated and thousands of Yazidi families–a particular religious community in Iraq–were trapped on the mountain without water, nourishment or any form of sanitation as ISIS fighters surrounded them. Despite numerous Department of Defense airdrops over a week long period in August, 1.5 million Iraqis are in need of humanitarian help, according to USAID.

USAID estimates that 10.8 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria; 2.5 million in the Central African Republic, with 900,000 more displaced; and 1.1 million displaced in South Sudan. USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah said:

This is the first time in our agency’s history that we have been called on to manage four large-scale humanitarian responses at once— in addition to reaching other vulnerable populations worldwide and preparing communities ahead of natural disasters.

UNICEF, WFP, UNFPA, UNHCR, CARE USA, World Vision USA, Save the Children, Oxfam America and many other NGOs are currently operating in these four countries. Their contributions have saved thousands from death, and millions of individuals have been helped to get back on their feet. The U.S. government alone has sent more than $2.8 billion in assistance to these four countries; but the battle is nowhere close to being done.

To the 5,000 people who are suffering from the Ebola virus, I feel for you. To my sisters in India, who have no choice but to give contaminated water to their children, I feel for you. To the 5.5 million children affected by the crisis in Syria, I feel for you. To the families in Gaza whose houses have been destroyed, I feel for you. I know my empathy won’t bring your loved ones back, give you a new home, or calm the fear that you have to live with everyday. But I hope my words can reach and inspire my colleagues here in America. I hope my words will make people realize how mundane their issues are compared to those I’ve outlined above. I hope my words can bring us together collectively, so we can finally realize that it isn’t “us and them,” but simply “us.” We are Iraq. We are Syria. We are South Sudan. We are Central African Republic. If they are experiencing a crisis, we are experiencing a crisis. With countries like Gaza, Yemen and the Democratic Republic of Congo on the horizon of reaching a level 3 designation, humanitarian aid is needed now more than ever. We are collectively in crisis, but it doesn’t have to be that way.

Mic Drop

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Collectively In Crisis: The Sad State of World Affairs appeared first on Law Street.

No one knows what happens when we die, and we never will. Some believe in an afterlife, some think death is just eternal darkness, and some believe that our spirits reincarnate into another body. We have no idea what belief is right, but I think we can all agree that death is terrifying. Which is why I would never wish it on anyone.

Earlier this week, actress and comedian Joan Rivers passed away at the age of 81. Thousands have voiced their opinions on the late comedian, calling her a “trailblazer,” “one of a kind,” and a “mentor.” While all these might well be true, let’s not forget that Joan Rivers was also a bitch.

Before she died, Joan Rivers was recorded on camera saying that Palestinians “deserved to die,” because they elected Hamas into power. In her short rant she manages to degrade a whole society by stating “they were told to get out, you don’t get out then you know you’re an idiot. And at least the ones that were killed were the ones with very low IQs.” Watch the statement below.

It’s one thing to be open and frank, but it’s another to be rude and offensive. When you’re as big of a star as Joan Rivers was you have to realize that your voice reaches the masses. You have to realize that you have a duty to be vigilant about what you say and when you say it. Because for some reason Joan, people looked up to you. And contrary to what you might think, innocent people who refuse to leave a place that they call home, do not deserve to die.

Apart from Gaza, the late actress managed to offend the President of the United States and the First Lady by calling President Obama “gay,” and the First Lady a “tranny.” She offended Heidi Klum, Germans, and Jews with her concentration camp joke. She attacked celebrity baby North West saying she was in need of a waxing, and British singer Adele with the tweet below.

Congratulations to Adele on the birth of her 68 pound 8 ounces bouncing baby boy.

— Joan Rivers (@Joan_Rivers) October 22, 2012

Yes, Rivers had her funny moments. Yes, she had an illustrious career in television and comedy. Yes, she helped pave the way for women in media. But I personally think that her disregard for people, her outlandish statements, and her brute stubbornness overshadows all of that.

We tend to hold celebrities in a higher regard than we should. If Joan Rivers was your teacher, would you respect her? If she called your baby fat or ugly, would you still adore her? If she called your husband gay or your wife a tranny, would you still think she was funny? I refuse to let her off the hook just because she was famous. I refuse to respect anyone who says innocent people deserve to die. I refuse to like celebrities just because they are celebrities. I am sorry that she died, and my condolences go out to her family. But let’s not act like we lost Mother Teresa.

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith (@TSmith1211) is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time.

 Featured image courtesy of [Steve Rhodes via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Stop Glorifying Undeserving Celebrities Like Joan Rivers When They Die appeared first on Law Street.

We are a self-conscious generation. We care way too much of what our peers think of us, which at times is all consuming. We crave likes on our Facebook pictures, strive for the most amount of retweets, and struggle to make our YouTube videos go viral. We seek approval so badly that we will go to great lengths just to get it; and we’re starting to cross the line. Personally, I see nothing wrong with executing a practical and thoughtful prank — what good is life if you can’t laugh, right? But there is a thin line with jokes and pranks, and a very thin line between a tasteful joke and a offensive joke. When you cross that line onto the offensive side, you’ll find it incredibly hard to come back from that.

A group of kids go to the “hood” and find strangers to pull pranks on and showcase them on YouTube: hood pranks. These “pranks” include pulling strangers’ pants up, approaching people with fake guns, pretending to steal people’s phones, and pretending to take pictures of people. The kids go to predominantly black neighborhoods because they know that these are the areas where people will react the harshest.

Of course these people are going to react with violence. They’re bitter, and how could they not be?They’ve been dealt the shittiest hand of cards of anyone in America. They’ve been ridiculed and they’ve been stepped on, and they carry a weight on their shoulders that we as outsiders can never understand. They are the minority of minorities. And these kids think it’s funny to exploit that, but it really isn’t. What some white people don’t seem to get is that we are done with being disrespected. You cannot go into a predominately black neighborhood, pick a fight, and not expect anything to happen. This isn’t the 17th century, we have a little bit more voice now.  And were going to use that voice.

We’re going to use that voice to tell you that these “pranks” need to stop. We’re going to use that voice to tell you that these “pranks” aren’t funny, they aren’t creative, and most importantly, they’re not actually pranks at all. They are intrusive and obscene acts that exploit black culture and they are useless in helping us progress as a society. I understand that we’re a conscious generation, and we feel the need to impress our peers; but there are lines. When we diminish a whole culture for the sake of some laughs, that is definitely crossing a line. And when you cross this line you completely deserve to get your ass kicked.

Mic Drop

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post “Hood Pranks” Are Racist Attacks on the Community appeared first on Law Street.

Everybody loved Joe Rogan and the Fear Factor show when it was still around–there was just something about people doing crazy things on camera for money that was so enticing. When I was a kid and they would make people jump out of a helicopter or sit in a tank full of tarantulas, I always asked my mom, “what if something goes wrong?” She would always reassure me that there were trained professionals off-camera that would step in if anything were to go wrong, and that’s why they tell you not to do these stunts at home by yourself. That made sense to me, and I was comforted knowing that those people were surrounded by medics and professionals that would help them in case of a disaster. However, for some reason, people have taken these stunts to their homes, re-creating all kinds of “challenges,” and are harming themselves in the process. Here are my top 10 idiotic web challenges that have been attempted over the past couple of years.

[wooslider autoslide=”false” slide_page=”Dangerous-Kid-Games” slider_type=”slides” limit=”10″ thumbnails=”default” order=”DESC” order_by=”menu_order”]

This rant is specially dedicated to all the people who have engaged in the Fire Challenge and the Pass Out Game over the past couple of months; because without you this post would have probably never been written. First I’ll start with the people who thought it would be cool to be the human torch for a couple of seconds. Honestly, what were you thinking? I can assure you that no job is going to hire you because you slapped fire in the face, this is not something you can put on your resume, no person is going to date you because of your “fearless actions,” and honestly once people have moved on to the next fad in a couple of months; no one is going to remember you. 

The worst part is that there are actual burn victims out there that have lost ears, lips, noses, and are scarred for life. For life. These people have to wake up everyday and face the gruesome criticism that our society throws at them. And you? You take their worse nightmare and turn it into a game. Maybe there should be an “Acid Challenge”, where we pour acid all over ourselves. Or a “Poison Challenge” where we swallow poison and see who dies last? See how crazy these sound? Setting yourself on fire shouldn’t be any different; it is one of the worst ways to die and should not be taken lightly at all. So please do me, your loved ones, and yourself a favor: stop lighting yourself on fire and grow up.

For the kids that play the pass out game, I know most of you think that you are invincible. You’re young, you’re lively, and you’re healthy; so why are you trying to throw all of that away for a couple of laughs and some likes on a video? I know it is really hard to look at your actions from a different point of view, but I guarantee you when you look back at what you did as a teenager, the Pass Out game will be one of the things you regret. It takes three people to play this “game”–the person who is passing out, the person who pushes down on their chest, and the person filming. But all it takes is one of you to speak up and stop it from happening. We all do stupid things as we grow up, we all experiment, we all test our limits, we all make mistakes, but we should try and learn from these mistakes. We are given one life and one life only in this world, and however cliche that may sound, it’s true. Your parents did not give you life just so you can throw it away. So can we please stop abusing our bodies for the sake of a video? Because all it takes is one thing going wrong, and just like that you’ll be gone.

Mic Drop

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Challenge of the Week: Don’t Be an Idiot appeared first on Law Street.

As a society, unfortunately, we have come to a point where we normalize violence. We no longer find it unusual when we hear about mass shootings at schools, we create extremely violent video games that allow us to kill our opponents in a variety of ways, and we videotape fights and post them online. But now, now we’ve taken it one step too far. A developer who uses the moniker PlayFTW uploaded a Bomb Gaza game where users can drop bombs on draped figures who are supposed to represent the Palestinian organization Hamas, while trying to avoid killing civilians. The game was downloaded around 1,000 times before it was pulled by Google’s app store according to Fox.

Both Palestinians and Israelis have been prominent in sharing their views on the matter. Since the conflict started over a month ago there have been numerous online mementos; from the simple hashtag of #freepalestine, to the statuses saying “I stand with Gaza.” Our generation makes it a point to use technology to voice their opinions on matters, and I often find it commendable. But when people use said technology to glorify the ongoing violence occurring in Gaza, it is utterly shocking and despicable. It also raises red flags on what Google’s standards and policies are for their Play Store applications.

A Google spokesman said that the company doesn’t “comment on individual apps, but will remove apps that breach our guidelines,” which prohibit some speech, bullying, and violence. The app’s maturity setting was set to ‘low,’ which means that the game was deemed suitable for kids, according to the Guardian.

Google: I don’t know how you could allow a game like this to be put up.

PlayFTW: I don’t understand why you would create a game like this in the first place.

Android users: I don’t understand why you would download and play an insensitive game titled “Bomb Gaza.”

I’m just full of confusion at the moment.

What is going on in Gaza is horrendous. So far, more than 1,800 Palestinians have died, and many of those are children. Children who don’t have any say in the matter. Children who hardly have any idea what the conflict is about. Children who simply radiate innocence. I just don’t understand. I don’t understand how someone could take something so serious and turn it into a game.

Now I concede, I have played the earlier Call of Duty games that were set during World War II, but “Bomb Gaza” is so much different.  You cannot play as the German army in the Call of Duty games; you cannot imprison Jews and gas people as the Nazis did; and you cannot strip people of their dignity. You simply cannot recreate the emotions felt during WW2, because they are still too raw. With “Bomb Gaza” you’re supposed to aim for the ‘terrorists’ but can easily hit a civilian, and although it’s only a game, it still hits a deep, deep nerve.

I have no ‘true’ connection with this conflict. I am not Palestinian, and I am not Israeli; but I am a human. And it saddens me every time I hear about a village being taken out. It saddens me when I see a picture of a father holding the remains of his son. It saddens me when innocent people are caught in the crossfire of a conflict they never asked for. And it saddens me when an app is developed to perpetuate the conflict, to add fuel to the fire, to glorify and normalize the bombings of Gaza, and to do it now at the height of the conflict.

Hate perpetuates hate, violence perpetuates violence. But you know what? Peace perpetuates peace, and love perpetuates love and instead of using our technology to provoke the situation, why don’t we use it to try and solve this issue peacefully?

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Plantronicsgermany via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Google Really Messed Up With Bomb Gaza Game appeared first on Law Street.

You know that sinking feeling you get when you dig your hands into your pockets for your keys, but come out with nothing but lint? After a long hard day, nothing is worse than being helplessly locked out of your apartment. Locksmiths are expensive, often ranging from $35 to $150, and may be even more depending on your location and what time you call. App developers in New York believe they have found the solution to this problem with a new service called KeyMe.

KeyMe is an iPhone app that allows users to photograph their keys and upload them to the company’s servers. After the photo is taken, users can make copies in one of KeyMe’s five conveniently located kiosks around NYC. For the low price of $10, KeyMe customers can walk to a kiosk, wait 30 seconds for a brand new key, and then return home. To me, the idea sounds pretty clever: creating a cloud that you can upload your key to, and providing stores around the city that can cut them for you in a matter of seconds. There are absolutely no flaws in that, right?

Wrong. Andy Greenberg, a reporter for WIRED, wrote a step-by-step account of how he was able to copy his neighbors key without him noticing, cut a copy at a nearby KeyMe kiosk, and later “break” into his house. Greenberg says:

Such services also enable jerks like me to steal your keys any time they get a moment alone with them. Leave your ring of cut-brass secrets unattended on your desk at work, at a bar table while you buy another round, or in a hotel room, and any stranger–or friend– can upload your keys to their online collection.

While it’s convenient for those of us who frequently forget our keys, the app also poses some alarming security risks.

Greenberg is absolutely right–now that I know there is an app out there that can create a copy of my key, I think I’ll find it extremely hard to trust anybody with it. No more throwing down the keys to my friends to let them in, no more hanging them at the door, and certainly no more trusting valets. Unfortunately, KeyMe allows the most simplest of simpletons to become a thief, and I can’t blame them–it’s far too easy. From what I can tell, Greenberg has been the only person to admit to using KeyMe to break into someones house, but that will probably change as soon as KeyMe gains traction.

The app also has the potential to wipe out the locksmith industry entirely. Much like what Uber is doing to the taxi business, KeyMey’s user-friendly and convenient service may have the ability to disrupt the market. As more and more services shift to mobile devices, one can imagine of the possibilities to come in the near future. The recent trend toward mobility and instant gratification may also have a negative side; are services like KeyMe causing people to sacrifice security for convenience?

Greg Marsh, CEO of KeyMe, told WIRED that, “digitally reproducing keys is safer than other methods because it leaves a digital trail with KeyMe’s account information, credit card records, and its kiosk fingerprint scanners.” While those are all very valid points, Mr. Marsh, I hadn’t heard of KeyMe until a couple of days ago. If I were robbed I would assume it was done the old fashioned way–by picking the lock or breaking a window. The last thing I would think is that someone took a photo of my key, copied it at the Rite-Aid down the street, and then waltzed through the front door to rob me blind.

Marsh’s advice to his future users is “to be prudent with where they have their keys and store them, similar to a password.” This is pretty obvious advice–even before the introduction of KeyMe, criminals still had the ability to steal a key, copy it, and return it before the person even noticed. But KeyMe just made it simpler for them–instead of going through the trouble of copying the key or stealing it, they merely have to take a picture. With a click of a button you now have access to someone’s valuables. All I can say is that KeyMe might be facing a lot of lawsuits in the upcoming years.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Moyan Brenn via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The New Key to Breaking and Entering appeared first on Law Street.

It seems like every summer a parent leaves their child in a smoldering car to die. Obviously none of these parents left their child strapped into the car seat on purpose, but it makes you wonder what is going through their minds. Now I am not a parent, and I do forget things pretty often, but one would think that if the little person that you gave life to is just inches away, you would remember that you have a responsibility to take them out of the car. Sadly, child hot car deaths are something that we’ve become accustomed to.

In 2014 so far there have been at least 18 heatstroke deaths as a result of children being left in vehicles. Just last Thursday Police in Wichita, Kansas found a 10-month-old girl unresponsive after she had been in her car seat for more than two hours after her foster parents forgot to take her inside the house. In 2013 there were 44 confirmed heatstroke deaths, and from 1998 until now there have been a total of 624, making an average of 38 child heatstroke deaths a year according to Golden Gate Weather.

Those are really sad statistics. RIP to every single one of them.

Alissa Chavez is a 17 year old from Albuquerque, New Mexico and she has designed a device called “Hot Seat” that alerts parents when it detects that a child has been left in its car seat. She is currently raising money to build a prototype. For the device to work, a parent will have to place a sensor pad on the child’s car seat. The pad will have a sensor that communicates with the key fob, which will sound three alarms (the fob, a phone app, and the vehicle alarm) if it senses that a child is still in the seat once the parent and key fob are a certain distance away from the car.

Brillant Idea, Alissa

While Alissa’s idea is a splendid one, I can’t help but think, why? Why is a device like this even needed? Have we become so distracted that we can’t even care for our children? Is technology the one to blame? Or are we too consumed by our own personal problems? Or are babies just too quiet nowadays?  It’s sad that a device like this is now needed in our society, we need to take a deep look within ourselves and ask what kind of people we really are. And it’s looking like we are just forgetful people. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said, “We encourage you to put something in the backseat to remind yourself that you have a child in the back, it could be a purse, it could be a phone, anything that will work for you.”

What could be a better reminder of your child being in the car than your actual child? Why are we more likely to check if we forgot our phone or our purse than our children? What does this say about us as a society? The piece of advice Foxx offered should have been to accept the responsibility of being a parent and remember to take your child out of the car; simple as that. As a society though we’ve come to accept that these things just happen, chalking it up to human error I guess. As Gene Weingarten explained it, any parent can fall victim to negligence.

“The wealthy do, it turns out. And the poor, and the middle class. Parents of all ages and ethnicities do it. Mothers are just as likely to do it as fathers. It happens to the chronically absent-minded and to the fanatically organized, to the college-educated and to the marginally literate. In the last 10 years, it has happened to a dentist. A postal clerk. A social worker. A police officer. An accountant. A soldier. A paralegal. An electrician. A Protestant clergyman. A rabbinical student. A nurse. A construction worker. An assistant principal. It happened to a mental health counselor, a college professor and a pizza chef. It happened to a pediatrician. It happened to a rocket scientist.”

Interesting…

Well put Mr. Weingarten, but if the parents aren’t to blame, then who the hell is? Yes, the parents who forget their children made terrible, terrible mistakes, and they have to wake up and live with the guilt of having murdered their child every single day; and while that is punishment enough, I still think that they deserve all of the blame.

When you bring a life into this world, you take on a whole other world of responsibility. When you bring a life into this world you can’t afford to slip up or forget. When you bring a life into this world, you should be 100 percent about where your kid is from the day they leave the womb until their 18th birthday. When you bring a life into this world, it is your duty to be on your A-game every single day, week, and month of the year. There is no such thing as a break when you bring a life into this world. There are no “re-dos” or “oopsies.” This is not a phone or a laptop or a purse, this is a life, and when you bring a life into this world, it deserves a whole lot more than to be forgotten in the backseat of a car.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Erik Bishoff]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Parents Need to Step into the Hot Seat and Take Responsibility for Hot Car Deaths appeared first on Law Street.

A 19-year-old Oklahoma teen named Matthew Durham has admitted to raping and molesting young girls and boys on a missionary trip to Kenya. Durham was volunteering with a group called Upendo and living with the children at the time of the assaults.

Why does this kind of story not surprise me? Maybe because White people have been going to the African continent for decades claiming to help, while actually causing serious harm. Whether they’re enslaving us, stealing our natural resources, or claiming our land; White people have a knack for hurting the people of Africa.

Durham was arrested last Thursday at his parents’ home in Edmond, Oklahoma after he fled Kenya due to the allegations, according to the Daily Mail. The founder of Upendo, Eunice Menja, told the FBI that Durham admitted to raping between four and ten children, including one who is HIV-positive, between April and June of this year.

According to KTLA 5, this was the fourth time Durham had visited Nairobi with Upendo, which was designed to help neglected Kenyan children. The organization’s vision statement reads, “One child at a time — while we envision a community with no more child poverty, no more child abuse but every child with each basic need met.” Oh the irony, oh the hypocrisy, it’s too much I can’t handle it.

Now it’s hard to completely blame Upendo. How were they to know that Durham was secretly into little children? But the one question that arose when I read this story was why was he allowed to sleep in the same place as these kids in the first place? He was there to help the kids, not to have a slumber party. So for that Upendo, I believe you failed.

But Durham’s lawyer doesn’t seem to think so. Stephen Jones, the lawyer who defended Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, says that Menja forced a false confession from the teenage boy with “psychological voodoo.”

Yeah, we’ll see how that holds up in court.

Jones went on to say, “I don’t think Hollywood could make up what happened at this so-called orphanage. We’re on the ground in Kenya now. We’re finding out a lot about these people. This place is right on the outskirts of Nairobi. It’s like some cult over there.”

Whether or not this “so-called orphanage” is a legitimate foundation is not the issue here. Multiple children have come forward and said that Durham touched them in inappropriate places or made them watch as he touched other kids in inappropriate places. Now whether or not you believe in voodoo is up to you, but the fact that multiple children have come forward and spoken on Durham’s behavior has to mean something, and while I get that it is your job to defend your client Mr. Jones, it seems to me like you are grasping at air.

Obviously, most of the blame falls on Durham. Even if you are exploring your sexuality you have absolutely no right to explore it with children. Mr. Durham, don’t you think that these kids have already been through enough in their short lives? Don’t you think the daily hardship that these kids have to endure is already taxing enough without you forcing yourself on them? Don’t you think that these four to ten year olds deserved to grow up just a tad bit more before they were introduced to the complicated world of sex? No. You didn’t think Mr. Durham, and for that you deserve to spend a considerable amount of time in prison to do just that.

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Geraint Rowland via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Africa Gets Screwed Over Once Again by the White Man appeared first on Law Street.

While the World Cup brought some of the mot talented soccer players to the forefront, it also brought out some of the savviest criminals along with it. Much like the South African World Cup in 2010, spectators venturing to Brazil this summer were told to be wary and vigilant as crime was expected to make a meteoric rise as the games went on. Sadly, they were correct. From the cloning of debit cards to rudimentary muggings, fans from all over the world were victims of crimes during the World Cup

Crime was already on the rise in Rio de Janeiro in the months leading up to the World Cup, with muggings increasing an astounding 60 percent at the infamous Copacabana Beach. According to Rio’s crime statistics, muggings had increased 44 percent in the first four months of this year alone. As Brazil was expecting criminals to take advantage of the wide-eyed tourists exploring the country this summer, they started to “clean up” the infamous favelas. Police presence was amplified in the months leading up to the World Cup, which saw the arrests of dozens of hardened criminals. Despite this, fans still fell victim to crimes throughout the month-long tournament.

Jack Smith, an American who withdrew money in a Rio De Janeiro airport believes that his card was cloned instantaneously and used over the next couple of days to spend $12,000. Luckily, when he noticed the charges he immediately contacted his bank and they were able to cancel the card and cover the losses. “I’ve probably met 60 people here, and 20 have been hit,” Smith told Fox News. Some spectators were not as lucky as Smith and were unable to retrieve their stolen property.

Christian Alvarez, a Chilean fan, had $1,700 stolen from him at gunpoint outside his hotel. He contacted the Chilean consulate to try and get his money back but was unsuccessful. Another Chilean, Fabian Morales, lost his passport as he was celebrating Chile’s win over defending champions Spain.

Takeshi Itai, a Japanese tourist, was visiting a favela in the eastern region of Salvador when five men with guns approached his taxi. Luckily the taxi managed to drive away before the robbery could take place. “I’ll never go into a favela again. I never imagined I would have guns pulled on me,” Itai told the Japanese Times. Unfortunately for Brazil, it seems like the experiences from this World cup may discourage some fans from venturing to Rio for the 2016 Olympics.

At the start of the World Cup, the Brazilian government distributed a brochure detailing what to do in the event of a mugging. “Do not react, scream or ague,” the brochure said. They warned tourists to not carry a lot of cash on them, to not flaunt their valuables, and to do periodic checks to make sure no one was following them.

For those who could afford it, private security companies were available to provide round-the-clock security. iJET, a security company, estimates that between 30,000 to 60,000 people spent at least $10,000 on “enhanced security services,” at this World Cup. A lot of people are venturing down to the South American country not for pleasure, but for business. “These companies are sending their most valuable assets and customers down there,” John Rose, chief operator at iJET said.

Yet with the 25,000 police officers dispatched for the final, a 2-km police perimeter set around the stadium, and hundreds of personal security guards, chaos still ensued throughout the tournament. Fans watching the Brazil vs. Germany game at Fifa’s Fan Fest on Copacabana Beach were forced to flee after a group of masked men conducted a mass robbery, stealing bags and jewelry. An electronic store was looted, gunshots were fired into a large crowd, riots broke out, passports were stolen, fans fought each other, and buses were set ablaze. The buses burned in the neighborhoods of Sao Paulo, Brazil’s largest city; and when the flames were finally put out nineteen buses were destroyed in total.

In my eyes, Brazil has lost this World Cup on all accounts. Brazil certainly lost in on the field after an embarrassing  7-1 defeat by Germany, which will be remembered for decades. It has lost the faith of tourists, the people who traveled to Brazil in hopes of celebrating this joyous event and soaking in the Brazilian culture, but were instead held at gunpoint, robbed, and assaulted. And it has lost the faith of its own people, after spending so much money — $14 billion to be exact — while the country is plagued by massive economic inequality and an ailing economy. We can only hope that in four years, when the World Cup dawns upon us again, Russia will do better.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Breno Peck via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Brazil Lost the World Cup and the Battle Against Crime appeared first on Law Street.

So in New York, housing developers have the option to participate in an “inclusionary zoning program,” which requires them to set aside 20 percent of the units for affordable housing. This means that those apartments are granted to households making less than $42,950 a year.

Smart idea, NYC

Mayor Bill de Blasio wants to make inclusionary zoning mandatory in order to create more affordable units, according to The New York Times. De Blasio “hopes to get both bigger buildings and more affordable units within those buildings.”

New York, you’re on a roll!

But just as I’m about to clasp my hands together and give New York the standing ovation that I thought they deserved; they approved a plan for an Upper West Side condo building to have a separate door for low-income tenants. Yes, a separate door.

Now correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the days of Jim Crow Laws were long behind us. I mean we’ve elected a half-black President, a black attorney general, and honored the legendary Martin Luther King Jr. with a national holiday. This sends us back to 1920 when segregation ran rampant in this country. Are you happy New York? You took an innovative, progressive, awe-inspiring idea and just destroyed it.

The new Upper West Side apartment complex joins another building that already makes its lower class tenants use a “poor door.” Yes, there is another building where the rich have a separate door, just so they don’t have to rub shoulders with the poor. The apartment complex is in Williamsburg, a neighborhood once occupied by minorities and low-income citizens.

Gentrification at it’s finest folks. Disgusting.

“No one ever said that the goal was full integration of these populations, I think it’s unfair to expect very high-income homeowners who paid a fortune to live in their building to have to be in the same boat as low-income renters, who are very fortunate to live in a new building in a great neighborhood.”

This guy cant be serious…

First off, these really really rich people are not even close to being in the same boat as the low-income renters; they’re not even on the same island, hell they don’t even live on the same planet. They get to come home through the front door to their nicely furnished apartments and relax with a glass of red wine, while the “peasants” have to use the back entrance and hide their faces, for they are too poor to be seen. Who is he to demean a person’s life, who is he to say that the rich are better than the poor, who is he to disrespect the hardworking people of this country and strip them of their dignity through his comments?

Thankfully not everyone in New York agrees with this pompous idiot. Former City Council Speaker Christine Quinn told the New York Post, “I do not believe that these discriminatory practices were ever contemplated by the legislature, we need to change state law so that developers provide common entrances and facilities for residents in the building.”

You know New York, since you are the most diverse city in the world I thought you’d be better than this. I thought you were the city that inspired people, influenced masses, and made dreams come true. Not the city that discourages people and makes them believe they are worthless because of how much money is in their bank account. No one should be judged by how much money they make or whether they are renting or buying. New York, you are home to over 8 million people, and no matter how cliche you think it is, every single one of these people are special and unique. You do not get to choose who comes in the front and who goes in through the back. Poor or rich, black or white, people are people and you do not get to say otherwise.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Light Brigading via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NYC ‘Poor Doors’ Separate Rich and Poor Tenants appeared first on Law Street.

“Rape culture” is a term coined by feminists in the late 1970s to describe the way that society blamed rape victims and normalized male sexual violence. It described how our culture condoned physical and emotional harm toward women. It showed that we allowed women to get raped and men to get away with it. And sadly, the phrase is still apt throughout the globe today, 50 years later.

Yesterday, hundreds of people in Bangalore, India demonstrated outside a public school where a six-year-old girl was raped.

The incident happened at Bangalore’s Vibgyor School in early July, but it was only brought to light last week. No arrests have been made, but it has been reported that police have detained eight suspects in the case.

The pressure from the people of Bangalore is commendable, without their effort the Indian police force would not have taken this issue as seriously, and the girl’s rapist may have never been caught or even investigated.

We’ve come along way since the 1970s. It was in ’77 that Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl before fleeing to France without serious public uproar.

Since then, there have been major advances in the feminist movement, and people are finally starting to change the way they think about rape. Here are some examples of how people are have started to change the way women can protect themselves:

• A trio of Indian students created “anti-rape underwear” that delivers shocks and alerts the police to potential assaults. The device is cleverly named Society Harnessing Equipment (SHE), and is equipped with a GPS system and pressure sensors that make it capable to send a 3,800 kV shock.

• A group of Swedish girls designed an “anti-rape belt,” also referred to as a “reverse chastity belt.” It has a complex labyrinth of a latch that the wearer has to unlock, which is impossible to do without two hands. “The rapist can’t hold you down and open it at the same time. It takes a while to figure it out if you don’t know what you’re doing,” one of the creators said.

• A South African doctor designed a condom called the “rape-axe” that is designed to dig into a rapist’s penis upon penetration. The jagged hooks cling on to the offender’s penis and create enough pressure to prevent the man from being able to urinate.

• Inventors added a little twist to the rape whistle: now there’s a keychain-like security device that sounds a loud alarm when pulled. The device is meant to scare the attacker while also alerting bystanders that you are in need of help.

• Two students at India’s National Institute of Fashion Technology created a jacket that is supposed to prevent sexual assault. The jacket discharges 110 volts of electricity when it detects unwanted pressure. A button is pressed by the person who is being assaulted, which then signals the jacket to stun the aggressor and temporarily disable him.

• A group of inventors created a test called Pd.id that determines whether or not your drink has been drugged. “The lighter sized sensor is dipped into your drink and performs electrical conductivity tests, temperature measurements, and spectroscopic analysis to determine the molecular makeup of your beverage.” If it does detect something, the sensor alerts the user with a red LED light.

So as you can see there is a lot being done to prevent girls from being raped, and while all these inventions are spectacular and innovative, there’s still one thing wrong; we’re placing the responsibility on women and girls. These inventions send out the message that prohibiting rape is up to the female, and that it is their own duty to make sure that they do not become a victim. Instead, we should be holding our men accountable and teaching our boys that it is their responsibility to respect women.

Many of our conversations these days focus on preventive behavior, telling women not to get drunk, what not to wear, when and where to go out. This is rape culture.

Rape culture is telling women to “be careful” when they leave the house, or to put on something “less revealing.” Rape culture is shaming women for who they sleep with, how they walk, how they talk, what they drink, where they go. Rape culture is protecting our men, and condemning our girls; and I think it’s about time we change that. Not all men sexually assault women, but at one point or another in their lives, most women will be sexually assaulted by a man. We’ve been to the moon, cured numerous diseases, taken flight, and beaten our preconceived prejudices. I think we’re advanced enough to stop shifting the blame off men, and start respecting our women. I think it’s time we stop accepting rape culture, and start refuting it. Don’t you?

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Chase Carter via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Yes. All. Women. appeared first on Law Street.

We’ve all experienced the bystander effect at one point or another in our lives. Whether you kept walking as a mother punished her child at the local park, or looked the other way when someone stashed a shirt from a store in their bag. Bystander effect knows no bounds and you will be affected by it at some point in your life.

Americans are nosy when it comes to Hollywood celebrities and their lives.

But when it comes to normal citizens, we don’t seem to want to get involved in their personal lives because of the “risks” involved.

Last Tuesday afternoon, a 27-year-old McDonalds worker named Catherine Ferreira was brutally beaten after work by her co-worker Latia Harris, 25. What Harris did is unequivocally brutal. In my eyes what is even worse is the bystanders who not only stood by and watched Ferreira get thrown around like a rag doll, but pulled out their phones and videotaped the event. You can watch it below if you’re so inclined but be aware that the video is graphic.

There are some cases when you just shouldn’t get involved, but when someone is getting beaten to a bloody pulp in front of her child, I believe that it is the bystander’s duty to step in and intervene. Whether it is verbally or physically, you cannot just sit by and watch a person get battered, and if you do, you might as well throw in a couple of punches yourself because you’re honestly just as bad.

Shaking My Head.

To the people in the video standing by watching and recording as the woman’s son pleads for Harris to stop pummeling his mother: shame on you. To the kids who record videos of fights and yell “worldstar!” as punches are being thrown: shame on you. To all the men and women who record drunk people as they make fools of themselves: shame on you. And to make matters worse, these videos are recorded for the sole reason of getting attention. Newsflash people, if your video goes viral on the web, that makes you about as famous as…

Honey Boo Boo…..

I’m no saint. I know that I am guilty of looking the other way from time to time. But what I do possess are morals and a conscience. Let me define those terms, because it seems like we have forgotten what they mean as a society. Now we could delve into the discussion of what morals really mean, and I could bring up Kant, Hume, and Nietzsche and we can discuss it for hours upon hours. But to save us time I’m just going to give you the Trevor Smith definitions.

Morals: A set of just standards that we conform to because we are civilized beings.

Conscience: That little voice inside your head that tells you when something is really wrong.

I know that we have evolved into a society that condones fighting, which is why people may not see the problem with Harris beating the shit out of her co-worker. But have our consciences disappeared? Did the little boy pleading for the fight to end not just break your heart? Did Ferreira’s limp body not make you want to jump in and say, “Hey Latia, I think she’s had enough?” No? I guess not.

Ah Choooooo

As a society our moral compass is starting to point in the wrong direction. We don’t need more videographers recording our worst moments, we need more heroes to step in and stand up to the Latia Harrises of the world. So I’m going to challenge you: the next time you see an argument heat up, or a kid getting bullied, or a fast food worker getting mistreated, say something. I promise you’ll feel great about yourself, and it will make a world of difference for the person you’re helping.

That felt good

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Taylor Sloan via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bystanders? More like Bye Standards. appeared first on Law Street.

Meriam Ibrahim, the 27-year-old Christian woman who was jailed for apostasy in Sudan and sentenced to death by hanging last May has finally been set free, again.

Ibrahim’s story has gone global as she is the only Sudanese woman to escape a death sentence without renouncing her faith. Ibrahim was convicted of apostasy, the renunciation of one’s religion, after marrying a Christian man, Daniel Wani in 2011. The Sudanese government sentenced Ibrahim to death after she birthed her child, but through the efforts of diplomats and other world leaders, Ibrahim was released from jail and the charges were dropped.

Ibrahim’s release seemed to be a step forward by the hard-ass Islamic government in Sudan. It seemed that they had finally realized how barbaric they were being. But just as I raised my hands up to applaud the Sudanese government, they went and re-arrested the poor woman.

Liars! I say liars! Ibrahim barely had 24 hours of freedom before she was arrested for trying to leave the country. Really? Just for trying to leave after being imprisoned for holding on to her faith. Sudan, I didn’t hold your policies in the highest regard before, but now I am so ashamed, I can barely look you in the eye.

So ashamed.

Thankfully she was re-released on the condition that she remains in Sudan, according to her lawyer. She now faces forgery charges because of the travel documents she attempted to use to fly out of the country. South Sudan gave visas to the family to travel to America because the husband, Wani, is recognized as a citizen there. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said that Ibrahim had all the documents needed to travel to the U.S., but that “it is up to the government of Sudan to allow her to exit the country.” Sudan sounds like a clingy ex if you ask me.

You would think that through all this Ms. Ibrahim would at least have the support of her family right? Wrong. Her own brother was quoted by CNN saying, “The family is unconvinced by the court’s decision. We were not informed by the court that she was to be released; this came as a surprise to us…This is now an issue of honor. The Christians have tarnished our honor, and we will know how to avenge it.”

Who said blood was thicker than water?

If it wasn’t for the international outcry by so many official figures across the world, Ms. Ibrahim wouldn’t have been saved. But support has come from notable figures such as British Prime minister David Cameron who said he was “absolutely appalled,” by the sentence given by the court, and told The Times that “religious freedom is an absolute, fundamental human right, I urge the government of Sudan to overturn the sentence and immediately provide appropriate support and medical care for her and her children.”

Amnesty International headed a campaign demanding the immediate release and halted execution of Ibrahim, started a Change.org petition that has gained more than 600,000 signatures, and released a statement saying, “the fact that a woman has been sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion is appalling and abhorrent. Adultery and apostasy are acts which should not be considered crimes at all. It is a flagrant breach of international human rights law.”

The U.S. State Department said it was “deeply disturbed” by the sentence and called on the Sudanese government to respect Ms. Ibrahim’s religious freedoms.

And to put the sweet icing on top of the justice cake, tweets calling on the Sudanese government to release Ibrahim from Hillary Clinton, David Cameron, and British personality Laura Laverne were retweeted thousands of times.

I am absolutely appalled by the decision to sentence #MeriamIbrahim to death. The way she is being treated has no place in today's world.

— David Cameron (@David_Cameron) May 31, 2014

Meriam Yahya Ibrahim’s death sentence is abhorrent. Sudan should stop threatening religious freedom and fundamental human rights.

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) May 24, 2014

#Sudan: pregnant mother sentenced to death for apostasy. Take action to save her life https://t.co/fQqZlRIRxx

— Lauren Laverne (@laurenlaverne) May 21, 2014

The problem at hand here is the so called “Freedom of Religion” in Sudan. In 2005 the Interim National Constitution of Sudan provided freedom of religion throughout the entire country, but in practice religious minorities exist between the North and the South. Christians in the North face strong social pressure to convert, and Muslims who express interest in converting face even stronger pressures to recant. Ibrahim was the first woman who did not have to convert religions to be released. Forcing women into believing in a certain religion doesn’t seem all that holy to me, and while the step is small, Ms. Ibrahim’s case is a step in the right direction.

Although she is being forced to stay in Sudan, I have a strong feeling that Amnesty International, the U.S. State Department, the British Parliament, and Hillary Clinton will all still have a strong voice in the matter and Ms. Ibrahim and her family will be free at last.

Bring it

—

Trevor Smith

Featured imaged courtesy of [Waiting for the Word via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Meriam Ibrahim: Free at Last? appeared first on Law Street.

I’d like to think my article from last week played a part in the important decision made today, but the true heroes are the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Congratulations, you get the Trevor seal of approval.

The USPTO canceled six federal trademark registrations for the name “Washington Redskins” today, saying that the name is “disparaging to Native Americans” and thus cannot be trademarked under federal law.

I’m actually dancing.

Lead attorney Jesse Witten of Drinker Biddle & Reath filed the case before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board on behalf of five Native Americans.  “We presented a wide variety of evidence including dictionary definitions and other reference works, newspaper clippings, movie clips, scholarly articles, expert linguist testimony, and evidence of the historic opposition by Native American groups to demonstrate that the word ‘redskin’ is an ethnic slur,” Witten said in a press release.

Federal trademark law does not allow trademarks that could be considered offensive or racist to groups, so the ruling has stripped the Redskins of six different trademarks associated with the team, each containing the word “redskin.”

What does this mean for the Washington Redskins? They could potentially be forced to change the name of the team since they wouldn’t be able to make any money off of anything with the Redskins name or logo. But, Native Americans have been down this road before. In 1992 the Trial and Appeals Board rescinded the team’s trademark, only for it to be overturned in a federal court ruling after the team appealed.

The Redskins will still have rights to their name for the time being as they are expected to appeal the decision much like in 1992, but I have a strong feeling that this time it will be different and people will finally come to their senses and realize that the name is atrociously racist. So everybody please cross your fingers with me.

Daniel Snyder will fight tooth and nail to keep the name of his precious team, and I just learned today that the outspoken owner has a backup plan. Snyder had the name “Washington Warriors” trademarked more than ten years ago according to the Washington City Paper. This convinces me even more that he realizes the Redskins name is offensive, racist, derogatory, disrespectful, hurtful, obnoxious (I could go for days but I’ll stop with obnoxious), otherwise he wouldn’t need a backup name.

I guess I’m okay with Warriors

Native Americans won this battle but the war is not close to being over, it could be months and even years before we see the Redskins change their name and logo. But as a wise man named Trevor Smith once said, “we’ll fight and we’ll fight until we cant fight anymore, because our cause is just but our patience is poor!”

In all seriousness though, this was a great outcome for Native Americans around the country. The five plaintiffs should be extremely proud of their courage and determination as they could be the ones who finally get the organization to change its name.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [RedSoxFan33 via DeviantArt]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dan Snyder is Definitely Pissed Off by Redskins Trademark Loss and I Love It appeared first on Law Street.

The possibility of government regulation of noncompete clauses in the business world has been a hot topic in recent months – especially throughout the tech industry. Now it seems that the debate has expanded to an array of other smaller industries, including the ever-so-competitive camp counseling field.

According to the New York Times, 19-year-old college student Colette Buser was passed over for a summer counselor job in Wellesley, Mass. in fear that nearby LINX camp would sue. Apparently Buser had a noncompete clause tucked into her contract from the previous summer, which prevented her from working within ten miles of a LINX location. According to the Times, everyone from “chefs to investment fund managers to yoga instructors, employees are increasingly required to sign agreements that prohibit them from working for a company’s rivals.”

LINX tried defending its actions to the Boston Herald, claiming that its training methods are just as crucial as the confidential intel that tech companies using noncompetes have. LINX President Joe Kahn said that the company uses these clauses because they train employees using unique methods and have seen counselors get hired mid-summer as babysitters. “Much like a tech company would be protective of their technology and proprietary information, we’re protective of our customer information,” said Kahn.

Buser is not the only person who has been affected by noncompete clauses recently. According to the Boston Herald there have been plenty of other instances where former employees found themselves in trouble because of a noncompete clause.

• A student trying to intern at a tech firm was requested to sign a one-year noncompete.
• A Massachusetts man whose job involved spraying pesticides on lawns was asked to sign a two-year noncompete agreement.
• A Boston University graduate was asked to sign a one-year noncompete for an entry-level social media job at a marketing firm.
• Phil Poireir, a pastor at a Megachurch in Seattle, was let go because he refused to sign a noncompete contract.
• A hair salon in Norwell, Mass., obtained an injunction requiring hairstylist Daniel McKinnon to stop working at a nearby salon because he had signed a noncompete, which prohibited him from working at any salon in neighboring towns for a year.

In McKinnon’s case, he was forced to live on unemployment benefits for months. “I almost lost my truck, I almost lost my apartment. Almost everything came sweeping out from under me,” McKinnon told the Times.

From the employer’s perspective, noncompete clauses make sense. The company has invested its time and money into training its employees, so it would only be logical to protect those investments. But it seems that some companies are taking it a bit overboard. Can one hairdresser really cause a business to flop? What does it say about your company if you’re trying to scare your employees to stay committed? These are the questions that businesses need to ask themselves when they put noncompete clauses in their employees’ contracts.

Many noncompete clauses put people like Daniel McKinnon out of work for weeks and even months at a time. MIT professor Matthew Marx thinks that people should have the freedom to come and go as they please. “There was a saying at the Silicon Valley startup where I worked, ‘You never stop hiring someone.’ They can go where they want. People are free to leave and start companies if they’re not happy,” Marx said.

Over the past year there has been a 60 percent rise in departing employees who face lawsuits from their former bosses for breaching these agreements, the Wall Street Journal reported. These disputes lead to long, drawn out court battles that impede productivity on both sides of the disagreement.

Many legislators are trying to bar noncompetes in various states throughout the country. State Representative and Vice Chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development, Lori Ehrlich,  contends that noncompetes are hurting growth in our economy by “decreasing working mobility and squelching startups.”

Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts has proposed a bill that will make it easier for workers in all types of industries to move from one job to another with ease by banning noncompete agreements. These agreements seem to cripple employees’ ability to be innovative, leaving them befuddled and frustrated with their inability to advance.

While the fear that former employees may take confidential information is understandable, companies should sue if, and only if, the former employee is caught doing so, not beforehand. Should their personal knowledge be considered company information? Does that make sense to anyone out there?

Currently, only California and North Dakota ban noncompete clauses according to the Herald. So if you are working for a company and you have a brilliant idea for a new startup, you can go to California or North Dakota and the judge will not honor the agreement. Since startups in North Dakota aren’t exactly booming, I would look to the Golden State.

— Trevor Smith Featured Image Courtesy of [Penn State via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Want to be a Camp Counselor? Better Check Your Noncompete Clause appeared first on Law Street.

I’ve had trouble with the Redskins name ever since I was in elementary school. I never understood why the mascot of a professional football team was just a man with some feathers on his head. You would think that if a seven-year-old kid can see the wrong in naming a team “Redskins,” then adults would too. But sadly many of them do not. So to help get my point across, for the rest of this article I will refer to them as the R*dskins.

Daniel Snyder, owner of the R*dskins since 1999, has been pressured to change the name of the team by fans, politicians, and various advocacy groups who feel that the name is derogatory to Native Americans. In May 2013, in response to a question regarding the team’s name, Snyder told USA Today, “We’ll never change the name. It’s that simple. NEVER – you can use caps.”

Seriously?

I get that you’re from Maryland Mr.Snyder, I am too. And I get that you are a die-hard R*dskins fan, though I am not. But can you seriously not see the racism behind the name of your team?

You are literally taking a whole group of people and turning them into caricatures, and when asked to just think about changing the name to something less offensive, your response is always a loud and clear.

Now, my issue with the name of the R*dskins is not just with Daniel Snyder, it goes a lot deeper than that. My issue runs with the players, the fans, the coaches, the media, and the NFL. Any and all these people could take a stand against Snyder and the R*dskins organization and possibly make a change. But who cares about Native Americans right? We only came to their country, took their land, killed their people, and made it ours. Then to rub salt in the wounds we took a stereotypical image of a Native American and made it a mascot alongside the likes of  falcons, jaguars, ravens, bears, rams, and a ton of other animals. Is that what you see Native Americans as, R*dskins fans? Animals?

You should be ashamed

I’ve been having this argument for years and years, and I have heard the same arguments as to why the R*dskins are a nice, genuine, wholesome team who are just misunderstood. I’ve heard the, “It’s been like that for so long, it would be weird to change the name now,” excuse. Well…

Slavery was normal in America for more than 200 years. People thought it would be “weird” if we gave Black people in America the same rights as White people. Laws change, social systems crumble, but universal truths are constant. What is true and right is true and right for all.

So often when I’m having this argument I say, “What if the team was called ‘Washington Blackskins’ with a Black person wearing a do-rag?” The person is often quiet for a very long moment before replying, “It’s not the same.”

How? How is it not the exact same thing? So what is racist for Black people isn’t racist for Native Americans? That in itself sounds racist to me, and whenever someone says that to me I just simply…

spazz out.

What’s funny to me is that most R*dskins fans are Black, and you would think that they would be more sensitive to racial slurs. I am willing to bet all the money in my bank account that if the team were called the “Washington Blackskins,” there would be a march on Washington, Black religious leaders and other Black activist would be holding press conferences, and a social media campaign with a witty hash tag would be in full effect. Since the slur isn’t directed at the Black community, we don’t really seem to care.

whatever right?

To Snyder, the NFL, and all of the team’s fans, the name isn’t racist. They see it as an entity to be proud of. They’ve watched R*dskins “heroes” such as Joe Gibbs, Sean Taylor, Clinton Portis, and many more, give a good chunk of their lives to this organization. Well I’m sorry to be the one to break it to you, R*dskins fans: these guys are not heroes. In fact, they played an essential part in the continuing racism that plagues America today. Also, the original owner of the team, George Marshall, was a loud and proud bigot. He was the last owner in the NFL to integrate his team, and only did so because he was forced to do so by the federal government. “We’ll start signing Negroes, when the Harlem Globetrotters start signing Whites,” Marshall once said. This is the history that makes R*dskins fans proud?

I wish i could roll my eyes further into my head.

Just because you think it isn’t offensive doesn’t mean that it actually isn’t. In fact, many Native Americans do find the name to be incredibly insulting.

• Oneida Nation has encouraged Americans to lobby the NFL in support of the name change at www.changethemascot.org.
• A group of Native Americans sued the team back in 2013 arguing against the team’s trademark rights to the name. Trademarks that are deemed racist are illegal under U.S. federal law.
• The 2,000-man protest at the 1992 Super Bowl consisted of members from various tribes (Chippewa, Sioux, Winnebago, Choctaw).
•  Hundreds protested at the home stadium in Landover, Md. on Thanksgiving day 2013.
• The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) issued a video last year that consists of leaders from seven different tribes calling for the name to be changed, and released a new and even more powerful video showing everything that American Indians are, R*dskin not being one of them.

Thankfully they are not competely alone in their fight to get the R*dskins to change their name. There have been numerous politicians, former athletes, and plain old citizens who have helped in the conflict.

• President Barack Obama said, “If I were the owner of the team and I knew that there was a name of my team — even if it had a storied history — that was offending a sizable group of people, I’d think about changing it.”
• DC Mayor Vincent Gray said that if the team wanted to relocate from Maryland to DC they would have to consider changing their name.
• Fifty senators sent a letter to the NFL (really just Roger Goodell) saying that the NFL needs to change the name.

“The NFL can no longer ignore this and perpetuate the use of this name as anything but what it is: a racial slur,” the letter reads. “We urge the NFL to formally support a name change for the Washington football team…We urge you and the National Football League to send the same clear message as the NBA did: that racism and bigotry have no place in professional sports.”

thank you… its about damn time

Native Americans aren’t cartoons. They aren’t caricatures, or mascots. They are people like you and me, and deserve to be treated with a lot more respect than we have given them over the past hundred years. Their voice may be small in America, but it can still be clearly heard, and as long as one Native American is offended by the word, I think it’s worth discussing what can be done to fix that.

So, I’m going to help out you R*dskins fans a little bit since I don’t hold grudges. Instead of the R*dskins, you could call yourselves the Pigskins! The name still has the same syllables as the original name, it’s a lot less racist, and pigs are super cute and super smart. You could even have RG3 race a pig across the field to start every game or something.

HTTP- Hail To The Pigskins!

That was just a suggestion off the top of my head, you could change it to literally anything and it would probably be better than the R*dskins. Just please for the love of god change that racist name.

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Keith Allison via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s Past Time to Change the Racist Redskins Name. Why Aren’t You Angry? appeared first on Law Street.

Citizens of the UK have just two weeks to protect themselves from a dangerous computer virus that could potentially give hackers access to their personal information and cost the country billions of pounds. The National Crime Agency (NCA) said in a statement that they urge citizens to protect themselves from any malicious software by updating their anti-virus software and running frequent scans on their computers. UK based internet awareness group Get Safe Online said, “This warning is not intended to give you panic, but we cannot over-stress the importance of taking these steps immediately.”

The announcement comes after the FBI successfully stopped a group of hackers who were holding peoples personal information hostage, but the disruption is only temporary. The viruses are known as GOZeuS and CryptoLocker, and each is incredibly harmful and can invade your email, bank accounts, and other personal information.

GOZeuS hides itself within email attachments, and when opened can give hackers access to your computer. CryptoLocker is a secondary virus that activates if no valuable information is detected. This virus locks the computer from the user and does not give back access until a ransom is paid. If the victims do not pay on time, they lose the ability to do so and risk having their data permanently encrypted.

Hackers usually demand $300 to $700, typically requested in bitcoins. Andy Archibald, Deputy Director of the NCA’s National Cyber Crime Unit, said: “Nobody wants their personal financial details, business information or photographs of loved ones to be stolen or held to ransom by criminals. By making use of this two-week window, huge numbers of people in the UK can stop that from happening to them.”

Cybercrime is often overlooked and seen as a laughable crime to be affected by, but its seriousness is very real. According to the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) there were 262,813 reports of cybercrime last year, resulting in the losses over $781 million.

The IC3 became aware of the malicious CryptoLock in October of 2013 and have since become more knowledgeable of the malware and how it operates. The virus is so intricately designed that it is nearly impossible to completely wipe out.

Whether you find online security complicated, boring, or useless, now is the time to take action as cybercrimes are prevalent and could cost you immensely. There are numerous places where you can find cyber security help if you don’t know where to start.

Get Safe Online is a UK based website that focuses on providing information on online safety. According to its website it is “a unique resource providing practical advice on how to protect yourself, your computers, and mobile devices against fraud, identity theft, viruses and many other problems encountered online.” There are plenty of similar resources like Get Safe Online in America as well. US-Cert stands for United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team, which deals with major incidents, analyze threats, and exchange critical cyber security information with other trusted outlets.

The criminals committing cybercrimes are much smarter than your average criminal and are highly skilled in the art of staying anonymous. To keep you and your personal information safe, it is vital that you update your security software as often as possible and think twice before clicking on links or attachments from strange emails.

[Get Safe Online]

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Don Hankins via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UK Citizens Face Massive Online Threat appeared first on Law Street.