Week 3 EOC: Stolen Valor Act

The Supreme Court struck down the Stolen Valor Act that congress passed in 2006. Under the act, it is a crime to lie about winning US military medals..  The court ruled that the act was unconstitutional because it violated the free speech rights of those making false claims about winning medals.

            The court apparently didn’t want to get involved in the messy business of determining which about which subjects lies are legal and which ones lies are punishable.

“The prospect that Congress might move to outlaw other kinds of statements understandably prompted rights groups, writers, publishers, and news media outlets to urge that the Supreme Court overturn the Valor Act.[… At stake was whether the government could decree that otherwise harmless speech on any subject could be prosecuted. – Philadelphia Inquirer

           

As Reuters says, “The nation well knows that one of the costs of the First Amendment is that it protects the speech we detest as well as the speech we embrace, so while lying about receiving a Medal of Honor may be "contemptible," it is constitutionally protected free speech, as the Stolen Valor Act was struck down.”

Others are not so sure:

According to TIME, “the court held the First Amendment’s right to be vile pond scum protects those who boast falsely of military decorations as well as your normal, garden variety slime. “

Veteran’s groups are dismayed by the ruling. Meanwhile, The defense department announced plans to create a stolen valor website to help people determine if someone is lying about military medals. Lawmakers are trying to pass a revised, narrower version that would make it a misdemeanor for anyone to benefit financially from lying about military service or awards.

I can see how on the one hand this ruling protects speech which has no good purpose, but at the same time I agree that if the act was allowed to stand it would bring about all sorts of questions about what subjects it is ok to lie about and what ones it is not ok. I agree that sometimes people go to far with their lies, but where do you draw the line and who gets to decide where that line is. So I can see that a more narrowly worded law would be better.

Week 2 EOC:
Facts about the Erin Brokovich case, Anderson vs Pacific Gas and Electric:

• both sides agreed to arbitration in order to speed up the process
• because of the arbitration, details of it were kept secret, which angered some of the victims
• the case was settled in 1996 for $333 million in damages
• the plaintiffs attorneys got 40%, $133 million, then billed the clients an extra $10 million for expenses
• Erin Brokovich got $2 million
• 650 residents got part of the settlemen
• the average was $300,000 per victim
• some of the victims were upset about the amounts they received
• the plaintiffs attorneys didn't disburse the settlement money until 6 months after they got it, which is very unusual, no explanation was given for this
• unlike in the movie, once the case got going, the plaintiffs attorneys hired some big law firms to help them win the case

My opinion of the case:

I think the case is very interesting in that it shows how attorneys can help the victims of environmental damage get large settlements, even against very large and well connected companies like PG&E. If parts of the movie are to be believed, it also shows how the presence of a beautiful woman like Erin Brokovich can open doors and get information that would be unobtainable by normal means. This probably wouldn't be possible if our society wasn't so male dominated, with most power in the hands of men.

My opinion of lawyers:

Lawyers are a necessary part of our society. I think quite highly of those lawyers that fight for what I believe in, like environmental and consumer protection. Without them, the big companies would get away with far more things than they do now. On the other hand, some lawyers have a bad reputation in society and I feel it is deserved by the tactics they use and the ethics they have.

Week 1 EOC: Intro

I love traveling. The world we live in is a very beautiful place and the things to see are endless. I love to visit new places and because things are constantly changing, even revisiting old places can be very exciting for me. My curiosity is boundless and I always want to see what is around the next bend and the bends after that. This natural curiousity has led me to many amazing places, primarily national parks in the western United States, but other scenic areas also. I started traveling in my 20s but after some time, I realized that I was having trouble remembering all the places I went to. It is this desire to hold on to these memories that to led to my interest in photography. Originally my images were just these documents of the places I went to but eventually as I learned more and more about photography they became more art than simply documentary photographs. The photographs were meant for my eyes only and would have stayed that way had I not shown some of them to my friends at work, who really liked them and encouraged me to pursue photography. This blog is meant to be about my photography.