Monday, April 20, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/04/20/400447308/omalley-americas-economy-needs-sensible-rebalancing-not-pitchforks

O'Malley: America's Economy Needs 'Sensible Rebalancing,' Not 'Pitchforks'
NPR Staff
April 20, 2015

Photograph – Martin O'Malley

Martin O'Malley, former governor of Maryland, says he'll decide by late May whether he's running for president. Running would put him — even he seems to acknowledge — in an uphill battle against Hillary Clinton, currently the only Democrat who has declared.

O'Malley is positioning himself to Clinton's left, and even President Obama's left.

He's for a much higher minimum wage, and against a major trade deal — the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In an interview with NPR's Steve Inskeep, O'Malley also said he wants to increase Social Security benefits, even though some people would pay more taxes.

Surveys put O'Malley far behind Clinton. But, he's hoping his travels across the country can change that. Last month, he addressed a crowd in Iowa while standing on a chair. Last week, he gave a speech at Harvard. And this week, he's in the early primary state of South Carolina.

"I've been an executive and a progressive executive with a record of accomplishments," the former Baltimore mayor said of the difference between him and Clinton. "I think contrasts will become apparent."

(A full transcript of the discussion is available here.)

Interview Highlights

On Republicans' and Democrats' competing economic theories

I think what's going on right now, Steve, is you have a competition between two theories of how our economy actually works and how we generate economic growth that lifts us all. The Republican Party is doubling down on this trickle-down theory that says thou shalt concentrate wealth at the very top of our society. Thou shalt remove regulation from wherever you find it, even on Wall Street. And thou shalt keep wages low for American workers so that we can be more competitive. We have a different theory. Our theory as Democrats and as the longer arc of our story as Americans is that we believe that a stronger middle class is actually the cause of economic growth. What ails our economy right now is 12 years of stagnant or declining wages, and we need to fix this.

On Republican candidates' focus on economic opportunity

I mean, look, talk is cheap. And so there are two ways to go forward from here, and history shows this. One path is a sensible rebalancing that calls us back to our tried and true success story as the land of opportunity. The other is pitchforks.

There's history affords no other paths. We're either going to sensibly rebalance and do the things that allow our middle class to grow, that expands opportunities and allows workers to earn more when they're working harder. Or, we're going to go down a very, very bad path.

On whether large corporations are able to deal with regulation better than small businesses

Oh, certainly. I mean, our tax code's been turned into Swiss cheese. And certainly the concentrated wealth and accumulated power and the systematic deregulation of Wall Street has led to this situation where the economy isn't working for most of us. All of that is true. But it is not true that regulation holds poor people down or regulation keeps middle class from advancing. That's kind of patently bulls- - -.

On the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal

Yeah, I do oppose it. What's wrong with it is first and foremost that we're not allowed to read it before our representatives vote on it. What's wrong with it is that right now what we should be doing are things that make our economy stronger here at home. And it's my concern that the Trans-Pacific Partnership, this deal is a race to the bottom, a chasing of lower wages abroad, and I believe that that does nothing to help us build a stronger economy here at home.



http://www.citizen.org/TPP

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Job Loss, Lower Wages and Higher Drug Prices
PublicCitizen

Have you heard? The TPP is a massive, controversial "free trade" agreement currently being pushed by big corporations and negotiated behind closed doors by officials from the United States and 11 other countries – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam.

The TPP would expand the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) "trade" pact model that has spurred massive U.S. trade deficits and job loss, downward pressure on wages, unprecedented levels of inequality and new floods of agricultural imports. The TPP not only replicates, but expands NAFTA's special protections for firms that offshore U.S. jobs. And U.S. TPP negotiators literally used the 2011 Korea FTA – under which exports have fallen and trade deficits have surged – as the template for the TPP.

In one fell swoop, this secretive deal could:
– Offshore American jobs and increase income inequality,
– Jack up the cost of medicines,
– Sneak in SOPA-like threats to Internet freedom and empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards.
– Expose the U.S. to unsafe food and products,
– Roll back Wall Street reforms,
– Ban Buy American policies needed to create green jobs,

Although it is called a "free trade" agreement, the TPP is not mainly about trade. Of TPP's 29 draft chapters, only five deal with traditional trade issues. One chapter would provide incentives to offshore jobs to low-wage countries. Many would impose limits on government policies that we rely on in our daily lives for safe food, a clean environment, and more. Our domestic federal, state and local policies would be required to comply with TPP rules.

The TPP would even elevate individual foreign firms to equal status with sovereign nations, empowering them to privately enforce new rights and privileges, provided by the pact, by dragging governments to foreign tribunals to challenge public interest policies that they claim frustrate their expectations. The tribunals would be authorized to order taxpayer compensation to the foreign corporations for the "expected future profits" they surmise would be inhibited by the challenged policies.

We only know about the TPP's threats thanks to leaks – the public is not allowed to see the draft TPP text. Even members of Congress, after being denied the text for years, are now only provided limited access. Meanwhile, more than 500 official corporate "trade advisors" have special access. The TPP has been under negotiation for six years, and the Obama administration wants to sign the deal this year. Opposition to the TPP is growing at home and in many of the other countries involved.

TPP Corporate Empowerment Map: See which foreign corporations near you could use NAFTA-style investor rights to challenge laws and regulations under the TPP

– Factsheet Series: Learn how the TPP's investment rules harm Public Access to Essential Services, Public Health and the Environment

– Map: What Would the TPP Mean For Your State?

– Find out more on the blog: Read the latest on the TPP on Eyes on Trade




NPR – “Martin O'Malley, former governor of Maryland, says he'll decide by late May whether he's running for president. Running would put him — even he seems to acknowledge — in an uphill battle against Hillary Clinton, currently the only Democrat who has declared. O'Malley is positioning himself to Clinton's left, and even President Obama's left. He's for a much higher minimum wage, and against a major trade deal — the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In an interview with NPR's Steve Inskeep, O'Malley also said he wants to increase Social Security benefits, even though some people would pay more taxes. …. "I've been an executive and a progressive executive with a record of accomplishments," the former Baltimore mayor said of the difference between him and Clinton. "I think contrasts will become apparent." …. I think what's going on right now, Steve, is you have a competition between two theories of how our economy actually works and how we generate economic growth that lifts us all. …. One path is a sensible rebalancing that calls us back to our tried and true success story as the land of opportunity. …. On whether large corporations are able to deal with regulation better than small businesses: Oh, certainly. I mean, our tax code's been turned into Swiss cheese. And certainly the concentrated wealth and accumulated power and the systematic deregulation of Wall Street has led to this situation where the economy isn't working for most of us. All of that is true. But it is not true that regulation holds poor people down or regulation keeps middle class from advancing. That's kind of patently bulls- - -. …. On the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal: Yeah, I do oppose it. What's wrong with it is first and foremost that we're not allowed to read it before our representatives vote on it. What's wrong with it is that right now what we should be doing are things that make our economy stronger here at home. And it's my concern that the Trans-Pacific Partnership, this deal is a race to the bottom, a chasing of lower wages abroad, and I believe that that does nothing to help us build a stronger economy here at home. …. “We have a different theory. Our theory as Democrats and as the longer arc of our story as Americans is that we believe that a stronger middle class is actually the cause of economic growth. What ails our economy right now is 12 years of stagnant or declining wages, and we need to fix this.”

PUBLIC CITIZEN – In one fell swoop, this secretive deal could:
– Offshore American jobs and increase income inequality,
– Jack up the cost of medicines,
– Sneak in SOPA-like threats to Internet freedom and empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards.
– Expose the U.S. to unsafe food and products,
– Roll back Wall Street reforms,
– Ban Buy American policies needed to create green jobs,


I'm very interested in O'Malley. He is stressing the things that worry me most on the economic front, the shrinking of the Middle Class and rise of poverty due to 1970 level wages in a 2015 marketplace, and an increase in Social Security benefits. He says, of his background, "I've been an executive and a progressive executive with a record of accomplishments," the former Baltimore mayor said of the difference between him and Clinton. "I think contrasts will become apparent." I have some doubts about Clinton's stand on economic things, though I think she is a progressive on cultural issues. Above all, I would like as a voter to have a viable progressive Democratic alternative for 2016. On the TPP, this is the second time in the last week I've heard about it in these articles and it sounds to me like a very bad idea – no wonder many Democrats are opposing it and the Republicans are backing it. I'm sorry to say that Obama has been pushing it. Is he bowing to political pressure from big business, too?





RACE AND THE POLICE – TWO ARTICLES


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/motorist-shot-in-back-by-cop-lisa-mearkle-david-kassick/

Another case of motorist shot in back by cop gains notice
CBS/AP
April 19, 2015

Photograph – Lisa Mearkle, right, after being charged with criminal homicide.  WHP-TV

HARRISBURG, Pa. - the video from the camera attached to the officer's stun gun shows how david kassick died, authorities say: two bullets, four seconds apart, fired into his back as he lay face down.

Two months before a police officer was captured on video shooting a South Carolina motorist eight times in the back, Kassick was killed by a Pennsylvania officer who is now charged with criminal homicide.

"I think it would be impossible not to see some similarities between the two, inasmuch as the manner in which both individuals are shot," said Christopher Slusser, a lawyer working for Kassick's family who has viewed the video.

Unlike the video in the South Carolina case, which has itself resulted in a murder charge, the footage recorded by Hummelstown police Officer Lisa Mearkle's stun gun has not been released. Attorneys for the officer want to keep it that way: they asked a judge on Friday to bar the prosecution from releasing it.

Videos of police violence have raised raised new questions about the use of force by law enforcement. In addition to the South Carolina shooting, 10 sheriff's deputies in Southern California are on leave after attacking a suspect two weeks ago at the end of a three-hour chase in cars and on horseback.

Video shot by a KNBC Los Angeles helicopter showed two deputies kicking and punching 30-year old Francis Pusok as the man lay on the ground, hands behinds his back. More deputies joined in, striking him more than 50 times in total.

A preliminary hearing in the Pennsylvania case is scheduled for Monday to determine if there is enough evidence to send the case to trial. Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico said he plans to show the video if the hearing happens, though Mearkle may waive it. A hearing on the defense motion to prevent the video's release is scheduled for Tuesday.

In a statement, Kassick's family said they were "extremely pleased" that the DA had decided to press ahead with its case against Mearkle.

"The family is comforted by the knowledge that the individual who caused David's death will be held to answer for her cowardly and criminal behavior," the statement read.

Mearkle's lawyer, Brian Perry, describes her case as a matter of self-defense, arguing that Kassick repeatedly reached toward his waist while Mearkle commanded him to show his hands. She told investigators she fired because she feared he was reaching into his jacket for a gun.

Kassick, however, was unarmed when he was shot after fleeing from the Feb. 2 traffic stop prompted by expired inspections and emissions stickers, authorities said.

The fatal encounter was recorded by the camera on the stun gun Mearkle had already used in her bid to arrest Kassick. Such cameras are a popular feature on the devices, with current models able to record in high definition and color.

In the South Carolina case, a witness' cellphone captured the April 4 shooting ofWalter Scott. The video shows former North Charleston officer Michael Slagerfiring eight times as Scott ran from a traffic stop that began over a broken tail light.

Perry, who said he has not seen the video in Kassick's case, said the situation does not resemble the South Carolina shooting.

"She's giving the guy repeated commands to stop, she's giving him repeated commands to show his hands. She Tased him four times. They're completely different facts than shooting a guy running away in the back," Perry said

Slusser, however, said the video "leaves nothing to the imagination."

"Whether she would have been charged or not had the video not existed, I can't answer that," he said. "But I can tell you having that video, for me - I won't speak for the DA - but it made it very clear the DA had very little choice not to charge her."

Marsico said this week police have continued to investigate the matter and develop information about the case.

Perry said he is confident his client did what she thought was necessary in the moment.

"The ultimate question is, did Officer Mearkle believe that the actions that she took were necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury? That's the question. It's not what was found after-the-fact," Perry said. His answer? "100 percent."

Mearkle, 36, a 15-year veteran of the department, has been free on bail but is under electronic monitoring. She is suspended from the police department without pay.

The Kassick family's lawyers have taken out advertisements in local newspapers to solicit information about Mearkle's time as a police officer. Slusser said they have generated a good response and he is sharing the information with prosecutors.

The ad noted there have been online postings by people who claimed to know about "past incidents of civil rights violations and unnecessary force" by Mearkle. Borough officials did not return messages left in recent days seeking comment about the case.

Two weeks ago, Hummelstown residents petitioned the city council to do more about Mearkle, and many shared what could best be described as "unpleasant" experiences with the office, as well as a pattern of mistrust between her and the community, reports CBS affiliate WHP-TV in Harrisburg.

"It sounds like a lot of people around town have had negative experiences with this officer," said Andy Hoover, a local resident who spearheaded a petition demanding answers in the case.

WHP reports that one of the main complaints from residents is that the borough seems to be dodging some requests from people and the media about the department's pursuit policy and Mearkle's disciplinary record.

Mearkle's charge of criminal homicide could ultimately result in a range of charges, from misdemeanor involuntary manslaughter to felony first-degree murder. The charge against her may be narrowed at formal arraignment, if the case gets past the preliminary hearing.

Slusser said he does not know why Kassick, 59, ran from Mearkle, although Kassick had problems with substance abuse and police recovered a syringe near his body that may have been his. Alcohol and unspecified drugs were found in his system, Marsico has said.

"Should he have run from the officer? No, of course not," Slusser said. "However, his running from the officer doesn't justify his death."




"Video shot by a KNBC Los Angeles helicopter showed two deputies kicking and punching 30-year old Francis Pusok as the man lay on the ground, hands behinds his back. More deputies joined in, striking him more than 50 times in total. …. Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico said he plans to show the video if the hearing happens, though Mearkle may waive it. A hearing on the defense motion to prevent the video's release is scheduled for Tuesday. …. In a statement, Kassick's family said they were "extremely pleased" that the DA had decided to press ahead with its case against Mearkle. …. Mearkle's lawyer, Brian Perry, describes her case as a matter of self-defense, arguing that Kassick repeatedly reached toward his waist while Mearkle commanded him to show his hands. She told investigators she fired because she feared he was reaching into his jacket for a gun. assick, however, was unarmed when he was shot after fleeing from the Feb. 2 traffic stop prompted by expired inspections and emissions stickers, authorities said. …. Slusser, however, said the video "leaves nothing to the imagination." Whether she would have been charged or not had the video not existed, I can't answer that," he said. "But I can tell you having that video, for me - I won't speak for the DA - but it made it very clear the DA had very little choice not to charge her." …. The Kassick family's lawyers have taken out advertisements in local newspapers to solicit information about Mearkle's time as a police officer. Slusser said they have generated a good response and he is sharing the information with prosecutors. The ad noted there have been online postings by people who claimed to know about "past incidents of civil rights violations and unnecessary force" by Mearkle. ….

“Two weeks ago, Hummelstown residents petitioned the city council to do more about Mearkle, and many shared what could best be described as "unpleasant" experiences with the office, as well as a pattern of mistrust between her and the community, reports CBS affiliate WHP-TV in Harrisburg.” The people are getting more savvy, thorough and bold in dealing with police violence, it seems to me. The lawyer ran an ad asking for witnesses just like “Perry Mason” has done in those good old shows. The longstanding tradition of giving the police the benefit of the doubt, as one official expressed it recently, is not a good idea. The police are sufficiently powerful at all times and don't need that extra help. We need justice.

One thing I'm sure of is that police officers everywhere need to be retrained and regularly supervised. They should try a nonviolent approach before they fire their gun unless they or someone else are menaced. One very interesting article from the last couple of months was on the surprisingly low incidence of police killings in England and in some other European nations. It is possible to apprehend a suspect most of the time without shooting them. In this case the female officer had the advantage and should have been able to grasp the victims hands to put on the handcuffs. She also should have had a partner to help subdue suspects. From city to city, several times a week the officers keep making the same kinds of errors, misjudgments and possibly purposeful assaults.

The claim “I feared for my life” is being used so often that it's becoming monotonous and sounds like a coached response, almost. It's also being allowed by the courts to exonerate police officers in nearly case. We need more cameras, patrolling in teams of two, and more training – acting in “fear” or simply “on the spur of the moment” without thinking things through should not dominate these situations as it now does.

Those are real problems. Officers need to ask themselves, are running away, passively resisting without having a weapon, “talking back,” a consarned old broken taillight, or even an existing arrest warrant for a minor problem such as failure to pay child support when the man is destitute – worthy of the death penalty? No court in the land would say they are under any other circumstance. Guns are very deadly, and I think the use of them should be much less common. I also believe that blatant excuses like a broken taillight should not be used as the reason for a high-speed car chase. Those things endanger the other citizens who are out driving or walking on the roadway. Death can occur out of sheer stupidity as well as malice and the victim is equally dead in either case.

Only responsible, intelligent, reasonably well educated, highly trained, honest and compassionate people should be police officers. They are public servants, not soldiers in some war zone. See the article below on the British police and the matter of guns. It is very informative and interesting, including interviews with members of the British public and police officers. One bobby states, “"I was previously injured badly in an assault. My colleague and I feared for our lives - thankfully other officers came to our aid. I don't think a gun - or a Taser for that matter - would have helped us in that situation. Communication is one of the best tools, and to be honest, having a gun could make an officer feel over-confident."

One central thing that is true of American police officers, that many of them rather than just a few are on a power trip in dealing with their communities and they are indeed very “over-confident.” That, along with a certain American trend toward corruption among policemen – from the willingness to plant evidence to stealing drug money or accepting bribes – is the worst thing wrong with our officers. They think they are invulnerable and have a right to do anything at all. Basic moral structure has broken down. This wouldn't happen if the courts didn't back them up no matter what they do, all the way up to and including some Supreme Court rulings and certain federal laws such as RICO and the Patriot Act. Richard Nixon campaigned on “Law and Order,” and while we certainly do need those things, we shouldn't sacrifice human rights to get them. Besides, a broken taillight is not a lack of Law and Order. Some of the things they are caught doing are simply unnecessary."




http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19641398

Why British police don’t have guns
BBC News Magazine
By Jon Kelly
19 September 2012

The deaths of two female police constables have brought into focus the unarmed status of most British police. Why does Britain hold firm against issuing guns to officers on the beat?

It's the single most obvious feature that sets the British bobby apart from their counterparts overseas.

Tourists and visitors regularly express surprise at the absence of firearms from the waists of officers patrolling the streets.

But to most inhabitants of the UK - with the notable exception of Northern Ireland - it is a normal, unremarkable state of affairs that most front-line officers do not carry guns.

Unremarkable, that is, until unarmed officers like Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone are killed in the line of duty. There are always those who question why Britain is out of step with most of the rest of the world, with the exceptions of the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and a handful of other nations.

View from a bobby

A police constable serving in a city in southern England gives his view:

"I have been in the police for 12 years, before that I was in the Army. I would happily carry a gun if the decision was made but it won't ever happen.

"I don't think practically it could work because of the training. Officers in this country are highly trained and this would extend to firearms training, too. But, at the moment, with all the cuts, we can't put enough officers in the cars, let alone give them firearms training.

"Also, the police in this country are always under so much scrutiny. Look at the issue of Tasers, the civil liberty groups think they are one of the most inhumane things going.

"I was previously injured badly in an assault. My colleague and I feared for our lives - thankfully other officers came to our aid. I don't think a gun - or a Taser for that matter - would have helped us in that situation. Communication is one of the best tools, and to be honest, having a gun could make an officer feel over-confident."

The police are the public and vice versa

Police should not be armed – Orde

For a heavily urbanised country of its population size, the situation in Great Britain is arguably unique.

Film director Michael Winner, founder of the Police Memorial Trust, and Tony Rayner, the former chairman of Essex Police Federation, have both called for officers to be routinely armed.

But despite the loss of two of his officers, Greater Manchester Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy was quick to speak in support of the status quo.

"We are passionate that the British style of policing is routinely unarmed policing. Sadly we know from the experience in America and other countries that having armed officers certainly does not mean, sadly, that police officers do not end up getting shot."

But one thing is clear. When asked, police officers say overwhelmingly that they wish to remain unarmed.

A 2006 survey of 47,328 Police Federation members found 82% did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty, despite almost half saying their lives had been "in serious jeopardy" during the previous three years.

It is a position shared by the Police Superintendents' Association and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

The British public are not nearly so unanimous.

An ICM poll in April 2004 found 47% supported arming all police, compared with 48% against.

In 2007, the centre-right think-tank Policy Exchange found 72% of 2,156 adults wanted to see more armed police patrols.

International models

All major police forces in Europe, as well as the US, Canada andAustralia routinely carry firearms, says Prof Peter Waddington. The exceptions are Britain, the Irish Republic, and New Zealand. InNorway officers carry arms in their cars but not on their person, he says.

New Zealand has adopted an armed response model similar to Britain, says the International Law Enforcement Forum. There was considerable debate there in 2010 when two officers were shot, and commissioner Peter Marshall wrote: "International experience shows that making firearms more accessible raises certain risks that are very difficult to control."

These considerations included:
• risk of police having weapons taken from them
• risk of greater use of weapons against the public and/or offenders
• and ambush can never be controlled, whether or not officers are armed

For decades there have been incidents that have led to calls for issuing all officers with firearms. Cases like those of Sharon Beshenivsky, shot dead during a robbery in 2005, or of the three plain-clothes officers murdered by Harry Roberts in west London in 1966, or the killing of PC Sidney Miles in the Derek Bentley case of 1952.

Few expect the system to change even after widespread public horror at the deaths of PCs Bone and Hughes.

For one thing, incidents such as that in Greater Manchester are extremely rare. Overall gun crime, too, remains low.

In 2010-11, England and Wales witnessed 388 firearm offences in which there was a fatal or serious injury, 13% lower than the previous 12 months. In Scotland during the same period, there were two fatal and 109 non-fatal injuries during the same period, a decade-long low.

Additionally, officers, chief constables and politicians alike are wary of upsetting an equilibrium that has been maintained throughout Britain's 183-year policing history.

"There's a general recognition that if the police are walking around with guns it changes things," says Richard Garside, director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies.

Arming the force would, say opponents, undermine the principle of policing by consent - the notion that the force owes its primary duty to the public, rather than to the state, as in other countries.

This owes much to the historical foundations of British criminal justice, says Peter Waddington, professor of social policy at the University of Wolverhampton.
"A great deal of what we take as normal about policing was set out in the early 19th Century," he says.

Police use of firearms 2010-11

Authorised in 17,209 operations, says Home Office figures for England and Wales - a decrease of 1,347 (7%) on previous year
6,653 authorised firearms officers - (5% decrease)
13,346 operations involving armed response vehicles (6% decrease)
Three incidents in which police discharged a conventional firearm (down from six incidents)

Breakdown by region (Home Office PDF)

"When Robert Peel formed the Metropolitan Police there was a very strong fear of the military - the masses feared the new force would be oppressive."

A force that did not routinely carry firearms - and wore blue rather than red, which was associated with the infantry - was part of this effort to distinguish the early "Peelers" from the Army, Waddington says.

Over time, this notion of guns being inimical to community policing - and, indeed, to the popular conception of the Dixon of Dock Green-style bobby - was reinforced.

While some in London were issued with revolvers prior to 1936, from that date only trained officers at the rank of sergeant or above were issued with guns, and even then only if they could demonstrate a good reason for requiring one.

Today only a small proportion of officers are authorised to use firearms. Latest Home Office figures show there were just 6,653 officers authorised to use firearms in England and Wales - about 5% of the total number.

Home Office statistics on police firearms use, 2010-11 [317KB]

None of which implies, of course, that the British police are somehow gun-free. Each police force has its own firearms unit. Police armed response vehicles have been deployed since 1991.

View from Louisiana

By Colonel Richie JohnsonWest Baton Rouge Sheriff's Office

"What does a British police officer do if someone comes out with a knife? Is he supposed to get out his knife and fight him?

"Our citizens are armed - even the bad ones. The criminal element here is better armed than the police departments most of the times, due to budget constraints.

"It would be impossible for us to do our job if we weren't armed. I'd have to quit. I worked narcotics for 20 years and definitely in that field, how would you do that job without being armed? Even as a patrolman, you're reactive. The other guy knows what he's going to do. It definitely has to be armed when you have to be reactive.

"The public expects us to be armed - when they call in the cavalry that's exactly what they want. The general public, because of television, they believe that we're a lot better armed than we really are. You respond to a call and they say 'Where's your machine gun?'"

In addition, trained officers have had access to Tasers since 2004 despite controversy about their use. Met Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe called for police response officers to be routinely armed with the weapons in November 2011.

Particularly in London, the sight of armed officers at airports, embassies and other security-sensitive locations has become a familiar one, especially since the 11 September attacks.

However much firearms become an accepted part of British life, former Met deputy assistant commissioner Brian Paddick doubts police themselves will ever support a universal rollout.

For one thing, the sheer cost of equipping all personnel with weapons as well as providing regular training would be prohibitive at a time of public spending cuts, he says.

In addition, Paddick adds, front-line officers would not be keen to face the agonising, split-second decisions faced by their counterparts in specialist firearms units.

"In terms of the police being approachable, in terms of the public being the eyes and ears of the police, officers don't want to lose that," he says.

"Every case in which a police officer has shot someone brings it home to unarmed officers the sheer weight of responsibility that their colleagues face."

Cases like that of Jean Charles de Menezes, shot dead by a Met firearms officer after he was wrongly identified as a terrorist, illustrate Paddick's point.

For now, at least, that starkest of all distinctions between British officers and those abroad looks secure.

Additional reporting by Kathryn Westcott, Tom Heyden and Daniel Nasaw





http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3046485/Wall-silence-residents-80-police-force-city-officials-resign-black-mayor-Missouri-city-elected.html

Almost the entire police force of small Missouri town resigns citing 'safety concerns' after first black mayor is elected

By WILLS ROBINSON FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 19 April 2015 | UPDATED: 07:02 EST, 20 April 2015

Photograph – Mrs Byrd, who was sworn in last Wednesday, told Daily Mail Online she still doesn't know why the employees quit - though the outgoing mayor says they cited 'safety concerns' in their resignations

Tyrus Byrd was elected into office in the small city of Parma last week 

Five of the six cops in the city reportedly handed in their resignation 
The city's attorney, clerk and water treatment supervisor also quit 
All employees cited 'safety concerns' in their resignation letters' 
Mrs Byrd and the outgoing mayor Randall Ramsey insist they do not know why they decided to leave  

Residents of a tiny Missouri city say they have no idea why five of their six police officers and several other top officials resigned after their first black mayor was elected.

Tyrus Byrd, 40, was sworn into office in Parma last week, but her election victory was overshadowed by the departure of the majority of the police force, the city attorney, clerk and water treatment supervisor. 

The officials all cited 'safety concerns' in their resignation letters, the outgoing mayor says. 

There are 713 people living in the community and, according to the US Census Bureau, 57 percent are white and 41percent are black.

Unwelcome change: Tyrus Byrd, who was sworn in as mayor last week, must find replacements for five of the city's six police officers, the city attorney, the city clerk and the water treatment supervisor. 

Mrs Byrd, who was sworn in on Wednesday, told the Daily Mail Online on Sunday that she is still not sure why the city employees quit. 

Her father, former city board member Simon Wofford, insists his daughter has a good relationship with the police department.

KFVS-TV broke the story last week. Citizens rallied to Mrs Bryd's side, saying that the town didn't even need as many officers as it had. 

'I think it was pretty dirty the way they all quit without giving her a chance, but I don't think they hurt the town with quitting because who needs six police for 740 people?' resident Martha Miller told KFVS. 

The run-down city, which is 175 miles south of St. Louis in southeastern Missouri, has suffered a spate of break-ins recently. 

Despite the surge in crime and the comparatively large police force, residents told the TV station that they almost never saw cops patrolling the streets.  

Mrs Byrd told Daily Mail Online that the election of the first African American mayor should be celebrated instead of focusing on the departures of city employees. 

Randall Ramsey, the outgoing mayor who has spent 36 years in the job, told the Daily Mail Online he also has no idea why the group quit.

Randall Ramsey, (pictured center with a past City Board) the outgoing mayor who has spent 36 years in the job over two terms, told the Daily Mail Online he has no idea why the group quit. The new mayor's father Simon Wofford (far right), who was defeated in the election for his seat, says she had a good relationship with the force 

He added that most of the officers are part time and work for other towns in the surrounding area.

He told KFVS that the officers cited 'safety concerns' when they resigned.    

Barry Aycock, who has served as an alderman, told the Daily Mail Online the election and the consequences are the same as usual and he hardly sees the police out on patrol.

He added there is little crime in the city, aside from a spate or burglaries in recent weeks.

There are around 700 people living in the community (Broad Street pictured) and, according to a 2010 US Census Bureau, 57 per cent are white and 41 per cent are black




"KFVS-TV broke the story last week. Citizens rallied to Mrs Bryd's side, saying that the town didn't even need as many officers as it had. 'I think it was pretty dirty the way they all quit without giving her a chance, but I don't think they hurt the town with quitting because who needs six police for 740 people?' resident Martha Miller told KFVS. …. Mrs Byrd told Daily Mail Online that the election of the first African American mayor should be celebrated instead of focusing on the departures of city employees. Randall Ramsey, the outgoing mayor who has spent 36 years in the job, told the Daily Mail Online he also has no idea why the group quit. …. He added that most of the officers are part time and work for other towns in the surrounding area.”

I personally congratulate Mrs. Byrd, who clearly won the votes of many of the whites in the town, with population statistics given in this article. I'm glad to see a small Southern town vote for racial equality. Those officers and city officials who quit will give her the opportunity to put better people in their places, and perhaps more black people. Most police departments are flawed by having too few black memberes.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/adopted-ohio-woman-finds-out-birth-mom-is-coworker/

Adopted Ohio woman finds out birth mom is coworker
CBS/AP
April 19, 2015

Photograph – La-Sonya Mitchell Clark, left, and Francine Simmons  WKBN-TV

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio - A 38-year-old woman's quest to find her birth mother ended in a surprising place - the company where she works.

CBS affiliate WKBN-TV in Youngstown reports that La-Sonya Mitchell-Clark requested records that were made available recently by the Ohio Department of Health. She learned her mother's name is Francine Simmons. She looked her up on Facebook and saw that she worked at InfoCision, the teleservices company where she works.

She knew of an employee named Francine. She reached out, and the next day, got the long-awaited phone call.

"I said, 'I think I'm your daughter," Mitchell-Clark said.

Simmons said she always wanted to connect with the daughter she gave up as a 15-year-old mother, but didn't know how.

"I'm still in shock," Simmons said. "It's amazing."

Simmons said after Mitchell-Clark was born, she was placed in a group home by authorities, and only got to hold her briefly before giving her up.

Now, the two only live a few minutes from each other in Youngstown.

It turns out Mitchell-Clark has three sisters she didn't know about. And one of them works at InfoCision as well.

"I feel a sense of relief for my mother," said Kamala Cummings.

"It's just amazing that all this time we're thinking about her and trying to find her and she was trying to find us, too," said Maisha Cummings.

She said her adoptive parents have always been supportive of her, and encouraged her to try to find her mother.

"Now, we've got a bigger, extended family where we can just be together," Simmons said.




“CBS affiliate WKBN-TV in Youngstown reports that La-Sonya Mitchell-Clark requested records that were made available recently by the Ohio Department of Health. She learned her mother's name is Francine Simmons. She looked her up on Facebook and saw that she worked at InfoCision, the teleservices company where she works. She knew of an employee named Francine. She reached out, and the next day, got the long-awaited phone call. "I said, 'I think I'm your daughter," Mitchell-Clark said. Simmons said she always wanted to connect with the daughter she gave up as a 15-year-old mother, but didn't know how. "I'm still in shock," Simmons said. "It's amazing." Simmons said after Mitchell-Clark was born, she was placed in a group home by authorities, and only got to hold her briefly before giving her up.”

This is one of those really happy stories that come along every now and then. I like stories about ordinary human lives and families. The Internet has been used in several of these stories to find a long lost family member. Facebook is really amazing, as is the Internet as a whole. I have Googled many facts, stories and piece of information of all kinds and failed to find very few of them.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/04/15/399801305/maybe-they-ll-grow-out-of-it-physicians-respond-late-to-kids-with-autism

Some Doctors Still Dismiss Parents' Concerns About Autism
PONCIE RUTSCH
APRIL 15, 2015

Photograph – Some doctors aren't up to date on how to assess autism symptoms in very young children.
iStockphoto

Most children with autism get diagnosed around age 5, when they start school. But signs of the developmental disorder may be seen as early as 1 year old.

Yet even if a parent notices problems making eye contact or other early signs of autism, some doctors still dismiss those concerns, a study finds, saying the child will "grow out of it." That can delay diagnosis and a child's access to therapy.

"Autism should be something that primary care pediatricians are really comfortable with, like asthma or ADHD, but it's not," says lead researcher Katharine Zuckerman, a pediatrician at Oregon Health & Science University, whose study was published Tuesday in The Journal of Pediatrics. "If you see a general pediatrician like me, I can't actually diagnose your child with autism."

Diagnosing autism often starts when parents notice subtle differences in their baby's development. The child might not make eye contact as much as other babies do, or he might not be grasping objects at 6 months. Other early signs include not smiling when smiled at, or not responding to a familiar voice.

To get a better sense of how children with autism get delayed on the road to diagnosis, Zuckerman looked at the Centers for Disease Control's Survey of Pathways to Diagnosis and Services, which includes detailed data about 1,420 children between ages 6 and 17 with autism. She documented three significant dates each child: the date parents first worried; the date they first mentioned their concerns to a physician; and the date the child was diagnosed. She also noted what the parents recalled about the physician's response to their concerns.

Some doctors called for further tests or referred parents to a specialist, while others took no action other than reassuring the parents that their child was normal or it was too early to tell if anything was wrong.

Zuckerman compared the information for children who were eventually diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder to children with an intellectual disability or developmental delay, two other intellectual problems that first show up in early childhood. About 14 percent more of the children with an autism spectrum disorder received a passive response from the health care practitioner, and were diagnosed about three years later than the children with other intellectual problems.

So what's delaying the pediatricians? Rebecca Landa, the director of the Center for Autism and Related Disorders at the Kennedy Krieger Institute, says there are a number of reasons why health care practitioners don't always jump at the first mention of autism. First, many parents with young children tend to worry over minor problems. Health care practitioners are listening for certain words, and if the parents don't seem particularly alarmed, it's easy to dismiss their concerns.

And even if parents are persistent, autism is hard to diagnose. The symptoms are subtle, particularly in young children. "People expect that autism [in infancy] is going to look like autism in infancy, and that's not what happens." explains Landa. A baby who sits unsteadily at 6 months may have autism, or he might just be a slow sitter. "Babies do weird things," says Landa.

But perhaps the biggest problem isn't that it's hard to spot a young child with autism, but that most doctors and other health care practitioners aren't trained to identify those early signs.

Researchers knew far less about autism when most doctors practicing today studied medicine. Unless a pediatrician spent her or his residency in a field like neurodevelopmental pediatrics, they wouldn't have been trained to diagnose autism.

The children in the study were diagnosed around age 5, the average age of autism spectrum diagnosis in the U.S. But Zuckerman says that children could be diagnosed much earlier. And an earlier diagnosis means that children and parents can get help learning techniques to make life with autism a little more manageable a little sooner.

If anything, the study points to the need to get resources to physicians so that they can recognize signs of trouble. "We need to give them the skills they need so they can identify kids," says Zuckerman.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that pediatricians screen children at their 18-month checkup and again when the child is between 24 and 30 months old. But it will take a few years for this practice to truly take root.

Meanwhile, Zuckerman says parents can find online testsand videos, so that they have a better idea of that to look for.

"We screen for blood pressure in kids and for vision," says Zuckerman. "There's no reason we can't screen for autism."




“Most children with autism get diagnosed around age 5, when they start school. But signs of the developmental disorder may be seen as early as 1 year old. Yet even if a parent notices problems making eye contact or other early signs of autism, some doctors still dismiss those concerns, a study finds, saying the child will "grow out of it." That can delay diagnosis and a child's access to therapy. …. To get a better sense of how children with autism get delayed on the road to diagnosis, Zuckerman looked at the Centers for Disease Control's Survey of Pathways to Diagnosis and Services, which includes detailed data about 1,420 children between ages 6 and 17 with autism. She documented three significant dates each child: the date parents first worried; the date they first mentioned their concerns to a physician; and the date the child was diagnosed. She also noted what the parents recalled about the physician's response to their concerns. Some doctors called for further tests or referred parents to a specialist, while others took no action other than reassuring the parents that their child was normal or it was too early to tell if anything was wrong.…. About 14 percent more of the children with an autism spectrum disorder received a passive response from the health care practitioner, and were diagnosed about three years later than the children with other intellectual problems. …. But perhaps the biggest problem isn't that it's hard to spot a young child with autism, but that most doctors and other health care practitioners aren't trained to identify those early signs. …. If anything, the study points to the need to get resources to physicians so that they can recognize signs of trouble. "We need to give them the skills they need so they can identify kids," says Zuckerman. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that pediatricians screen children at their 18-month checkup and again when the child is between 24 and 30 months old. But it will take a few years for this practice to truly take root.”

"We screen for blood pressure in kids and for vision," says Zuckerman. "There's no reason we can't screen for autism." When I was young my family had a medical book aimed at laymen which had lots of photographs, disease descriptions, and – my favorite – the list of symptoms. I read it quite a bit because, even though it was outdated, having been published in 1948, it was very informative. That is where I first saw the word autism. It was described more or less they way it is now, but said that specialists believed it to be “childhood schizophrenia.” After that time it was within the last 20 years or so when news articles on autism began to pop up and the general public became interested in it. Some people consider it to be one of those popular ideas that emerge which aren't based in reality. I heard a man scathingly say that he just thought the kids had not been punished enough, in other words that they were screaming because they were spoiled. He was ignorant, of course. There is a need for physicians to be trained fully in all areas of medicine if they are going to be general practitioners. See the article below on the history of autism awareness.


http://www.autism-society.org/about-the-autism-society/history/

History

The Autism Society was founded in 1965 by Bernard Rimland, Ph.D. His book, Infantile Autism: The Syndrome and Its Implications for a Neural Theory of Behavior, was written in late 1964 and was one of the first of its kind. In 1968, Ruth Sullivan, Ph.D., became the organization’s first elected president. Over the last 40 years, the Society has grown from a handful of parents into the leading source of information, research, reference and support on the autism spectrum. The Autism Society is the oldest and largest grassroots organization within the autism community.

From strong advocacy efforts beginning in 1969 presented to the Joint commission on Mental Health of Children to playing a key role in vital legislative efforts such as Section 504, the Developmental Disabilities Act, the Education for All Handicapped Act (now known as IDEA) and calling for increased autism research, the Autism Society has long been engaged in systemic change that really impacts people’s lives.

The Autism Society began a nationwide awareness campaign in the early ’70s that was adopted by Congress in 1984 and strengthened by the release of the autism awareness ribbon in 1999. The Society launched a project to study brain tissue in 1976 and formed a Foundation focused on applied research in 1996. The first national conference on autism was convened by the Autism Society in 1969 and our organization is proud to have had individuals with autism serve on its Board of Directors and in other key decision-making roles since the ’80s.

Today, more than 120,000 members and supporters are connected through a working network of more than 100 affiliatesnationwide. The Autism Society membership continues to grow as more and more parents and professionals unite to form a collective voice representing the autism community.

The Autism Society is dedicated to increasing public awareness about autism and the day-to-day issues faced by individuals with autism, their families and the professionals with whom they interact. The Autism Society and its affiliates share a common mission of providing information and education, supporting research, and advocating for programs and services for the autism community.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/04/20/398806514/fda-ponders-whether-homeopathy-is-medicine

FDA Ponders Putting Homeopathy To A Tougher Test
Rob Stein
April 20, 2015

Graphics – Katherine Streeter

It's another busy morning at Dr. Anthony Aurigemma's homeopathy practice in Bethesda, Md.

Wendy Resnick, 58, is here because she's suffering from a nasty bout of laryngitis. "I don't feel great," she says. "I don't feel myself."

Resnick, who lives in Millersville, Md., has been seeing Aurigemmafor years for a variety of health problems, including ankle and knee injuries and back problems. "I don't know what I would do without him," she says. "The traditional treatments just weren't helping me at all."

Aurigemma listens to Resnick's lungs, checks her throat and then asks detailed questions about her symptoms and other things as well, such as whether she's been having any unusual cravings for food.

Aurigemma went to medical school and practiced as a regular doctor before switching to homeopathy more than 30 years ago. He says he got disillusioned by mainstream medicine because of the side effects caused by many drugs. "I don't reject conventional medicine. I use it when I have to," Aurigemma says.

Throughout his career, homeopathy has been regulated differently from mainstream medicine.

In 1988, the Food and Drug Administration decided not to require homeopathic remedies to go through the same drug-approval process as standard medical treatments. Now the FDA is revisiting that decision. It will hold two days of hearings this week to decide if homeopathic remedies should have to be proven safe and effective.

When Aurigemma is finished examining his patient, instead of pulling out a prescription pad, he uses a thick book to come up with a homeopathic diagnosis. He then searches through heavy wooden drawers filled with rows of small brown glass vials filled with tiny white pellets. They're homeopathic remedies. He pulls out two.

"So this will be the first dose," he says. "Then I'll give you a daily dose, to try to get underneath into your immune system to try to help you strengthen your energy, basically."

Homeopathic medicine has long been controversial. It's based on an idea known as "like cures like," which means if you give somebody a dose of a substance — such as a plant or a mineral — that can cause the symptoms of their illness, it can, in theory, cure that illness if the substance has been diluted so much that it's essentially no longer in the dose.

"We believe that there is a memory left in the solution. You might call it a memory. You might call it energy," Aurigemma says. "Each substance in nature has a certain set of characteristics. And when a patient comes who matches the physical, mental and emotional symptoms that a remedy produces — that medicine may heal the person's problem."

Critics say those ideas are nonsense, and that study after study has failed to find any evidence that homeopathy works.

"Homeopathy is an excellent example of the purest form of pseudoscience," says Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale and executive editor of the website Science-Based Medicine. "These are principles that are not based upon science."

Novella thinks consumers are wasting their money on homeopathic remedies. The cost of such treatments vary, with some over-the-counter products costing less than $10.

Some of the costs, such as visits to doctors and the therapies they prescribe, may be covered by insurance. But Novella says with so many people using homeopathic remedies, the costs add up.

There's also some concern that homeopathic remedies could be dangerous if they're contaminated or not completely diluted, or even if they simply don't work.

Somebody who's having an acute asthma attack, for example, who takes a homeopathic asthma remedy, "may very well die of their acute asthma attack because they were relying on a completely inert and ineffective treatment," Novella says.

For years, critics like Novella have been asking the FDA to regulate homeopathy more aggressively. The FDA's decision to revisit the issue now was motivated by several factors, including the growing popularity of homeopathic remedies and the length of time that has passed since the agency last considered the issue.

The FDA is also concerned about the quality of remedies, according to Cynthia Schnedar, director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Office of Compliance. The agency has issued a series of warnings about individual homeopathic products in recent years, including one that involved tablets being sold to alleviate teething pain in babies.

"So we thought it was time to take another look at our policy," Schnedar says.

The FDA's decision to examine the issue is making homeopathic practitioners like Aurigemma and their patients nervous. "It would be a terrible loss to this country if they were to do something drastic," he says.

He also disputes claims that homeopathy doesn't work and is unsafe.

"There's no question that it helps patients. I have too many files on too many patients that have shown improvements," Aurigemma says, although he acknowledges some homeopathic products sold over the counter make misleading claims.

Companies that make homeopathic remedies defend their products as well.

"Homeopathic medicines have a very long history of safety," says Mark Land, vice president of operations and regulatory affairs for Boiron USA, which makes homeopathic products. "One of the hallmarks of homeopathic medicines is safety," says Land, who is also president of the American Association of Homeopathic Pharmacists.

"The potential risk [of greater FDA regulation] to consumers is if any change in regulation were to limit access to these products," says Land.

That's what worries Resnick. She says homeopathic remedies have helped alleviate a long list of health problems she's experienced over the years. "Why would they want to take that away from us?" she says. "Let us have the freedom to decide what works the best for us."

The FDA says this week's hearing is just a chance to start gathering information to decide what — if anything — the agency should do about homeopathy.




“Resnick, who lives in Millersville, Md., has been seeing Aurigemmafor years for a variety of health problems, including ankle and knee injuries and back problems. "I don't know what I would do without him," she says. "The traditional treatments just weren't helping me at all." …. In 1988, the Food and Drug Administration decided not to require homeopathic remedies to go through the same drug-approval process as standard medical treatments. Now the FDA is revisiting that decision. It will hold two days of hearings this week to decide if homeopathic remedies should have to be proven safe and effective. …. When Aurigemma is finished examining his patient, instead of pulling out a prescription pad, he uses a thick book to come up with a homeopathic diagnosis. He then searches through heavy wooden drawers filled with rows of small brown glass vials filled with tiny white pellets. They're homeopathic remedies. He pulls out two. "So this will be the first dose," he says. "Then I'll give you a daily dose, to try to get underneath into your immune system to try to help you strengthen your energy, basically." …. "We believe that there is a memory left in the solution. You might call it a memory. You might call it energy," Aurigemma says. "Each substance in nature has a certain set of characteristics. And when a patient comes who matches the physical, mental and emotional symptoms that a remedy produces — that medicine may heal the person's problem." Critics say those ideas are nonsense, and that study after study has failed to find any evidence that homeopathy works. "Homeopathy is an excellent example of the purest form of pseudoscience," says Steven Novella, a neurologist at Yale and executive editor of the website Science-Based Medicine. "These are principles that are not based upon science." …. Some of the costs, such as visits to doctors and the therapies they prescribe, may be covered by insurance. But Novella says with so many people using homeopathic remedies, the costs add up. There's also some concern that homeopathic remedies could be dangerous if they're contaminated or not completely diluted, or even if they simply don't work. Somebody who's having an acute asthma attack, for example, who takes a homeopathic asthma remedy, "may very well die of their acute asthma attack because they were relying on a completely inert and ineffective treatment," Novella says. …. The FDA's decision to revisit the issue now was motivated by several factors, including the growing popularity of homeopathic remedies and the length of time that has passed since the agency last considered the issue. The FDA is also concerned about the quality of remedies, according to Cynthia Schnedar, director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Office of Compliance. The agency has issued a series of warnings about individual homeopathic products in recent years, including one that involved tablets being sold to alleviate teething pain in babies. ….

“Companies that make homeopathic remedies defend their products as well. "Homeopathic medicines have a very long history of safety," says Mark Land, vice president of operations and regulatory affairs for Boiron USA, which makes homeopathic products.” Of course they do. They and the “doctors” are making money hand over fist. The only person I know who uses homeopathic “cures” is very bright and clever, but not practical at all. She has switched religions at least six times, hates doctors because they have treated her disrespectfully. She is very “sensitive” and has lots of nebulous symptoms and one doctor refused to treat her because he thinks she is simply a hypochondriac. I have to agree with him. I hate to see products such as herbal and homeopathic substances be sold in every drug store and on TV and the Internet to neurotic and even be allowed by some insurance companies to be legitimate. Along with those go chiropractic, podiatry, acupuncture, and other less than scientific theories. I would like to see the American public be more savvy, educated and critical in their thinking in general.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/5-things-to-know-about-the-new-royal-baby/

5 things to know about the new royal baby
AP  April 16, 2015

26 Photos – Prince George's Photo Album

Royal fans are ready to welcome Prince William and Kate's second child - a younger brother or sister to Prince George, whose birth two years ago whipped up a worldwide media frenzy.

As in 2013, the royals are keeping everyone guessing by disclosing virtually nothing about the baby - including the due date and gender.

If the bookies are to be believed, the baby will be a princess and she will be called Alice.

Here's what we know - and don't know - ahead of the second royal baby's birth, expected in the coming days:

MYSTERY BIRTH DATE

Clarence House announced on Sept. 8 that Kate was pregnant, but gave no clues about the due date other than to say it would be this month. On a recent public visit, Kate reportedly told a charity worker that she is due mid-to-late April.

The baby could share a birthday with her great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, who was born on April 21. The newborn's birthday could also coincide with William and Kate's fourth wedding anniversary, on April 19.

PRINCESS ALICE?

Though there has been no confirmation of the baby's gender, bookies and the British media seem confident it will be a girl. Some suggest that Kate herself offered a hint of what's to come with her choice of clothing: She wore a bright pink coat for her final public appearance, before she disappeared for maternity leave.

As for what the baby will be called, many are betting on one quaint-sounding name: Alice.

The name is by far the favorite among Britain's bookmakers, with William Hill putting odds at 2-1 after a number of unusually large bets came in for it. Ladbrokes puts the odds at 3-1. No one seems to know why, though.

Elizabeth and Charlotte follow closely, with Victoria, Alexandria and Diana trailing behind. James and Arthur come in as the top bets for a baby boy.

"It's absolutely dominated at top of the market by girls' names," said Joe Crilly, spokesman for William Hill. "They're the seemingly perfect couple so maybe they'll have the perfect combination of a boy and girl family."

Britain's royal history has seen a few women called Alice: Queen Victoria named her second daughter Princess Alice, and the queen's mother-in-law - Prince Philip's mother - is Princess Alice of Battenberg.

Whatever the royals choose, it's fairly safe to rule out names like Wayne or Mercedes - both with odds of 500-1, according to Ladbrokes.

HEIR OR SPARE?

When George was born in 2013, he jumped the line of succession ahead of uncle Prince Harry to become the third in line to the throne - after Charles, his granddad, and his father William.

George's sibling will become the fourth in line, bumping Harry down to fifth place. Prince Andrew, the queen's second son, moves to sixth.

As the second-born, the new baby will likely not be expected to become the ruling monarch. Instead, he or she will be the "spare," or backup, should anything happen to the first-born.

George VI famously became king unexpectedly after his brother, Edward VIII, abdicated in 1936.

"An abdication is highly unlikely to happen again, but you never know," says Joe Little, managing editor at Majesty magazine.

And unlike in the old days, the gender of the second child will not matter.

Britain in 2013 introduced legal changes to end a centuries-old "male primogeniture" rule that puts boys before girls in the line of succession. Under that system, a princess can be robbed of her place in the line by a younger brother.

That rule, which dates back to the 1701 Act of Settlement, is now abolished in Britain as well as in 15 former British colonies.

RELAXED PARENTS

Kate, 33, and William, 32, seem relaxed about the birth of their second child, and both have been out and about chatting with locals and keeping up their official duties until March.

Kate did suffer from severe morning sickness, or hyperemesis gravidarum, in the early months - just as she did during her first pregnancy - and had to pull out of plans to make her first solo royal tour to Malta. But her health improved since then, and she looked well as she was snapped by photographers wherever she went.

Meanwhile, William will be taking some paternity leave from his new job. The former search and rescue helicopter pilot began his full-time job with the East Anglian Air Ambulance on March 30, and is expected to begin flying rescue missions this summer.
---
THE BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT

Britain's royal family may be one of the world's most traditional institutions, but its press team has made efforts to modernize communications by taking on Twitter and other social media.

Just like when George was born, royal officials plan to announce the baby's birth by Twitter, broadcasting the news directly to the monarchy's millions of followers worldwide.

Journalists will get a slight head start, though - reporters will get an email two minutes before the palace tweets the news.

About two hours later, officials will post a more traditional announcement on a gilded easel outside of Buckingham Palace.




“As for what the baby will be called, many are betting on one quaint-sounding name: Alice. The name is by far the favorite among Britain's bookmakers, with William Hill putting odds at 2-1 after a number of unusually large bets came in for it. Ladbrokes puts the odds at 3-1. No one seems to know why, though. …. And unlike in the old days, the gender of the second child will not matter. Britain in 2013 introduced legal changes to end a centuries-old "male primogeniture" rule that puts boys before girls in the line of succession. Under that system, a princess can be robbed of her place in the line by a younger brother. That rule, which dates back to the 1701 Act of Settlement, is now abolished in Britain as well as in 15 former British colonies. …. Kate, 33, and William, 32, seem relaxed about the birth of their second child, and both have been out and about chatting with locals and keeping up their official duties until March. …. Meanwhile, William will be taking some paternity leave from his new job. The former search and rescue helicopter pilot began his full-time job with the East Anglian Air Ambulance on March 30, and is expected to begin flying rescue missions this summer.”

I'm reading a biography of Queen Elizabeth right now, between murder mysteries, and there is a lot of interesting stuff in it about how the British royalty has progressed from the highly formal, English, class-based, and restricted life style during Queen Victoria's day to the “out and about” and friendly way that they now often appear. Even the Queen recently played a prank by stepping in the background of a couple of tourists who were setting up a “selfie” and smiling brilliantly in that way she has that makes her look quite beautiful and pleasant. She has also taken to using Twitter, I understand. She has lived a virtuous life and always conducted herself like a “lady,” unlike some of the younger members of the family. She, according to this book by Andrew Marr called “The Real Elizabeth,” reads pages and pages of parliamentary papers every day as she always has. Her education as was her sister's, came completely from tutors. She did study French, history, mathematics, geography, dancing, singing and art.

I just found an interesting piece of information. It is possible, surprisingly, to contact members of the royal family, which can only be done by letter. Addresses for all of them are given on the website – http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/HowtocontactamemberofTheRoyalFamily/Overview.aspx. The Queen's address is “The Queen, Buckingham Palace, London SW1A 1AA.” The article says that many people from all walks of life write the queen, so don't be embarrassed. Go ahead and send her a letter.