How sick is this? If you're having trouble making it to the hunting range, don't fret. John Lockhart, who runs Live-Shot.com will arrange for you to kill animals (for real) via remote-control on his website, using a computer and mouse.

You can choose from an assortment of live animals that roam a ranch in Texas.

A rifle, video camera and computer are mounted on a stand at the ranch at a spot where deer, antelope and sheep frequently pass. From thousands of miles away, via computer, a person can control the camera and gun, firing with the click of a mouse.

Isn't it illegal? Apparently, not yet. Lawmakers in California and several other states are trying to shut Lockwood down.

Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner has launched his next assault on freedom. The full House Judiciary Committee is set to vote as early as next week on H.R. 1528, which creates a new group of mandatory miniumum penalties for non-violent drug offenses, including a five year penalty for passing a joint to someone who's been in drug treatment.

That's right: Passing a joint to someone who used to be in drug treatment will land you in federal prison for a minimum of five years.

The "Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005" (H.R. 1528) was introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on April 6, and it has already passed out of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

We warned you about this bill last September. It's now coming home to roost. Please visit here to e-mail your U.S. representative and two U.S. senators today. Stop this bill in its tracks.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales met with the ACLU today in an effort by the group to bring the Patriot Act in line with the Constitution. The ACLU reports (by email, check their site later for the press release):

ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero addressed the most extreme provisions of the Patriot Act, including those that involve "sneak and peek" warrants, the so-called "library records" provision, and the overbroad definition of terrorism. These provisions came under heavy, bipartisan scrutiny from lawmakers in recent weeks, during Congressional hearings on the Patriot Act. Some parts of the act are set to sunset, or expire, this December.

by TChris

Despite its assurances that it hasn't misused the power granted by the Patriot Act, the Justice Department doesn't want the public -- or, so far, the Senate -- to know what it's been doing with that power.

Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who leads the Judiciary Committee, said he and others in the Senate sought details from senior intelligence officials at the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation about their demands for records and their use of roving wiretaps, secret search warrants and other provisions in the law.

Specter was frustrated that the Justice Department didn't produce those details at a closed-door briefing yesterday.

"This closed-door briefing was for specifics," Mr. Specter said after emerging from the session on Tuesday. "They didn't have specifics."

Deputy Attorney General James Comey claims he takes Senator Specter's concerns "very seriously" and says the public will support renewal of all Patriot Act provisions once it understands how the department is using the law. Funny, then, that it hasn't complied with requests to show the Senate how indeed it is "using the law."

We often say the Patriot needs to be fixed, not extended. In an editorial today, the New York Times makes a further important point: Fixing the Patriot Act should be just the beginning, not the end. As Congress debates the various Patriot Act fixes in the coming weeks, it should not lose sight of the ball.

These hearings should look beyond the Patriot Act, to the larger picture of civil liberties and the war on terror. After Sept. 11, the government rounded up illegal immigrants, and put hundreds with no ties to terrorism behind bars for months, often in deplorable conditions. The Justice Department's own inspector general found that the government made "little attempt" to distinguish people with ties to terrorism from those without. In conducting this roundup, the Bush administration gave itself far more power than the Patriot Act does. Under the act, aliens are to be held no more than seven days before immigration or criminal charges are brought.

by TChris

Who thinks the Patriot Act should be reformed (if not jettisoned)? Just today:

• Beth Wilson, executive director of the ACLU of Kentucky, writing in the Kentucky Post.

• The Minneapolis Star Tribune

• Peyton Knight,executive director of the American Policy Center

• The South Florida Sun-Sentinel Editorial Board

Hearings begin today over the renewal of various Patriot Act provisions. Rather than listening to how Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tries to defend making only small changes to the Act, I suggest you focus on the bi-partisan SAFE Act (Safety and Freedom Enhancement Act)which will be introduced today by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Larry Craig (R-Idaho.) Sen. Russ Feingold is among the co-sponsors. The ACLU reports:

The Craig-Durbin bill would address some of the most controversial Patriot Act powers, including section 213, which permits the use of "sneak and peek" delayed-notification search warrants; section 215, which gives law enforcement agents access to a wide array of personal records, including library, medical and educational records; and section 802, which redefines "domestic terrorism" so broadly that it could be used against direct action advocacy groups and individuals.

In the strongest language of any governmental entity to date, the Montana legislature has "just said no" to the Patriot Act.

Senate Joint Resolution 19, sponsored by Sen. Jim Elliott, D-Trout Creek, says that while the 2005 Legislature supports the federal government's fight against terrorism, the so-called Patriot Act of 2001 granted authorities sweeping powers that violate citizens' rights enshrined in both the U.S. and Montanan constitutions.

The resolution, which does not carry the weight of a law but expresses the Legislature's opinion, encourages Montana law enforcement agencies not to participate in investigations authorized under the Patriot Act that violate Montanans' constitutional rights. It requests all libraries in the state to post a sign warning citizens that under the Patriot Act, federal agents may force librarians to turn over a record of books a person has checked out and never inform that citizen of the request.

Montana becomes the 5th state to say no to the Patriot Act. The Bill of Rights Defense Committee is keeping track.

The hearing is over in federal court. The Judge has taken it under advisement. He told everyone to go home for now. He may rule in a few hours.

Meanwhile, former House Judiciary Committee Chief Counsel Julian Epstein was on Larry King tonight. He said Congress didn't really want to save Terri Schiavo's life. He was faxed a draft of the legislation in advance and said he told Congress staffers that the law wouldn't work, but that there were options that could work. He said Congress could easily have assured the reinsertion of the feeding tube by writing an automatic stay into the law -- or by creating new evidentiary rules. Congress' refusal to do so, Julian says, means it knowingly passed a half-hearted law that wouldn't work.

The inference is that Democrats wouldn't go for a bill that would have resulted in the reinsertion of the feeding tube, so this was the compromise. If true, this makes the Republican Congresspersons and Senators demanding she be allowed to live more than just a little disingenuous. They didn't even go on record for the courage of their convictions but passed a cosmetic bill instead.

Jeb Bush says he can't do any more. Where's his brother, President Bush? Back at the ranch, on vacation.

Update: Think Progress has more --particularly on Sen. Bill Frist.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is angry at video game makers. So he's timed the promotion of his legislation that would ban the sales and rental of sexually explicit and violent video games to minors with the release of the new game "Narc."

"These kinds of games teach kids to do the very things that in real life, we put people in jail for,'' Blagojevich said during a news conference Monday at Glenview's Springman Middle School. "Just as we don't allow kids to buy pornography or alcohol or tobacco, we shouldn't allow them to buy these games.''

The governor and other legislative backers of the bill showed a taped promo for "Narc,'' an M-rated game that features various fictitious characters of the drug demimonde, including narcotics officers faced with its temptations. Midway, the Chicago-based maker of the game said its dark look was influenced by films such as "Traffic," "Training Day" and "Rush."

The game sounds like a law enforcement officer's wet dream--pure proselytizing from beginning to end.I wouldn't be surprised if there's an unethical defense lawyer at every court hearing. Dick Wolf must have been a consultant (no offense, Mr. Wolf, I know you're a true believer, just like me.)

Bump and update: President Bush has signed the legislation, CNN reports at 1:30 a.m, ET. Guess he stayed up late. Have the papers ordering the reinsertion of the feeding tube already reached a federal judge in Florida? Was the case randomly assigned? Will the judge sign the order tonight? Or will Terri's husband's lawyer run to the Florida Supreme Court to have the federal law declared unconsitutional before a federal court gets to rule?

Update: Michael Schiavo on Larry King: The parents are out for Terri's money. He says Terri's father wanted to know "Where's my money?" in the hospital years ago. He also says the parents, with the aid of right wing groups, offered him $700k to walk away 2 years ago. And that Terri was bulimic and would eat like a horse when he was around, but bulimia, he's since learned, is a secretive disease. The parents accused him of trying to strangle her. Why? Because the father wants the money and control. The brother has seen her a handful of times in ten years, he only got interested when the media came around. Schiavo says the brother is lying. His girlfriend has done more for Terri than her own mother. He loves his wife. This is between Terri and himself. [Then why is he going on national tv?] So much dirty laundry on all sides, I really don't want to hear any of it.

Larry King sounded somewhat incredulous at Schiavo's explanation for how Terri, then 25, said to her husband after watching a tv show, I don't want a feeding tube inserted in me. Assuming this is a true statement, I can't help but wonder whether that just a visceral reaction, or a thoguht-out decision.

Schiavo's lawyer says Terri is not brain-dead, she just has no cognitive functioning and she never will.

If it seems like I'm waffling, I'm not. I have always doubted the husband's story. But on a legal level, Congress has no business intervening. Congress could care less about Terri Schiavo. They saw an opportunity to score a goalpoint for their "culture of life" and they ran with it. Shiavo and the Schindler families are being used. The cable news channels, realizing it is the voyeuristic case of the moment, pumps it 24/7. It's like a car accident, repulsive, but no one seems to be changing the channel.

***************
Original Post

The House and Senate have reached a compromise on Terri Schiavo. The new legislation will allow her case to be reviewed by the federal courts. It could be passed at a special session tomorrow. It then goes to President Bush for signature.

Bottom line: Assuming the legislation becomes law, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube will be reinserted pending the outcome of federal review.

The measure would effectively take Schiavo's fate out of Florida state courts, where judges ordered the feeding tube removed on Friday, and allow Schiavo's parents to take their case to a federal judge. DeLay said that would likely mean restoration of the feeding tube "for as long as this appeal endures."