The days of the future and the weeks of the past are never as long as the years that drag through today.

- 

The Homeless Helping Society Society

   Comes this idea from some friends of mine: Allow the homeless do service projects.  'Tis a wonderful idea. It will help instill in them a sense of pride, a sense of worth. It provides them opportunity to contribute. It provides them with a way to pay back society for the help society gives to them.
   And, if you have the community working side-by-side with the homeless, it allows those in their neighborhood to develop a bond with them. Too often, the homeless are dismissed as undesirables. But, if those in the neighborhood get to know them, there is chance they will learn to love them.

(Index: Campaign website: Homeless Reform)

Social Workers Better than Police in Some Situations

   Back came District Attorney Sim Gill from investigating the Marc Neal killing with a verdict of not guilty for the police officers. Or, more precisely, he found the officers justified in their use of lethal force.
  Neal was mentally incapacitated, you know. Think: Defund the Police, for this is why many are calling to defund the police. They believe social workers do a better job dealing with the mentally ill. So, they say, take the money away from the police, and give it to the social workers so they can take care of these situations involving the mentally ill.
   But, did you know that even without defunding, we have such trained workers?  They are already in place. They were in place when Neal was killed Feb. 3. They could have responded, instead of the police.
  Oh, that they had.
  Hindsight being better than foresight, it would have been better if they had responded to the call, not the police.
 Victoria Thomas, Neal's mother who called the police when she became concerned about her son, came to wish she had never called the police. "Oh, heck yes. Oh, yes," she told KUTV.
  The Neal case certainly underscores that we are not utilizing the social workers we already have in place. Why not? Did Victoria Thomas know they were available? Did she have the hotline, 1-801-587-3000? Free help, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
   I would imagine, sometimes social workers will want the police to come in ahead, to make sure it is safe. In this case, police arrived to find Neal with what appeared to be a gun, but it turned out to be a fake gun. Perhaps the social worker would have arrived, seen the gun, and called in the cops, anyway. At any rate, the social worker would not have been in jeopardy, as the gun was not real.
   MCOT, they call these social workers. Mobile Crisis Outreach Team. They are with the University of Utah Community Crisis Intervention and Support Services.
   "I ain't going back to prison," Neal called out to officers as they spoke to him. "Do what you gotta do." The officers, I believe, already knew he was suicidal. Those who have been through our judicial system, and our prison system, are not treated as gently as we could treat people. No surprise that Neal did not want to go back, that he might pick death rather than going back through the wringer of our judicial system.
   This was a situation the social worker would have been better able to deal with. He or she would have shown up, I assume, without a police-type uniform, and without the squadron of police cars. Neal's delicate mental frame would not have been jolted by the flashing police lights, the guns being trained on him, and the threat of feeling he was being arrested to return to prison.
    The case of Marc Dominic Neal is strong argument for using social workers instead of police for situations such as his. It seems most likely Neal would be alive today had social workers taken the call, instead of police.

(Index: Campaign website: Police Reform)

Honor the Officer

   Honor our police officers. Think of the times they talk someone off a ledge. Think of the times they show at the scenes of domestic disputes, talking to those involved and talking down the problem. Think of the times they provide comfort and care to the victims of assault.
   Think of the times they have place their lives on the line.
   Think of the reasons for which they decided to become police officers, many wanting nothing more than to protect and serve.
   This is a time when we do need to weed out the bad officers. It is a time we need to change police department policies. But, in all our correcting, let us not chase off our officers. More than ever, this is a time good officers could feel abused and unwanted. Their institution is under attack. In their frustration and stung by the hatred, they could walk away from the job.
  Let us, then,  laud, praise, encourage and thank our officers, for the police officer's profession is one of the noblest in the land.

(Index: Campaign website: Police Reform)

Those Working with the Child Must be Paid Better

   If you want good government, you don't rotate in and out those who are in the key positions dealing with the delicate members of your society. It is the same as it is with teachers, if you want to keep them, you need to pay them better.
   If we see the need to pay our teachers better, we should see the need to pay better those who work for the Division of Child and Family Services. . . . And, perhaps to also pay better many others who are in other such state agencies.
   Is $17 an hour enough?
   Our foster care workers are critical. They deal with the child. They make the decisions for the care of the child. If you have a turnover of your workforce every three years, if you lose 30 percent of your case workers annually . . .
   You have a problem.
    Continuity is critical in such a position if the child is going to get proper care. Not to mention that such turnover runs counter to running a sound government, period. If every three years, a new person is learning what needs to be done, and the experience of the out-going worker is lost, that may not be good government. I could be wrong: It might be that a new person can come in every three years, sit down at the desk, and learn the job perfectly well; No harm done. But, I think we can see there is reason to suggest that isn't the case. Experienced workers learn what does work and what doesn't work. They get better and more polished at dealing with problems as they go along. They see mistakes, and they learn from them. Perhaps most important, they get to know the children better.
   It is critical that we have the processes for dealing with children in good order, speak nothing of good government. If nothing else, we just want the care of the child to be the best. But, that continuity does make for good governance also makes this vital.
   Let us pay the workers better.

(Index: Campaign website, Foster Care and Child Abuse)

Hate, by definition, is when you see the need to attack others. At the end of each day, look back and reflect on whether you've been a hateful person.

-

The world you trust  

is the world that trips you.

-

Placing Them in Need of Money can be Placing Them Back in Prison

 Perhaps, with our prisons overfilling, we are tempted to punish convicts with fines instead of with prison time.

   But, it isn't wise.

   I think of Jean Valjean in Les Miserables. Wasn't he sent to jail for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his sister's children? He needed money, so he stole.

   I think of Max Hall, a former BYU and NFL quarterback, who ended up shoplifting after falling on leaner times. Good guy, perhaps. But his being on a thinner income might have contributed to what he did.

   I think of others, people I've known, and how their need for money has led them to steal.  And, actually, we shouldn't have any problem coming up with examples, because it is obvious, the reason anyone steals, is they need money.
  Note also: Sometimes, it can be harder for them to find a job after jail than it was before. Some businesses do not like hiring ex-cons.

   I think of how, if a person needs money, he is likely to go about getting it the same way he got it before. With criminals, that sometimes means stealing, and it sometimes means dealing drugs.

   So, how wise are we, as part of our efforts to reform the criminal, to push him into a position where he is tempted to fall back on his old ways?

   We need a solution on what to do with them. We need an alternative to prison. But, this isn't it. We are fools if our reformation efforts pressure them to get money illicitly.

I'm a Believer in People, and Their Right to Search for a Home

   I'm a believer in people, in the thought that there are many good people among all nations, and among all religions, and among all kindred.
   I'm a believer in their right to search for a home, a country in which to live, one that offers them the protections of freedom, and the opportunity to prosper and make a living. I find it no fault that people search for such a home.
   I find it wrong for governments to stand in the way of this freedoms. When you have good people who look but for a place to work, and to join family -- when you have people who are looking but for a country where they can do good -- it is not government's right to block the freedom to seek these things.
   Restrictions on freedom are only for those who harm others. When you commit murder, or thievery, or destruction, let it be that you are placed in jail. But, the good person, let them choose to live in whatever clime and country they choose, for they do no one no harm. Governments only should restrict the freedoms of those who do harm. When governments step in to block the freedoms of law-abiding people, it is those governments that exceed their rights, not the people who come to live here.
   America was founded as a haven for people from other countries, especially the poor. If we have drifted from that, we have drifted from our principles. I think not only of the welcome on the Statue of Liberty -- Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to be free -- but of words of our founding father, George Washington: "The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respected stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations."

You don't climb into prison and you don't fall into prison. If you live your life at the wrong level, you will someday walk through a door you don't like. 

-

Drugs are Like Bad Weather, They can Freeze You, or Fry You

  The harm in drugs, is you are no longer yourself. Drugs take the person and scramble them. It's not so unlike being placed in a box, and having someone shake the box violently. Sometimes you come out jittery, and sometimes you come out limp.
   Drugs are like bad weather. Sometimes they freeze you, sometimes they fry you.
   I would leave them outlawed. I wouldn't send to lock-down, though, those who have no violence associated with them. If they have displayed no signs of harming society, why lock them away from society? Yes, do put them in confinement -- soft confinement. Put them in a halfway-type house, where there are counselors living with them, helping them deal with their addictions. Continue to encourage them to work, and allow families to visit as often as can. Test them often, and make judgments based on that as to who might be bringing them drugs, and shield them from those who are.
   The drug addicts are an at-risk part of our society, obviously, and they should receive our highest attention, our highest care. If they are to change, they need love. If they can't change, they need love.
   It is said America is the most incarcerated nation in the world. Inasmuch as they would no longer be in lock-down, but could potentially just walk out the door, this would hopefully bring end to that embarrassing statistic.

Perfection is more in seeing your imperfections 

than in assuming you do not have any.

-

There is no More Pressing Issue than the Life of the Child

   The child should be one of the most important concerns of society. If we have 2,700 foster care children in Utah and only 1,300 homes to place them in, this should be one of the great issues of our state. If we have children running away from their foster homes, we should be asking why. Is it because the homes are inadequate, or because the child is seeking to return to his biological parents, or what? If we have children "aging out" at age 18, leaving the foster homes though they still lack the skills to be on their own in life, we must do something.
   There is no more pressing issue, politically and socially, than the life of the child.

(Index: Campaign website, Foster Care and Child Abuse)

Plea Bargaining is the Death of Justice in the United States

  Here we introduce the nation's unsung injustice. What we speak of here is about as grave of a fault as our our nation has. Yet, among the common public, it gathers no attention, no debate, no outcry or concern.
  We arrest and toss them in jail before their crime is established by the court. We set what we call a bond, and use it for leverage against them. Use the words "bribery" or "extortion," if you like, for they are not so wrong. The term we do use is "plea bargaining," and it simply means that if they do certain things, we will bargain with them.
  We often start with a higher charge than necessary, in order to have more leverage in the bargaining process.
   Tell me if all this amounts to justice. Real justice is when you charge honestly for the crime committed. There is no "plea bargaining." What you charge them with is what they were guilty of, no more, no less. Where is the room for bargaining? Where is the reason for bargaining?
   Fewer and fewer are the cases that go to court in America these days. The Constitution calls for a trail by jury, but usually, it never reaches that. We don't let our cases reach the court. We talk them into confessions, sometimes for things they've never done. We use the leverage we have against them to deprive them of justice.
   And, we can get away with it, because who is going to stand up for the criminal?
   A half a million jailmates on any given day are there awaiting their trials. They haven't even been convicted yet, but they are already in jail. Jailing them adds to the leverage we have against them. How many are in jail before conviction? Six in 10 jailmates are awaiting their trials. We say they will flee if we do not jail them and force them to put up a $10,000 bond. Yes, that is what we say, but what we really are doing is leveraging them, gaining leverage so they will be forced to make a plea.
   This plea bargaining tool has been around going back centuries, But, has it ever found its use just these past few decades. I mentioned above that six out of 10 people in jail are there without having yet been convicted. That same article says those who have not been found guilty account for 95 percent of all jail population growth between 2000-2104. Then, I read another article that says 70 percent of all people in jail are not convicted of any crime. Seventy percent being greater than 6 out of 10, I assume it is a newer article that suggests 70 percent, and it is but a reflection of how fast the rate is rising.
   And, note this, for it is important: This injustice is contributing to the number of people who flee arrest -- and, thus end up getting shot. Those who have gone through the wringer of plea bargaining see no hope for obtaining justice. They know if they go back, they will be but abused by the system. So, they flee. They flee in fear of a system that offers them no mercy, no justice, no hope.
   Finally, let it not go unnoticed that America is the most incarcerated nation in America. This has a lot to do with that.
   If we would improve our state and nation, this is a good place to start.

Least a Nation can do is Sit Officers Down and Tell Them This is Wrong

  Some will see only the smoke and the fire, and cry for the protesters to be tossed in jail, when they see the video of Jacob Blake being shot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, the other day.
   I am not so against that. Violence and vandalism are not to be condoned. But, watch the video. The guy walks away from police, so they shoot him. This happens again and again, and will yet happen again, if we do not teach our police that it is wrong. Every officer in the land should be sat down the day after every such shooting. They should be shown the video and be told in strong and definite terms that this is not acceptable, that it is wrong. What should we do about police violence? This is the least. This is the simplest and should be seen as the most apparent thing that must be done. Alas, some among us will see no fault in the officer's having shot Jacob Blake. Forgive me if I offend by asking this. But, what has become of the morals of our nation?

Utah has the Highest Proportion of Blacks Killed by Police

   Utah as the highest proportion of minorities killed by police than of any state in the nation, according to one study. So, it cannot be said that this a problem other states have, and not us. It cannot be said that there is no problem in Utah.
   Rather, from that survey, we must conclude the problem is greater in Utah than anywhere in the nation.
   Police across our nation are trained much the same: You pull your gun and you use it in accordance with the training. If there is a problem in one part of the nation, there is a problem in another. Training is pretty consistent.
   But, that addresses the problem of police violence in general, not of police violence on minorities. The officers may be trained to kill in certain situations, but they are not trained to kill Blacks and Browns any quicker than Whites.
   But, an officer is taught to react to his or her perception. If they perceive a fleeing person might do harm to another person, they are instructed to shoot. And, it is in that perception that gives rise to discrimination. Society teaches that Blacks and Browns are more likely to be criminals. Indeed, though Blacks account for only 13 percent of the population, they are responsible for 52 percent of the homicides. No matter that there are surely societal reasons for the disparity -- poverty being likely a factor -- Black killers are more common than White ones.
   So, an officer gets in his (or her) mind that Blacks and Browns are more likely to be criminals. That becomes part of the profile, the image, that an officer has of a person of color. So, they are quicker to shoot based on the color of skin. It is a bias. It is wrong for officers to carry such bias, but they do.
   We should seek to end this bias in Utah.
   Here is an interesting comparison, it showing that officers are more likely to assume some people are more likely to just bounce around a corner and kill someone. In September of 2014, a person of color, Darrien Hunt, had a cosplay samurai. Police spotted him and were fearful he was going to go around the next corner and kill someone. So, they killed him, figured they had to to protect the public from him.
  Contrast that with recent weeks in which militia members have been carrying weapons to protests. There is a real chance one of them could shoot down one of the protesters. Some say they have even heard them verbally threaten to do so. So, why do they get to carry their weapons around, even though there are threats to back up the thought that they might just go around the next corner and kill someone? Why kill Darrien Hunt and yet not even stop the militia?
   Clearly, Darrien Hunt fit the police profile (and that includes his color) of a possible killer, but the militia do not. Never mind the reality that Hunt may have been, in fact, less likely to go around a corner and kill someone than what some militia members are.
   Biases exist in Utah. In Utah, we are more likely to think of a young colored person like Darrien Hunt as a criminal than we are a member of a militia. The militia members are trained to await the day when they use their weapons to kill. "Make my day," sometimes even rules their minds. Can you say there is not an anxiousness in such a thought? Darrien Hunt had no such thoughts of ever killing. Yet, we judged him of being the more likely criminal. Is it fair, or is it unfair profiling?

Small Change in the Pockets of Beggars

A penny is only of great worth

 To a person who hasn't a dime

Small change in the pocket of beggars

 To them is very sublime

(Index: Campaign website: Poetry, Poem) 

O.U.R. Appears a Wonderful Cause

   A private non-profit, Operation Underground Railroad (O.U.R.) embarked on the mission of rescuing children from human traffickers in 2013. The founder, Tim Ballard, has Utah ties, having graduated from Brigham Young University. Being aware of little negative about Ballard or O.U.R,  then as an elected leader looking to end child trafficking, I would ask Ballard and O.U.R. if there is anything the state could do to support and help his cause.
   The little concern I do have reflects from the entry on Tim Ballard in Wikipedia, which is tagged with the notice, "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. (July 2020)"
   Whether something was left out of the article or whether it was simply written in accordance with someone's wishes in exchange for money or something else of value, I do not know. Still, this does leave me with some concern. However, even if this is the case, it seems probable  O.U.R. is a wonderful organization and I would support it until proven otherwise.

Rodney King: An American Hero and an America Enigma

   As we approach the 30th anniversary of the beating of Rodney King, it is worthy to consider whether King should rank as one of America's heroes.
   "I just want to say -- you know -- can we all get along? Can we, can we get along? . . . Let's try to work it out."
   King went on TV, pleading for peace after the rioting broke out. Eventually, 63 deaths, 2,383 injuries, more than 7,000 fires, and 3,100 businesses damaged.
   "It's just not right. It's not right, and it's not going to change anything," said King the day he was on TV. "We'll get our justice. They've won the battle, but they haven't won the war. We'll get our day in court, and that's all that we want."
   The rioting came more than a year after King was beaten. The beating took place March 1, 1991. The video of the beating, filmed by George Holliday from his balcony, angered the nation and angered the world. But, the large-scale rioting came almost 14 months later, April 29, 1992, when officers who had administered the beating were acquitted. The rioting commenced within hours.
  The Rodney king beating was the first time video coverage allowed the public its first peak into the violence police sometimes commit, embarking the nation on a long list of police killings and beatings capture on video. Outrage, outrage, ever since.
  Do we consider King an American hero? "I just want to say -- you know -- can we all get along?" He called for peace when lesser men would call for vengeance.
  If we do call for him a hero, we will have to remember he was fleeing arrest. His car was spotted speeding, officers pursued him in a chase that reached 117 mph. He was on marijuana at the time. Is that a hero?
   And, we will have to set aside the fact he was an ex-con, having served hard time for threatening a store owner with an iron bar and hitting him with a wooden pole during a robbery. Nor did he become an angel after the beating at the hands of police and the riots that resulted. No, haunted by drug and alcohol use, he would crash his car into a brick wall, be arrested for driving under the influence and for reckless driving, and he would slam his vehicle into house while failing to yield to an officer.
   And, how's this: He hit his wife with his car, knocking her to the ground. It led to his being sentenced to 90 days in jail for hit and run.
   A hero? Not all heroes are perfect. King was far, far from perfect. Some heroes are larger than others, and some have far, far fewer flaws. Still, we honor King for sparking the nation against police violence, and for showing forgiveness by calling for peace and asking the city of Los Angeles to drop the violence.

We Must Find a Way to Lower the Price of the EpiPen Alternatives

  The idea that someone could die for lack of having EpiPen due to its high price is surely morally revolting. What to do? We should first follow the lead of Ohio and its former governor, John Kasich. When the doctor specifies EpiPen on the prescription, pharmacies are allowed to substitute less expensive alternatives. While it would seem this would solve the problem, I called up a pharmacy in Ohio, to find if the law was working, and was told the alternatives are running but maybe $50 cheaper. So, needing more, let's add a second layer to what we do. Let us seek instate drug makers to manufacture alternatives, and work with them to offer a product that is less expensive. I don't know but what it eventually reaches a point that you just have to cap the price, but in this case, it seems the alternative offerings should be lowering prices. So, let's push to make that work first.

It's Time to End the Corruption of not Lowering Insulin Prices

   Are we ever going to do something about insulin prices? How long has it been since this came to our attention? And, still nothing is done?
   Change our patent laws so the drug makers cannot run a monopoly like this. Vote out of office those taking campaign contributions from companies making insulin, for that money is buying their inaction; That Money is buying silence.
   And, on the state level? We cannot change the patent laws, as the Constitution gives Congress power over them. But, we can pass a law putting a lid of the price and requiring the pharmaceuticals to make the insulin available anyway, even at the new low prices.
   It is time for us to stand up to our lawmakers, and demand that they quit pandering to the pharmaceuticals, quit taking money to do nothing. Its time for an end of this corruption..

https://www.t1international.com/blog/2019/01/20/why-insulin-so-expensive/

Roads that are paved seldom climb steep hills. It is the rock-strewn path that climbs the mountain.

-- 

We Look not at Their Cause, but at Their Flaws

   It began as a pressuring: We will be here until something is done about police violence. We will march and protest until Black lives are no longer so jeopardized. It was to be a cry for help until help would be offered.
   It is no more that.
  On day one, it seemed everyone in America was galvanized against police violence. Something must be done, the nation cried. The outrage in the homes of America matched the outrage in the streets.
   Then, with more vandalism and violence, the perception of what was going on changed. Instead of seeing it as an accounting, a moment that we must account for what we would do to change things, it became simply a pageantry of two sides pitted against each other.
   It became a war instead of an accounting.
   We no longer thought so much on what measures we should take to bring an end to police violence. Instead, we focused on whether the protesters had the right to be there and whether they were going about their protesting in the right way. Instead of being united in the thought that something should be done to end police violence, we divided into two sides arguing over who were the good guys, the protesters or the police.
   When you find a flaw -- violence and vandalism -- in those who have a cause, you can attack the cause itself, you can question whether the cause itself is just.
   And, yet it is. It is a just cause. It was just when it started and it remains just now. But, our eyes are being directed to look not at the cause, itself, but instead at the violence and vandalism of those who carry the cause.
   Our eyes are being diverted. We are looking from what need to be done, to what is wrong with those who are asking that something be done.
 

I Campaign not on Our Greatness, but on Our Need to Overcome Flaws

   We are a state that aspires. We don't sit easy being just another state. We are a state that is growing, flexing, vibrating and reaching for lofty heights.
   But, I like to think of us as more than that. I like to think of us as a state that reflects on its shortcomings, that searches them out with a fervor for overcoming them so it can thrust them behind.
  Greatness isn't greatness until it includes goodness. And, to become good, you must reflect not so much on how fabulous you are, but how fabulous you're not. You must spot your spots, so to speak, for you must spot your stains. You must see those stains before you can wipe them clean. No person repents without first acknowledging their faults. And, if that is true of the person, it is true of the society. Even so, this state will never become better if it does not first stop to reflect on what it does wrong so it can turn those mistakes around.
   Humility is not just for the person, but for the public body, as well. If it is a trait good for the one, it is a trait good for the many.
   So, I would ask, are we a state willing to be humble? Are we willing to stop and consider our faults?
  I am going to submit some ideas of what we are doing wrong. Rather than becoming angry with me, I would ask that you take my words and weigh them. Consider on them. Reflect.
  We are a state that is not doing well with its homeless. A few years ago, we threw them out of our city's downtown area. We have created new homeless shelters and perhaps new resource offices. But, I drive down the streets in the evening and still see the homeless abound. I read news stories of them not having places to defecate or urinate, so they do it on our streets.
   We are a state not doing well with police violence. We read of a police K9 dog being unleashed on a victim even though the victim was willing to submit to arrest. We read of police stopping a homeless man for riding across several lanes of traffic on a bicycle. And killing him.
   We are a state where a person buys paint to be thrown on the on the sidewalk of the DA's office -- a definite crime, but hardly worthy the punishment we attach, for we bring charges that could lock them away for life.
   I could go on.
   More greatness comes from confessing your weaknesses than does in bragging about your strengths. I would to have us become a great state, but we must first overcome our weaknesses. If we are too proud to see our faults, we will never see our horizons.
   I would campaign not on our greatness, but our need to overcome our flaws. 

Further Thoughts of the Providential Invention Known as the BolaWrap

   Further thoughts on the great invention know as the BolaWrap -- for it is a great invention. You have a person fleeing arrest? Capture him like the South American gauchos would capture animals. They would toss cords, weighted at their ends, that wrapped around the legs of the animals, bringing them down.

   Inventor Woody Norris looked at the gauchos and their bolas, and thought, Hey, we might just have something here. This might just be a way to stop fleeing criminals. We'll no longer need to shoot them dead. We can just throw a bola cord at them, wrapping around either their torso or legs, and their fleeing is brought to an end. 

  So, Norris took a "technology" that was used by the ancient indigenous peoples of South America, and it became the latest technology in how to stop a fleeing criminal. Strands of Kevlar shoot out, wrap around the party fleeing arrest, and down they fall, stopped short in their tracks.

  First off, I thought the BolaWrap a godsend, a tool police agencies should be rushing to purchase. And, I still think it a tool every police agency should have -- and use. But, I've had further thoughts. I'm guessing it is expensive, overpriced. Wrap Technologies has a patent, I'm sure, and become the exclusive source, so they can ask what price they will. Second, the device has its shortcomings. Reloading isn't easy. You fire once at the victim and if your shot goes amiss, no time to reload. It should have been designed to have at least two shots. Now, in a world of free competition, someone would simply come along and improve the product and make it right. But, in the world in which we live, where we allow such monopoly, if Wrap Technologies doesn't change their BolaWrap, no one else can.

   This is a technology that is greatly in need. Our nation is roiling in protest against wrongful police killings. Wrap Technologies needs to go back and straighten out the shortcomings of the BolaWrap. And, it needs to make sure the price is affordable so all the BolaWraps necessary can be purchased by all of our police agencies. Yes, I do not know for sure the price is exorbitant, but I'll bet you it is. 

   And, if we could change our laws to make competition possible, that would help.

   In the meantime, we need to be encouraging use of the BolaWrap. More than 150 agencies nationwide do have it. How often they employ it, I do not know. They are using it primarily to stop those with mental disabilities and such, I believe, not seeing the BolaWrap as being effective enough against dangerous criminals who might turn and shoot them. If I had sway, I'd have them use it more. If I had say, I'd have them explain why they didn't use it each time they instead used lethal force. 

   

  

Temptation has Never had Such Presence

   "Rare moments from the groovy days not suitable for all eyes." The ad teases me to open it. These days, one can barely use the Internet without facing such temptations. Our day -- perhaps like no day in history -- faces such allurements.
   Back in the day, you had your books, and you had your newspaper. Nothing needed to come before your eyes that you didn't want. When TVs and movies came along there began to be some slippage. You'd go to the movies, and an alluring-looking movie would be there and you might decide to click on it, so to speak. Or, even if you didn't choose a lurid movie, you might be watching along and suddenly a scene came up you didn't anticipate, and there it was, unavoidable.
 Today? Billboard ads with skimpily dressed women are reasonably common. You are driving along, and, bang!, there it is, front and center, no way to avoid it.
   Little by little, it has gotten worse and worse. First came TV and movies and billboards, we now we have arrived in the years of the Internet. Smut has its day. Pornography is but a click away.
  Temptation has never had such presence. 

Teach Them to Drop the 'Don't Mess With Me' Attitude

 This is a blog I posted years ago, but it is even more relevant today.
 Considering the number of cases we are seeing, yes, we should want to train our officers against police violence. At this point, so much police violence being in the news, there should be a national outcry for anti-brutality instruction being instilled into every training academy in the nation.
  Surely, we should realize training is the key. Nothing taught, is nothing learned. But, when something is taught -- when it is hammered into heads and yelled into ears -- there is chance it will sink in.
  Teach them not to shoot unless necessary. Teach them, theirs is to arrest, not judge, convict, or punish. Teach them, it is not theirs to bring remorse to the criminal, not theirs to get mad and put someone in their place, not theirs to take a paddle out and teach them a lesson. Warn them against even making comments such as, "That guy needs to learn he can't do that. I ought to beat the living daylights out of him."
   Teach them that, by nature, criminals are going to do things that provoke. The police officer's badge of honor is to not be provoked. Make the arrest, but don't go beyond.
   Teach them that sometimes the lawbreaker does get away. No, you don't shoot just because the person is eluding arrest. Chase, but unless there is a real threat, don't kill just because the person will otherwise escape.
   Teach them they are not there to make fights or win fights, nor to show who is the toughest or baddest. They are there to arrest, and that is the long and the short of it. Injecting personal vendettas is a violation of police ethics, or should be. Exacting personal revenge is wrong, or should be. Charge offenders with resisting arrest, assaulting an officer or whatever, but do not swing a fist or fire a gun just to exact personal revenge.
   They are not there to make a point, or to show off, or to ride herd on or rule over others. Theirs is not to rant at the offender, nor exchange in trash talk.
   Yes, some of this seems a little different than what we currently allow officers to do. We might think there is nothing wrong with ranting at the arrestee.  But, maybe it is time to realize actions and attitudes are going to have to change if we want to change the results we are getting. Actions come out of attitudes. What we sow is what we reap, it is said, and, if we let our officers sow anger, their anger will sometimes be their undoing.
   Yes, restraint needs to be part of what an officer is, part of what he is trained to be. If he isn't taught not to walk around with a "Don't-mess-with-me" attitude, he might well start thinking he is not just there to enforce the law, but to be the law.
   It is probably time to realize that is exactly what we don't want.

One School for Republicans, Another for Democrats

   I hate to see us reach such a point that we establish a Republican school on one side of the town and a Democrat one on the other, and let parents decide which to send their children to.

   Yet, I somewhat wonder if we should.

   One school teaches creationism, the other only evolution. One side doesn't allow sex education, the other does. The school on the east side of town teaches Black lives matter, while the one on the west is All lives matter. 

   I believe parents should be able to decide what they want their children to learn. But, it is hard to have it both ways. You either teach sex education, or you don't. Keeping both sides under one roof is becoming unwieldy.

   I think of the story in the Book of Mormon, of a prophet named Nephi, who gave up the judgment-seat as the people ripened for destruction. The nation was governed by the voice of the people, and they had become wicked, so Nephi became weary and let the people have their way.

   It is not so different with this. There is weariness in watching them argue. And, their voice should be heard, anyway. So, ask them if they want separate schools. 

   It would be a terrible and sad thing to see this happen. It does seem better to bring them together and teach them civility, tolerance of the other person's belief, and love of thy neighbor. If we should be allowed to teach these things in our schools, then let us. If students should be taught to listen to those with different beliefs without being upset with them, or deriding them, or mocking them . . .

   If respect could be something you offered your enemies, instead of each side supposing the other is full of the devil.

   If we could teach these things, and they were to be learned, such a thing could save our nation. On the other hand, though, segregating schools so one is for Republicans and the other for Democrats might well mark the death of our nation. 

Using BolaWrap Stands as an Alternative to Police Killings

   With all the cry against police violence, we must wonder why BolaWrap is not in greater use. I had never heard of it till today, but it is a tool to stop those fleeing arrest without harming them. Don't shoot 'em, don't taze 'em. Don't harm them more than making them fall. Strands of Kevlar twine shoot out and wrap around the fleeing person's legs or torso. It's not quite this good: but can almost be compared to shooting handcuffs on someone.
   It has been around for at least more than two years, and is being utilized by more than 100 agencies nationwide. (How many of them just purchased the BolaWraps, but never used them, I do not know.) Press conferences have been held as agencies have started using it. News stories have covered its use. YouTube videos exist showing actual case use. I saw a video from June 2018 posted on YouTube by the Salt Lake Tribune, so word of it has reached this town.
   I suspect it isn't receiving greater acclaim because it is seen more as a tool to stop those with mental illnesses and things like that, as opposed to stopping dangerous criminals. I, though, tend to think it should be used in many of our situations that are instead resulting in the killing of victims whose lives should not be being taken.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBA7JBmrqGo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDWJAT4g4Sk


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLbh9W7tWs4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oka9lYxTQWs


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti07ac9z1FQ

There is often more wisdom in letting wisdom go than there is in dragging it out.
-

President Trump Needs a Plan for COVID-19 at the Border

   Ten Border Patrol officers have reportedly lost their lives to COVID-19 from catching the virus while dealing with immigrants crossing the border. How you deal with entry of the virus into the country should go beyond banning entrance, a measure (which I do not approve of) President Trump has taken. The same principles used elsewhere of social distancing, face-masking, contact tracking, isolating when you become sick, etc., should be happening on our border.

   If you don't secure the border as best you can from the spread of COVID, you are failing to fight the virus. 

   If you don't have a plan of attack in place, you are failing. Each state has plans in place. Has Texas made the border part of its plan? And, rather, shouldn't that plan be coming from the White House, as it is over U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Protection, and the border extends through several states and you need policy for all of it?

   The detention camps are part of this. You should be providing the prisoners there the same protections, when possible. Because when they contact the virus, they spread it to Customs and ICE officials, and to camp attendants, and thus to others living here in the United States.

   Not to mention that you should be as concerned for the lives of the immigrants as you are for the lives of the Border agents. It is wonderful if the agents are getting immigrants to hospitals when it is suspected they have COVID-19. Texas and other states should be more transparent in accounting for how many patients in their hospitals are immigrants. And, if news reports start coming out that there are many, we should be concerned for the immigrants instead of being maligned against them. 

    Are the immigrants in the camps being issued masks? Are they being tested regularly? Are the Border agents being tested each time they come in contact with someone they suspect of having the virus? Are they being sent home on sick leave until cleared? Are they keeping distance from the immigrants when they pick them up, by keeping them in the backs of the vans walled off from the cab? Do they issue masks to the immigrants as soon as they apprehend them?

   It is possible that they are transporting a high volume of immigrants to the hospitals on suspicion of COVID and the testing is being done there. With the immigrants then having no other place to go to and isolate until those results do come back, they are being held right in the hospitals. Is this not possibly what is happening? Wouldn't it be better to test them right upon capture, and keep them in large tent facilities big enough to isolate each person?
   Whatever is being done, it falls for short of being planned out, if there is any plan even at all. I call for the Trump administration to come up with a comprehensive plan for dealing with COVID-19 at the border. 

    

   

A Conversation With My Government

  "Hello, government. I'm calling about your decision to give those three sisters a year's stay here. You know, the three who were to be deported in a week."
  "Yes."
  "Yes. I need you to answer me some questions. I need to know which laws are being used, so I'll know if you're going about this in the right way."
 I see. And, may I ask who you are?"
  "Well, I'm John Jackson."
  "Are you a member of the media?"
  "No, I'm John Jackson."
  "You've reached our media relations department. I'm afraid you need to be a member of the media if I'm to help you."
 "I see. Well, I looked through your website and you don't have anyone else I can contact. Yours is the only phone number the agency lists."
 "Yes."
 "I'm one of your stockholders, so I thought maybe it would be okay if I called, even if I'm not a member of the press."
 "What do you mean you are a stockholder? Actually, the government doesn't have stockholders."
   "Actually, it does. Well, maybe not in the strict sense of the term, but this is my government and I run it."
   "I see. I wonder who appointed you to such a high position."
   "Abraham Lincoln did."
   "Abraham Lincoln?"
   "Yes, he was giving something called the Gettysburg Address and he said something about government of the people, by the people, and for the people. That would be me."    
   "I see."
  "Ever since then, I've pretty much thought of this as my government."
  "I see. Well, you're not a member of the press. Do you realize what a nightmare it would be if we tried to take calls from everyone in the public, answering every question they have? We simply don't have time."
   "Make time. I'm one of your stockholders."
   "Have you filed a Freedom of Information inquiry?"
   "Too much paperwork. I'm a stockholder. I'll just call you up and you'll answer my questions. It's a lot simpler that way."
   "I see. If you were a member of the press, I'd be glad to help you."
   "What if I were a congressman, or a mayor or head of a government agency?"
   "Yes, I suppose I could help you then."
   "Well, those are my people. Think of them as my minions, if you will. I tell them what to do."
   "I see."
   "I don't like the way you think you only have to answer to them. And, I especially don't appreciate the way you think you only have to answer to the press."
   "Well, yes, like I said, we've only got time to answer to so many people. The press represents you in getting information."
   "I didn't elect them. I never gave the press permission to take anything from me."
   "And, what are they taking from you?"
   "My right to talk to you, to get some answers. You said you'd help me if I were a member of the press, but since I'm not, you're not going to help me."
   "But, this is media relations . . ."
   "The press doesn't run this country. I do. So, I'm going to have to ask you to quit answering so much to them and start answering more to me."
  At that point, the government hung up on me. I was left thinking that if government truly were government of the people, by the people and for the people, then, yes, it would make information more accessible to us, the public.

(Index: Quotes; stories) 

Paul Krugman Calls Payroll Tax Cuts 'hydroxycholorquine' of Economics

"I don't know if anyone else has said this, but payroll tax cuts are the hydroxychloroquine of economic policy. They won't do anything to solve the employment crisis, but will have dangerous side effects. Yet Trump remains obsessed with them as a cure." -- Paul Krugman tweet

A nation founded on the concept of freedom should not imprison those who seek it.

-

If We Looked to the Book of Mormon for Guidance on Police Shootings

   Striking are the parallels we find in the story of the "arrest" of Zerahemnah in the Book of Mormon to what officers experience today. Just to mention one, today they scream, "Drop it," warning the suspect before killing him. Sometimes multiple times. Look for that in this story as well.
   The Book of Mormon is a book of scripture of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is not so wrong to liken the things on its pages to our days and to our problems.
   Led by Zerahemnah, the Lamanites had attacked the Nephites. The attack was wrongful, and places Zerehemnah in our story to be likened unto a criminal today. In our story, Zerahemnah finds himself in jeapordy of being arrested the cops -- whoops, make that Nephites. The story says Zerahemnah and the Lamanites "became frightened . . . even until they began to flee." Even so today, when someone is about to be apprehended, it is because they are scared of being arrested that they turn and flee the cops.
   So, Zehahemnah and his men "were pursued by (Officer) Lehi and his men." The officers catch up with Zerahemnah and his co-villains and surround them, and "they were struck with terror."
   "Now (Officer) Moroni, when he saw their terror, commanded his men that they should stop shedding their blood." Even so, we should wonder if police officers, when they can see the person is running in fright, should back off and not shoot. I think of Bernardo Palacios, and of how he turned in fright and ran from officers, with indicators being that the very reason he was fleeing was that he was scared of the officers and what they might do to him.
   "And (Officer) Moroni said unto Zerahemnah: Behold, Zerahemnah, that we do not desire to be men of blood. Ye know that ye are in our hands, yet we do not desire to slay you."
   So, we are in what today is called the deescalation phase, where you try to talk the criminal into surrendering himself. Officer Moroni makes it clear they do not want to kill, even that they don't want to be "men of blood." Even so, officers today should not want to kill, but should be anxious to not have to kill someone. They should lament the very thought of it. "Ye know that ye are in our hands, yet we do not desire to slay you." Just because the chase has reached a juncture where the officers can shoot, does not mean they should.
   Officer Moroni then gives warning to the criminal. "I command you by all the desires which ye have for life, that ye deliver up your weapons." In other words, "Drop it."
   But, notice there is more explicit, empathetic, and reaching-out-to care language in the words of Officer Moroni than those sometimes used by officers today. "All the desires which ye have for life" were Moroni's words. Could officers today be more pleading, more empathetic? Could they say, "Please, sir, life is wonderful," or, "Please, sir, I beg you by all the desire that you have for life"?
   Moroni then offers Zerahemnah freedom. "Go your way and come not again to war against us," he says. Even so, officers today should give those they are chasing the hope that they will be set free if they just stop running. "If I don't find anything to arrest you for, I'm going to let you free." And, repeat it. "Bernardo, I'll let you free if I can. If it is possible, I won't arrest you. Stop, and let's see if I can just let you go free."
   Then, the officer will have to make good on that promise. He will have to do as much investigation as possible right on site at that time to make a determination.
   Well, Zerehemnah gives up his weapons, only to have them given back because he will not say that he will not return to war against the Nephites. Moroni gives another warning. "Now as ye are in our hands we will spill your blood upon the ground, or ye shall submit to the conditions which I have proposed."
   In his anger, Zerahemnah rushes forward to slay Moroni, even as those resisting arrest sometimes raise their guns to shoot the officers. One of Moroni's fellow officers smites Zerahemnah's weapon to the earth, and then swings his own sword at Zerahemnah, taking off his scalp but not killing him. That he disarmed him equates with an officer today trying to disarm the other person, as oppose to just killing them. Under today's rules, we are not as likely to do that. When officers shoot, the idea is not to disarm, or to disable to the point that the gun won't be used, but to kill. When the Nephite officer swung his sword and took off Zerahemnah's scalp, he might have been aiming to kill, but just ended up disabling. The point is, though, he stopped trying to kill Zerahemnah at that point. Even so, officers today should cut short their attempt to kill just as soon as the person has been disabled. Too often, it is twenty more bullets for a person lying on the ground.
   Perhaps one of the most pertinent passages in the story of the arrest of Zerahemnah, is Alma 43:46. The Nephites were taught that it was their duty to protect themselves, but listen how they were not to be the first to shoot: "Inasmuch as ye are not guilty of the first offense, neither the second, ye shall not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies."
     Even so today, officers are told they are to protect themselves, "not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies." But today, do they kill too quickly? Is the first or second offense when they see the person aiming at them, shooting at them, or what? Whatever it is, there needs to be provocation before our officers shoot.

Friendship never fails, 

but it is there for all the failures.

-

The Famines of Our Day are of Biblical Proportions

   Why not this as one of the biblical signs of our day that we are living in the end of times? Has there ever been a famine like the Great Chinese Famine of 1958-62? I am not student enough to know. But, I do know the Chinese Famine was a terrible one.
  Guess how many died? Would you believe an estimated 20 to 43 million? That means there were two to four times as many deaths as there were in the holocaust, where 11 million suffered death.

   Anyway, after learning about the great famine in China, I turned to the scriptures, reading in Luke 21 of how the Savior prophesied that there would be ". . . famines and pestilences and fearful sights . . ." I thought of Africa, where the famines have been so large that they have long held the world's attention, and been a hallmark of our time. I think both of the large charity events, such as Live Aid 50 years ago, and of the lyrics in songs such as Toto's Down in Africa, where it says, "I bless the rains down in Africa."
   I read how even now, more than 20 million people in Yemen, the Horn of Africa, and Nigeria face famine. I would guess the word "face" means they are in danger of dying. How many have died? I do not know the death toll for just Yemen, the Horn of Africa, and Nigeria, but I read how 9 million die worldwide every year from famine. I go to a website that counts the current deaths this year, and it says we were at 5.5 million as of this writing.

   There have been famines throughout history, but I do wonder but what we are living in a day when they are worse than at many other times. 

   And, yes, I do believe they are a fulfillment of prophecy. The Great Chinese Famine is perhaps one of the greatest famines of all time, and it is surrounded by other famines, and they are coming in these days of wonder that could be drawing us close to the end of time. The Savior said the last days would be marked by famine. It is in the world around us. Should we not wonder, then, if this is not a sign of the the end of time? 

A fool has to have an answer, 

but the wise considers that there is none.

- 

Appeal to Chief Brown that His Officers be Allowed to Hear Both Sides

   What to ask of Salt Lake City Police Chief Mike Brown, if he could be pleaded with to do something about police violence in Utah?

    Ask him if he would be willing to select a half dozen videos and show them to his officers, narrating them as he showed them, explaining what was wrong about what the officers did and explaining why those killings were wrongful. If he were willing to do this -- which he probably wouldn't -- then it would get him coming in the right direction. It would get him to admitting in his own mind that those killings were wrongful.

  When he declined to do that, then suggest that if he was not willing do it himself, to at least let someone from the protests be allowed to make the video presentation to the officers. Explain to him that this would be a starting point in understanding each other. Each side needs to know why the other side feels the killings were or were not justified. We have seen District Attorney Sim Gill make an hour-long (or however long) explanation on why Bernardo Palacios needed to be killed. We have seen the Carbon County Sheriff's Department explain why the killing of Bobby Duckworth was appropriate. And, the officers have repeatedly been trained by him and others in the police establishment that what they did was right.They are getting that side of the story.

  They need to hear the other side.

  They should be allowed to have a presentation from those who are protesting in the streets. They should be allowed a point-by-point explanation as why the killings are seen as wrong by the protesters. 

  The officers are not likely to quit the killings as long as they think they are justified. Unless someone steps in and points out to them why the killings are wrong, they are going to go right on committing them. But, if someone is allowed to explain why the killings are wrong, it could prick their consciences. Some of the officers surely should be able to see that what they are doing is wrong, and next time such a situation comes up, not kill. 

   Chief Brown might be hard-pressed to turn away an appeal that someone just be allowed to talk to the officers.

Facebook was Wrong to Remove Donald Trump's Post

   Facebook was wrong to remove Donald Trump's post. Such a thing is an infringement on the First Amendment right of free speech as troubling as anything America has ever experienced. Facebook is similar to a public utility that has obligation to serve all of its residents, not just those it chooses. It has an exclusive market. 
   

Sim Gill Should be Removed from Office

   Justice is never centered on retaliation. It never seeks to exact more than it's due. When you have an officer who wallows in such practices, his character is revealed, and he should be removed from office.
   I speak of Sim Gill, Salt Lake County's district attorney. But, I could as well speak of many of our police officers.
   Gill brought charges today against individuals who vandalized his office while protesting against police officers not being indicted for the murder of Bernardo Palacios. Some of them could face life imprisonment as a result of the DA choosing to enhance their crimes by classifying them as gang-related. Some did no more than buy the paint that was splashed on the streets and sidewalk.
   The calling card of an officer with tendencies toward police violence is that they believe they have the right to exercise dominion. They never learn that theirs is to arrest, not to make a point, nor exact vengeance, nor to show off, nor to ride herd on or rule over others.
   The same goes for a district attorney.
   We should be seeking out, identifying officers with these tendencies. We should be kicking them off our police forces.
    And, the same goes for such DAs. They should be removed from office.

The art of heaven is to paint others well.
-

Bernardo Thoughts

Was Bernardo a threat? Examine the videos, including the surveillance camera at Granary Storage. Do you find at any point where he points the gun at the officers, or threatens them in any way? I didn't as I repeatedly watched them. What happened in the "robberies"? Was any money even taken? I don't know that it was. Do we know if Bernardo even asked for money? What has become of the robbery victims? Some have moved away and it may be hard to reach to even interview them. What became of the investigation into the robberies? Is it over? What did it find? Did the incidents even amount to "armed robbery"?
If all came to public light, perhaps it would be understood that Bernardo did nothing to justify being killed. The officers panicked and thought he should be killed, and that panic is understandable, but as to whether it was things Bernardo did that raised that level of panic, I don't believe there was. The information fed the police by the caller-in (or possibly callers-in) led to much of the panic against Bernardo.
If justice were done, Bernardo would be alive and breathing.

He who has your ear, has your heart.

-

How Independent was the Independent Audit?

   I find the story saying an FBI audit found only "minor" errors in FISA applications of importance. An independent audit had previously released a scathing rebuke of the FBI for the FISA mistakes. Now, with the new audit, there is good reason to believe the errors were not of great consequence.
  One significance of all this, is it make one wonder at how independent the independent audit was. Was it influenced by the Trump Administration to reach a verdict pleasant to the president?

Perhaps It was a Mistake to Suggest We Should Try HCQ

    I'm wondering if I was wrong, in a couple blogs last week, in suggesting we should try hydroxychloroquine. Since then, Assistant Secretary for Health at the Department of Health and Human Services Brett Giroir, has come out saying:
   "From a public health standpoint, at first, hydroxychloroquine looked very promising. There were not definitive studies. At this point in time, there's been five randomized control, placebo-controlled trials that do not show any benefit to hydroxychlorquine. So, at this point in time, we don't recommend that as a treatment."
   To boot, the Texas Medical Board has come out warning that it could take action against anyone who falsely advertises a cure for COVID-19. Dr. Stella Immanuel, whose clinic is in Texas, was featured in the video hailing hydroxychloroquine that went viral last week.
   Mercy, mercy. We all make mistakes, and perhaps it was a mistake on my part to have suggested we try HCQ.

Those who would look into the windows of heaven must use eyes other than those of earth.

-

Freedom from Pornography Should be Strengthened

   Once you could protect yourself by the books you chose to open, and the movies you chose to go to, and the places you chose to go.
   Not so, no more.
   The Internet came along; Facebook came along. And with them, a trail of pornography, if I can call it that. They may just be scantily-clad women, not completely unclothed, but they are pornography, the same. And, while you can influence which ones come up by never clicking on any that seem questionable, the danger remains. Images with too much showing still filter in.
   There is a right: the right not to have to view these things, the right to be free to view what you want to view. If a person were to streak unclothed down the streets of a city, they would be arrested. Why? Because we should be free from having to view such things.
   It is no different with the soft porn on the Internet; We should be free from it being forced before our view. We should be free from it being forced upon us.
   Whether it is to be found on billboards, or television, or wherever, it is an invasion of our freedom.
   Our laws should be strengthened.
    1.) It should be illegal to disseminate images to those who do not want them. The Internet providers can often target their advertising, allowing it do disseminate to those who do not mind it, and not subjecting it to those who don't want it. They need only to go through the doors they are welcome, and not those that they are not.
   2.) Billboards should be held to perhaps the highest standard of all as we consider our rules. No display should reveal uncovered skin in the greater genital area, nor bare the hips. No displays should reveal skin too low below below where the breast begins. If the display would offend the sensibilities of many in the public, it should not be allowed. Billboards present their images before all of society. Every person who drives a car is subjugated to them, forced to view the images whether they want to see them or not. Because billboards force their images on people more so than many other venues (if I might use that term), there should be greater restrictions.
   3.) The same rules for billboards should apply to the hard copies of newspapers published within the state. And to all publications appealing to all cross sections of society that are either published within the the state or primarily targeting only Utah. Thus, we would not attempt to control national magazines that would be impossible and perhaps unreasonable to restrict. Nor would such instate publications not seeking an audience with everyone  -- entertainment publications and such -- be so restricted. Thus, playhouses, concert venues and others would be free to publish pictures suitable for their clienteles, and to disseminate them to their clienteles. The rule of your freedom ends where my nose begins would be honored in that they would not be allowed to disseminate the images to those who do not want them.
   4.) Theaters would be required to have personnel available, and available by phone, who could answer questions about movie content. Thus, before seeing a film, customers could learn whether it would offend their senses. Such personnel would be required to have viewed all movies playing a the theater.
   5.) Video rental and sales locations would be required to post phone numbers where people could call for input on movie content during business hours. Such content personnel, due to the large number of videos, would neither be required to have seen all films nor to be aware of the content of all of them. Still, they could discuss the videos the best that they could.
   If legal counsel suggested any part of the above would not stand as law, I would remove it from the bill, and file a second bill as a resolution encouraging businesses on the matter. Actually, I might even go the direction of a resolution, anyway, on some of the points.

 

 

 

A mind made up is more of a wall than one of brick and stone.

-

There are more lessons in defeat than there are in victory.

-

What Part of the Word 'Illegal' Don't I Understand? No Part at All

   What part of the word "illegal" don't I understand?
   I don't understand the part about why coming to America should be illegal.
  Or why joining family members here should be illegal.
  I don't understand why we make it illegal for people to work, why we take people begging for work at the meagerest of pay, and say, Nope, we still won't give you a job, not even at that wage.
  No, I don't understand that.
  I don't understand the part about making it wrong to want to be an American. If they've dreamed of becoming Americans, and if being an American is a good thing, why shouldn't we let their dreams come true?
  I don't understand the part about there not being enough of America to go around. There isn't enough room for them in America? No, I don't understand that. We've taken quite a few people in, and no one's spilled out yet.
  I don't understand the part about making them wait years before they can come here. I don't understand why we see the need to send them on paper trails once they get here. I don't understand why we think it necessary to make it such a complicated mess.
   I don't understand the part about making it so expensive, why we have to exact such a toll from those who are poor.
  Yes, and I don't understand why those who came and made it through the maze insist that it is only right, since they had to go through it, that everyone else should have to go through it, too. Why should it be an affront to those who have gone through a bad system that the system should be fixed?
  I don't understand the part about how they ruin our economy. I don't know that any economy has ever suffered because of people who want to work. I don't understand how if they are buying gas from us, and groceries from us, and entertainment from us while they are here, how that's going to hurt our economy.
   Just the same, I don't understand how we get mad at them for sending money home to their wives and children. We would begrudge them from supporting their families?
   No, I don't understand that.
   I don't understand why we say they are taking jobs from us, but we never complain about taking jobs from each other. We've always had to compete for jobs, but if we have to compete against them, somehow that isn't fair.
   I don't understand why it would be so wrong to make it so they could pay taxes. We complain about them working under-the-table, but won't let it be any other way. Shouldn't we let them pay taxes like everyone else?
   I don't understand how some of us don't even to want to live among them. What kind of pride is that?
   I don't understand how they're all criminals. Seems to me, most of them are just decent, poor people.
   I don't understand how we expect that there should not be some of them who are criminals. We raise criminals here. We have criminals among those who were born here. Why do we suppose there will not be some among them who are criminals?
   I don't understand why we judge the many by the few, why if one of them commits a murder, or a rape, or a robbery, we label them all as murders, and rapists, and robbers.
   I don't understand why that shouldn't be called slander.
   I don't understand how they are terrorists. In the long stream of those who have come, how many terroristic acts have they committed?
  What part of the word "illegal" don't I understand? I don't understand why it should be illegal for them to live and breathe on American soil, to walk down the aisles of our churches and grocery stores, and to just exist here. Live, breathe, and exist -- are those criminal acts?
   I don't understand how our helping them is going to hurt us.
   They are just ordinary people as long as they are on one side of the border, but if they walk across a line in the sand, it makes them evil. I don't understand that.
   I don't understand why we still call them "aliens." That word has changed. Using that verbiage today makes it sound like they are from another planet.
   I don't understand how they are destroying our nation.
   Oh, and I don't understand how they are destroying our rule of law. Someone walks into the country without your invitation, and suddenly your whole legal system falls apart, maybe? Is that it?
   I don't understand the part about them being an invasion. The word conjures up a foreign force invading to conquer. A bunch of poor people walking our way -- very few of them even having guns -- and we speak of an invasion?
   I don't understand how amnesty is a whole lot different than forgiveness. They came without our permission, and we don't want to forgive them for that?
   I don't understand the part about not wanting to give them a path to citizenship.
   I don't understand how the one crime that should never be forgiven is coming to America.
   I don't understand why, in America, that should be called justice.
   No forgiveness for them? I don't understand the part about how we are so  compassionate. You really think so?
   I don't understand how this doesn't have something to do with an awful lot of pride on our part, and a show of contempt for those who are humble.
   I don't understand the part about singing, "This land is my land, this land is your land," when what we really mean is, "This land is only my land, this land ain't your land. I'm too selfish to ever share."
   I don't understand the part about having a welcome sign at our country's entrance, saying, Give us your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free, but when they arrive, we tell them to get their tails out of here and seek their refuge somewhere else.
   I don't understand how it is suppose to be patriotic to turn these people away.
   I don't understand how it is that one of the reasons we went to war in the Revolution was that King George was restricting immigration, yet now, in our day, restricting them from coming is all just and proper.
   I don't understand how one of the freedoms this nation once enjoyed was the freedom to come here, but now it is not.
   I don't understand how this should be considered a freedom lost.
   I don't understand how locking people out has anything to do with freedom.
   The neighborly thing to do, would be to let them in. I don't understand -- as much as anything -- why we can't just be good neighbors and let them in.
    What part of the word "illegal" don't I understand? I don't understand one word of it. There's pretty much nothing I understand. Basically, I probably ought to be sent back to school on this one. What's the name of the textbook I should study -- Twenty-million Reasons for Not Loving the Immigrant?
   I don't understand why we don't just take the advice of Paul McCartney and Wings: "Somebody's knocking at the door. Somebody's ringing the bell. Do me a favor, and open the door, and let 'em in."