Ft. Hood, Philadelphia, and Zero Tolerance

I just didn’t know where to start.  Three topics that pushed my buttons over the past week or so.

Let’s start with the tragedy at Fort Hood.  At an American military base, supposedly a secure installation, stricken with the tragic deaths of over a dozen people.  The Army wants to be careful in calling it an act of terrorism, saying that there are many Muslim members in the ranks who would be offended.  I contend that we’ve gotten way to “PC” for our own good.  Call a spade a spade – this was an act of terrorism, plain and simple.  Like it or not, the US is in the midst of a war.  Not a war like generations before us fought, where the enemy was easy to identify.  The war we are fighting now has lines that are blurry and enemies that are hard to spot.  So it was amazing to me that the General of the base said that firearms are not issued to the troops unless there is a drill or other specific activity that requires them.

Really?  If we refuse to acknowledge that we are fighting a war, then we are allowing ourselves to be pushed around.  The Major that perpetrated this act of terrorism had to know that he would face little or no opposition simply because nobody else would be armed and able to counter his attack!  How many more acts like this will need to take place before we wake up and realize that the only way to prevent criminals – and terrorists – from plying their trade is to make them believe that they will not be able to accomplish their task.  Meeting force with force.  My heart goes out to the families of those who lost their lives at Ft. Hood, but this tragedy did not have to happen.  Allowing members of the military to be properly able to defend themselves would have caused Major Hasan to reconsider his plans.  At the very least, fewer lives would have been lost.

Criminals do not obey laws.  That is the very essence of what makes them criminals.  To operate a military installation in the midst of a war on terrorism and not allow our soldiers the ability to defend themselves is just crazy.

Moving on to Philadelphia, the citizens there are in the midst of a strike by transit workers.  It’s not uncommon to see workers go on strike in order to get better working conditions.  As reported in USA Today:

“Union workers, who earn an average of $52,000 a year, are seeking an annual 4% wage hike and want to keep the current 1% contribution they make toward the cost of health care coverage. Their contract expired in March.

“SEPTA was offering an 11.5% wage increase over five years, with a $1,250 signing bonus in the first year, and increases in workers’ pensions, Maloney said.”

Are you kidding me?  We are in the midst of a recession.  There are unemployed workers lined up looking for jobs.  SEPTA offers a guaranteed wage increase and an increase in pensions.  Yet the union decided that wasn’t good enough, so they decided to walk off the job, causing a major disruption to traffic and routines in Philadelphia.  Not the best timing here, folks.  It would be fairly easy to fill the positions left vacant by the striking workers with others who are desperate for a job.  Maybe if the economy was stronger there would be more sympathy for the transit workers.  I am not traditionally in favor of unions, and it is actions like this that give unions a bad image with the general public.

Finally, the insanity of “zero tolerance” in our public schools was displayed over the past week or so.  Right here in Des Moines, a student is suspended for bringing an empty shotgun shell to her science class for show and tell.  In Newark, Delaware, a student is suspended for bringing a Cub Scout camping tool to school that contained a blade.

In each case – and others like them – a sensible person would have to consider the intent of bringing the items into the school.  I am perfectly OK with throwing the book at those who bring dangerous items into schools with the intent to do harm or create panic.  This was not the case in the two incidents I highlighted.  In fact, an empty shotgun shell simply cannot cause harm to anyone, unless someone tries to swallow it.  Zero tolerance policies will not keep criminals from bringing dangerous items into our schools.  The two students I highlighted had no ill intentions, yet their records are now tainted with their respective suspensions.  We should be teaching our students about trust and responsibility.  Zero tolerance policies teach our children about neither.

Who Watches the Czars?

According to the 10/23 edition of The Washington Times:

“The White House has told Congress it will reject calls for many of President Obama’s policy czars to testify before Congress – a decision senators said goes against the president’s promises of transparency and openness and treads on Congress’ constitutional mandate to investigate the administration’s actions.”

So let me get this straight. The “Czars” are technically above the law, in that they report to Obama only and do not need to testify before the US Congress about what they are doing, or how they will be held accountable for their actions. Does this make sense to you?

“Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” That’s an age old saying that rings as true now as it ever did. And in the hands of Obama’s “Czars,” the power is apparently absolute. Do your job like I tell you to do it, and don’t worry about being accountable to the people.

I love this line:

“We recognize that it is theoretically possible that a president could create new positions that inhibit transparency or undermine congressional oversight. That is simply not the case, however, in the current administration,” [White House counsel Greg] Craig wrote.

Really? So all of the other times in world history where giving someone absolute power has resulted in abuse of that power won’t happen now, right? Through some act of divine knowledge, Obama’s appointees who have no Congressional oversight will not be tempted to do what they want, when they want, and everything will work out fine, right?

“Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.”

It sounds like it’s not too far away from planting the seeds of tyranny. Tell me, what is our recourse if we disagree with the performance of the Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs? We cannot elect someone else to fill that position. He cannot be fired, except on order of President Obama. He essentially had free reign to make policy as he sees fit, and as approved by the Office of the President.

“By the people, for the people.”

Apparently, that’s not the case here. By the President, for the President. It will be good for the people too, you’ll see. Trust us. We’re from the Government, and we’re here to help you.

America was a far better place when we did not depend on the government to “help” us. The Constitution sets forth the powers of the united States as a republic, and the power of the federal government. (My lack of capitalization was not in error.) Over the past few decades, the American people have forgotten what the words of that document really mean. They trust the politicians to do the right thing, when in actuality, they are letting the inmates run the asylum. It is a slippery slope that the American people find themselves on now, and I fear it is one on which we may not be able to find a handhold or a foothold before it is too late.

Sheriff Joe

It was reported this week that Maricopa County (AZ) Sheriff Joe Arpaio was relieved of his immigration enforcement duties under the authority of the federal 287g program.  This program deputizes local law enforcement to help federal agents target illegal immigrants, essentially using local law enforcement as ICE agents.  Sheriff Arpaio was relieved of his duties under this program because ICE believed that he was arresting immigrants who have committed no serious crimes.  This is the first time that ICE has ever revoked these duties from a local law enforcement agency.

In response to his loss of authority, Sheriff Arpaio said, “Nothing has changed.  We’re still going to be doing what we’ve been doing tonight and during the last two and a half years. I don’t take orders from anyone.”

Sheriff Arpaio has his flock of critics.  According to the Christian Science Monitor:

“Sheriffs — who are essentially colonial-era holdovers — cut a cultural and political profile that critics say challenges the democratic system. In recent years, jurisdictions across the South have attempted to rein in the power of the sheriff — with mixed results.”

Reuters reports that Arpaio “… has been criticized by Hispanic activists, civic authorities and civil rights leader Al Sharpton. They say the Phoenix sweeps in areas with significant Latino populations amount to racial profiling.”

Sheriffs do not challenge the democratic system.  So long as they are doing what they are elected to do – enforce the laws – that is not a challenge to the democratic system.  It is when they start making the laws, or they lose their objectivity in the enforcement of current laws.  In my work with Iowa Carry, in those Iowa counties where a citizen cannot obtain a permit, it is the Sheriff that presents the problem.  But it’s not because they are enforcing the laws, it’s because they are using a subjective interpretation of the law, as opposed to being objective.

It is interesting that Arpaio’s critics accuse him of targeting Latinos in his immigration crackdowns.  In Phoenix, a large city close to the Mexican border, one would naturally assume that the Latino population would present that largest target of illegal immigrants.  This is not necessarily “racial profling,” but rather, hitting the largest target.

When all else fails, it is the Sheriff who stands between the citizens and a corrupt government.  It is true that there have been (and maybe still are) some Sheriffs who have been as crooked as some of the criminals that they have locked up.  Every profession, law enforcement included, has its share of members who do the wrong thing.  Even Sheriff Arpaio has done some questionable things in the past.  But in the end, the chief law enforcement officer of any county is an elected official who serves at the behest of the public – the Sheriff.  No other law enforcement agency – local, state, or federal – has the duties or powers of a county Sheriff and his deputies.  ICE should wake up and smell the coffee, as their refusal to keep the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office deputized with federal immigration powers will really have little effect on how Sheriff Arpaio carries out his duties on a daily basis.

That’s the way it should be.

Governments who have tried in the past to reel in the power of the Sheriff are doing a grave disservice to the people of their jurisdictions.  Effective law enforcement cannot take place when the people who make the laws are entrusted with enforcing those laws.  A police department is headed by a Chief of Police who is usually appointed by a governing body.  This ensures that the governing body who makes the laws also gets to have a say in how the laws are enforced.  Truly the “absolute power” paradigm.  By keeping the chief law enforcement position as an elected position away from the influence of the governing body, it keeps a separation of powers that keeps all of the power from ending up in one place.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio gets it.  He enforces the laws in Maricopa County, and the citizens are happy enough with his work to have kept him elected since 1992.  More Sheriffs should stand up to those who would tell them how to enforce the law in their own counties, including challenges from the Federal government.

American Apologies

President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize this week.  According to the Nobel Prize Committee, the reason Obama received this award is due to:

“… his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

“Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.”

In the first few months in office, President Obama has repeatedly apologized to the world for the sins of the “old” United States.  We were too much like cowboys.  We were too arrogant.  We were too willing to use the sword, rather than the pen.  This is a fact that none other than our good friend to the south, Fidel Castro has picked up on.  He gives high marks to the Nobel Prize Committee for their award, saying:

“”Many will say that he still hasn’t earned the right to receive such distinction. We prefer to see in the decision, more than a prize for the president of the United States, a criticism of the genocidal policies that not a few presidents of that country have followed.”

Of course Mr. Castro would believe that past US Presidents have been unfavorable to his liking.  He ran (and still does, by some accounts) a communist country on our back door step.  The citizens of his country do not enjoy the freedoms that every human should have, nor does their government operate in such a manner that it is held accountable by the people it supposedly represents.  I can’t imagine why former administrations might be considered “genocidal” by Mr. Castro.

“The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations.”  Let’s face it, this is as pie in the sky as a world free from firearms.  The US and Russia can talk about nuclear disarmament for the press, but in the end, disarming the two largest nuclear powers in the world will not bring a Utopian “world peace.”  Other countries already possess nuclear capabilities, and more are on the path to develop them.  To see how well disarmament will work, take a look at the draconian gun control laws that have been in place in US cities like Washington DC, Chicago, or LA.  Or in countries like Australia and Great Britain.  Then, take a look at the crime rates that involve the use of firearms.  Does abolishing firearms from the hands of the law-abiding make for a safer society?  Criminals still have firearms, and they still commit their crimes as if the laws do not exist.  Now, replace “firearms” with “nuclear weapons.”  What makes anyone think this would be any different?

“When nuclear weapons are outlawed, only outlaws will have nuclear weapons.”

President Obama has repeatedly apologized for the America of the past.  If the America of the past was so bad, why have we always been called the land of the free, the home of the brave?  Why have so many sacrificed so much to leave their homes and come to our shores to begin a new life?  Could it be that we DO have a system of diplomacy that (until now, it seems) provided for negotiations first, but the ability to bring the full brunt of a feared American military into the picture if necessary?  It is ONLY because of the intervention of the US military that Europe did not transcend into Hitler’s vision of a new world order.  American blood was spilled on foreign land to liberate an oppressed population.  Yet half a century later, the citizens of the very countries we liberated bemoan American politics and decry our policies, until President Obama arrives and apologizes for the past and give “hope” and “vision” for a new world order.

There is nothing to apologize for.  Apologizing for what has made America great, in the past, only has the affect of neutering us for the future.  The United States is not without faults, and mistakes have been made in the past.  The greatest mistakes are made when those who fail to remember the past commit the same mistakes that were made in the past.  Case in point:  Korea and the mistake President Truman made when pulling General MacArthur out of country after doing what he did best – run the military machine.  President Obama is in danger of doing the same thing with General McChrystal in Afghanistan.  Negotiations do not work with criminals and terrorists.  Military power and use of force are the only things both groups understand, and the only way that America can possibly remain the land of the free and the home of the brave is to keep a big stick handy for the times that speaking softly does not work – and then NOT apologizing for using that stick.

I am tired of hearing the apologies.  I am tired of being made to feel like the policies of past presidents are something to be ashamed of, as a country.  We are America, and we have a unique place in world history.  We do not need the “vision of a new world order.”  We need to regain our place as the country that others can turn to when all else fails to keep the dream of freedom alive.

Doing All They Could Do

I’m down here in Dallas for a few days, and watching the evening news.  The top story is a double murder and suicide in East Dallas.  Apparently, a convicted wife beater decided to exact his revenge on his wife, her mom, and then took the coward’s way out and killed himself.

But two days ago, she was afraid for her life, and got an emergency protective order.  Friends and neighbors are shocked, saying that the woman did everything she could have done to protect herself.

Bzzzzzt…  wrong answer, but thanks for playing the game.

She did NOT do everything she could have done.  Had she done so, she and her mom might still be alive.  An EPO is as useful as an open window.  Had she met deadly force with deadly force, the outcome of this might have been totally different.

I know that I’m preaching to the choir here.  It’s just a damn shame that two innocent lives are gone, and those close to the case are incredulous about how it could have happened.  Those words keep playing in my head…

“She did everything she was supposed to do, everything she could have done….”

How blind.  How naive.

How sad.

An Ironic Situation

Iowa Carry had a board meeting this afternoon.  As we went through our skull session of various topics, it was accurately noted that that in spite of the terrible state of the economy, gun sales are at an all-time high.  In some cases, people can hardly afford to pay for the basics of life.  Yet, gun shops can barely keep certain types of firearms on the shelf, and ammo is being sold faster than ever.  What kind of statement does that make?  While President-Elect Obama continues to stress that there is “hope” for our country, apparently, many citizens fail to see that same hope.  It would appear that they are afraid of losing their right to defend themselves.

And Obama has already given them plenty of reason to be afraid.  The website where he lists his “changes” makes a reference to the permanent reinstatement of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, among other things.  He has also hinted that the first few weeks of his presidency will see him issuing a number of Executive Orders – legally binding decisions that require no approval from Congress.  Is that what is best for America?  Or is it one man pushing his agenda without regard for what his citizens want?

Time will tell, and history will be the judge.  I fear, though, that those who have looked to him for change will be ill prepared for the amount of change that will be foisted upon all of us.  This transcends not just firearms related issues, but all basic rights and freedoms that our forefathers fought for and defended with their blood, and spelled out in our Constitution.

And, can anyone accurately define an “assault weapon” anyway?  I can assault someone with a nail gun.  Does that make that tool an assualt weapon?  How about an automobile?  Automobiles in Iowa kill more people than firearms do, every singe day.  Why aren’t automobiles classified as assault weapons?

Let’s not forget that it has been proven, time and time again, that criminals – the ones who use firearms illegally – will not pay attention to new laws.  They do not care what Executive Order gets handed down from Washington, DC.  They will continue to ply their trade, oblivious to what laws have been passed.

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution is a basic freedom that keeps our citizens free from a tyrannical rule.  History has shown time and time again that once a populace is unable to defend itself, there no longer exists any reason to be responsible to them.  Firearms level the playing field, whether it is a citizen fighting off an armed attacker, or a populace defending their basic freedoms.

Perhaps Senator Obama can truly unite this country and set it on an even keel once again.  We need that.  There is a level of stability that is lacking from our great country right now, and we need a strong leader who can unite us and help us regain our strength once again.  But it cannot be done at the cost of our Bill of Rights.  That is what makes us who we are, standing out above the rest of the world.

End of the Week

Spent most of the day today working on routers for two customers and bringing their VPNs online.  I think the next thing I want to do is consolidate the VPNs and eliminate all of the Cisco routers, and instead, place all of the VPNs onto the Juniper firewall cluster.  Less equipment and higher redundancy.

It seems the NRA is very unhappy with Iowa Carry right now.  The NRA seems to think the Shall Issue situation is fairly administered, which could not be further from the truth.  Yet when confronted on it, NRA State Representatives berate us for our lack of support for them.  The truth hurts!  The NRA has no idea about the true situation in Iowa, and they consistently turn their backs on us when we try to tell them the way it is.  All you can do is keep trying – and that’s exactly what we will be doing.  Never give up.

The US Presidential elections are less than a week away.  Current poll numbers continue to show Obama in the lead.  He has certainly played the “Hope” card, and stirred up the emotions of the younger generation.  I think back to the old saying of “be careful what you wish for, because you might get it.”  More and more it seems like the general population expects the government to be the giver of handouts.  Government entitlement.  If I can’t (or won’t) stand on my own two feet, I expect the government to be there to bail me out.  We’re growing soft.  Government wasn’t created to give handouts; rather, government’s function is to provide sevices used by the entire populace and to provide for national defense.   I wonder what kind of future we are leaving for our kids if we continue to expect the government to provide more and more entitlements.  Unfortunately, I don’t think either party is the best choice.  I believe that politicians have lost touch with the population.  It would be refreshing to see someone lead the country without having the influence of special interest groups, and get us back to the foundation that built this county – our Constitution.  But I doubt that will ever happen, and with each passing year, that dream continues to fade.  So long as we have our sports, XBox, MTV, and all of the other luxuries of our culture, we will continue to slide down the slope toward total dependence on the government.

Another warm and sunny day in Iowa, with a few more still in the works.  It’s nice while they last – keeps the heating bill down.  I figure in a few months well be longing for this warm weather.

Getting Started

We had our annual InfraGard meeting today.  I got to listen to a fascinating lecture by Mr. Frank Abangale, the subject of the movie “Catch Me If You Can.”  A truly excellent speaker!  If you get a chance to listen to him, you should certainly jump at the chance to do so.  What’s scary about his lecture is how easy it has become to steal identities in the Internet age.  We want our data to be accessible, for the sake of convenience, yet we don’t always take into account how that ease of access can have a negative effect.  Scarier still is how quickly someone who is a professional at stealing identities can perpetrate their crime and vanish from sight, leaving the victim with ruined credit, huge bills, and potentially a shattered life.  Cavalier attitudes toward data sharing and access need to be changed.  “It can’t happen to me” is what many people think, but it CAN happen to you, and it can happen faster than you can possibly imagine.

Otherwise, it was a beautiful day in Iowa.  Fairly warm for this time of year, although it fell well below freezing a couple of nights ago and that ended the tomato season for the year.  We’re planning on a bigger garden next year!