In the Name of Public Safety: A Look at Amendments 3 an 4

As we take our next steps down the twisted and abused pathway of our Bill of Rights the next two check points we encounter are the overlooked Third and oft cited but ignored Fourth Amendments.

The reason I call the Third Amendment overlooked is simply because 90 percent (according to the latest Fitzwater/BS polls) of the people in America couldn’t tell you what it is. In fact, I bet most of you didn’t know what it was unless you just went and checked. And really, why should you know what it is? It is after all one Amendment that really has outlived its intended use, hasn’t it? Of course, the argument can be made that we may soon need the protections of the Third more than ever; even if our Government does have a history of ignoring it. Therefore, we need to see how we can make it fit with life in the 21st century. Lucky for us, our government has provided more than enough fresh meat for the Third by prison raping the Fourth in the name of public safety. Don’t shrink away now, it is our fault after all.

Although many people I know will vehemently disagree with me, these two Amendments, more than others, have been the national victims of 9-11. I don’t use this phrase lightly and it is not intended to diminish any of the personal losses suffered by families of the physical victims of the 9-11 attacks. Rather, I make this statement because 9-11, more than any other event since Pearl Harbor, has created a culture of public safety over personal freedoms. That my friend is Un-American and Mr. Jefferson would tell you that if he was here.

Amendment III, U. S. Constitution

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

This Amendment was added because of the habit of the British to force colonists to take in, and provide for, soldiers assigned to garrisons within the colonies. There was no compensation for this and refusal could bring punishment from the governor of the colony, acting on mandate from the king. This is a practice that was not seen again until the Civil War when soldiers from both sides, but mostly Northern Soldiers, would occupy and loot homes in enemy territory for any provisions they needed. This practice was encouraged and sometimes ordered as both a way to restock an always hungry Army, and also as a psychological weapon against the enemy. Post-war, the idea of compensation for those who were victims of sacking fell somewhat short.

Today, we don’t have to worry about the Army needing to set up an outpost in our living room, but only because they have really great mobile command posts that can pull up and park right at the end of your driveway. No, you need to worry more about federal and local law enforcement laying siege to your home in the name of public safety. Of course when it comes right down to it, the Amendment as written with the phrase “without the consent of the owner,” doesn’t say anything about how that consent is obtained. Given the recent elevation of the options the president has in dealing with U.S. citizens, perceived consent could easily be obtained. Add in, “nor in a time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law,” and there are really no restrictions at all (War on Terror and all).

Of course you might not be asked to quarter live military or law enforcement personnel, but rather with our current technologies, it is more likely that they will want to place surveillance equipment on, in, or about your property, you know, to help them “keep an eye on the community.” This is the 21st century equivalent of quartering a soldier since the virtual government agent will be there 24/7; the next evolutionary step in the, community watch program, right?

And that’s where the line between the Third and the Fourth blurs. Many see the Third as a protection Amendment just at the Fourth is, but the Fourth gets a little more specific on what it was intended to protect. But alas, it has been whittled down considerably, in the name of public safety.

Amendment IV, U. S. Constitution

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Let’s look at what being secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects means.

Being secure in your person means that you are the one who decides who sees your physical person or your body. This part of the Fourth is violated thousands of times each day by the Transportation Safety Authority (TSA) by having you empty your pockets, open your bags, remove your shoes, and now, step into a scanner that shows much more than any level of modesty should permit. This is done in a manner that makes no sense. We have all heard the stories of grandmothers and children in wheelchairs being searched and anyone with half a cup of common sense has to ask why? It wasn’t, after all, baby toting grannies that facilitated the attacks of 9-11. But to only check persons of Middle Eastern ethnicity is considered profiling. So? If a police officer receives a report to be on the lookout for a short, bald, middle-aged, white guy who just threw a brick through the town hall window, they are not going to stop young Mexican males or Asian women for questioning. Why is this, such a hard concept to transfer to airport security? No, it’s not oversimplifying the problem; it’s a common sense approach to address a problem.

Being secure in your person also means the right not to submit to urine and blood test to see if a person drinks alcohol or uses legal or illegal drugs, to obtain employment. Testing is also required or soon will be, to receive pain medications through public health departments and the VA, and several state governments are pushing to test people applying for unemployment compensation and other services.

Look, I know it’s the Libertarian in me, but what a person puts into his or her body, be it food, alcohol, drugs, fruit juice, MSG, or whatever is that person’s right. If they are on the job and you suspect they are drunk or high and can substantiate the claim, then testing makes sense, as well, if they get hurt or are habitually late, test them. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Another place the Fourth is ignored is being secure in ones papers and effects. And it is done with both public and high court support with the traffic stop. Some have heard me talk on this before and know that I am simply baffled by how it is somehow legal to without a warrant or probable cause, as is required in the Fourth, simply stop individuals that are driving down the highway and order them to surrender their papers and effects for inspection. Here public safety raises its ugly head again. The cry in support of this legal violation of the Fourth is the anti-drunk driving effort. They must protect us from drunk drivers. Well, how about we just have additional police on duty during times of high drunk driving probability (weekends and holidays) and stop more people near the bars. How far do most drunk drivers get before even encountering a stop?

The next evolutionary step is for law enforcement, in the name of public safety, to begin to check the papers (IDs) and effects of pedestrians walking, or people accessing public transportation. It’s a blending of the security culture being developed by the TSA, and the traffic stop. We accept both without complaint now, how hard do you think it would be to get enough elected officials to put the legislation forward for train/subway platform, bus stop and sidewalk stops, then would come the workplace checks until finally they knock on your front door and check. I can hear what some of you are thinking, but people in countries where these things have happened didn’t believe it could happen either. Might I suggest you read about Europe in the 1930s and 40s, or maybe the history of the Russian people.

The government is placing video cameras everywhere, local law enforcement units are employing unmanned drones, federal law enforcement officials can listen in on phone calls “they” decide are worthy, and just this week it was announced that the federal government is looking into ways to monitor “questionable people” through internet access points. This is not science fiction or conspiracy theory stuff; this is real world, happening today stuff. All thanks to the hysterical response to 9-11 called the PATRIOT Act and its subsequent strengthening.

You know, I really wish that I could see a future where our rights will be returned to us but I don’t really believe that it will happen. I see the freedoms we still have being ravaged even more over the years to come because of the fear the government has of its own citizenry. Is there an answer? Yes, but Revolution takes much more than what we see happening so far. Many of us are angry about the way we are being treated, but most either ignore it or are in a group that is not really touched by the woes of the common folks. No, Revolution may come for our descendants; we are here to watch the decline. In the name of public safety.

The right for who to keep and bear arms exactly?

Well for good or ill this week I am going to tread and possibly even stomp upon sacred ground for many who read these thoughts of mine. For as we move on, in this look at our Bill of Rights (and selected additional Amendments), we arrive at Number Two; one of the most passionately, and often, debated of the Amendments adopted by the Founders. So forgive the extra two days of editing, before placing it before you.

I also want to preface this by saying that I am a gun owner, (which is what most people think the Second Amendment is talking about. Arms in the 18th Century also included swords and pikes). I have owned semi-automatic pistols, shotguns, rifles and even a bow once. I own knives and swords and other military paraphernalia that can be used as weapons or arms. So I personally benefit from the Second Amendment being interpreted the way it is by our government, but that interpretation is backed by only the tone of our society, not by the actual words of the Second Amendment.

Amendment II, United States Constitution

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

To get a true understanding of what this Amendment means, we must first look at when it was written. We as a nation were not that long separated from the threat of war literally breaking out in the back yard. The War for American Independence officially came to an end on Sept. 3rd 1783 with the signing of the Treaty of Paris. Just over four years later, on Sept. 17th 1787, the Constitution was signed, with ratification coming the following July 21st and the Amendments following in September of 1789. So it is not surprising that war would still be fresh in the collective mind of America.

The Congressional Representatives, taking in account recommendations for a Bill of Rights from the several new states’ legislature during the ratification process, determined that the war weary citizenry were not in any mood to leave themselves defenseless to anyone who might decide to test the young nation’s security. After surviving the brutalities of the British Army and their allies the Hessians and some Native American tribes, no newly minted American was going to be too far from his musket for a very long time to come. Thus, it was sensible to allow the citizens to keep arms, but being politicians, they made the purpose of such a right, the maintenance of a “well regulated Militia.” For defense of the Nation.

It is important to note that at this time in post-war America, there was still no standing army to speak of. The first Congress had allocated an Army of 1,000 men, but that was all. While present day Marines, Soldiers and Sailors date their birth to Revolutionary times, they were not the military force we know of today. Most men were too busy carving out agrarian communities and private farms – combat veterans “turning swords into plough shears,” as they say. There were few cities to speak of and travel through rural areas was common. Most of the men do agree to be a part of local militias for the defense of their homes. Just as with today’s National Guard detachments, these militias were trained (well regulated) in defensive combat operations and were on call to take up arms should there be an attack on the safety of the community.

Unlike today’s National Guard detachments, there were no armories to store weapons and ammunition, so each man maintained his own weapon in his home, and thus the need for the next line of the Amendment, “being necessary to the security of a free State,” to be added. What the government was saying is that, ‘yes, this well trained reserve military detachment we have said you can have is there to protect your community, but, if we need them to defend the “State” (now known as the Nation) then we’re going to call them into service.” In other words, your armed men can keep the Indians out of the corn fields but remember they are only permitted to exist to defend the nation from attack.” Exactly as National Guard are managed today. That’s also why they are called the North Carolina, National Guard for example. They are U.S. Military units maintained by individual states. The Charleston South Carolina Militia in 1788 was the period equivalent of the South Carolina National Guard Detachment of 2012. This is who the founders ordered to be well trained.

Since these men came from within the community they lived in their homes and gathered within, or just outside the town to train, it was logical for them to maintain their arms at home, which included everything from swords to cannon depending on the community and what was left over from the war. If the Indians attack at 3 AM, you don’t want to go looking for the guy with the keys to the town armory. This logical, logistical provision gives us the most debated part of the sentence, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Well, first off, let’s be clear about what “people” meant at this time; free, white, men with the exception of a very few “free men of color,” emphasis on the word few. So, free, white, men were going to be the ones given permission by the federal government to keep their arms within their homes, providing they were trained for the purpose of protecting the Nation in a time of dire need. Today “people” fortunately has a broader meaning.

The amendment does not say that the purpose is for self-defense, or home defense, or hunting, or sport shooting or anything other than for the defense of the Nation against a common enemy. And that is where the real nut of the thing lives, with who they and we perceive as the enemy.

I will put aside completely as a given the right to shoot an intruder trying to get into your home for ill intent, I believe you have the right to protect your land from poaching or vandalism and that we all have the right to defend your person and you loved ones using anything you can from martial arts to guns to ball bats and throwing rocks. But what the government should have had the foresight for, is the arms-wielding population of Americans that will rise up against the common enemy of a government trying to claim too much control over a free people. It has happened in many different countries, empires, and kingdoms throughout time. A corrupt government can be toppled by even a semi-well regulated armed resistance – such as happened in the war the authors of the Second Amendment had just finished fighting.

Maybe that’s it right there, they were so determined to create a nation that would not be a pseudo-monarchy that they built into the laws of the land the very tool that could lead to the destruction of an American Government gone rogue with power; a citizenry with the right to be armed against a common enemy, even if it were their own government. Could some of these men really have possessed that level of foresight or paranoia about their descendants’ temptation to seize too much control? I would like to think so.

As I said at the beginning, I am glad the law interprets the Second Amendment the way it does instead of how it is written. I am also glad that the interpretation has been so long engrained into our collective American psyche. In the end it may be the only thing that saves us when the government says that the Second Amendment has been revoked and they start knocking down doors.

Like MacArthur, I Have Returned

Having been gone so long from this task, I have been quite tentative about returning to our conversations. I will sum up my absence by simply saying that it was unavoidable and is now ended. Sometimes in life you find that you have responsibilities which cannot be ignored. And no, I wasn’t in jail.

I did, in my time away from you, monitor the news as best I could. I watched the slow reduction in the GOP primary candidates (we’ll talk a lot about them in weeks to come), I watched with interest the rise of the Occupy movement and then in disgust at the government and law enforcement responses. (All I’ll say about that is when the citizens of Egypt rose up and protested their government, ours praised them; when American citizens rose up and protested their government, it belittled, slandered, and abused in some cases, those citizens – and we’re the ones with free speech rights. Watching as unarmed protesters, sitting peacefully on the ground, were soaked down with tear gas made me very ashamed of my government.

While I was gone, I took some time to think about the changes both on the way and the ones that have happened in the last dozen or so years and it has left me with a chilling realization that nobody has been able to shake me from. That realization is simply that we are in the last days of America as our founders envisioned. This is hard for people to hear and most will say that I am flat wrong, but the signs are everywhere, everyday and they are growing.

When those, unqualified, but well meaning British gentlemen gathered in Philadelphia and began to discuss what exactly this new nation they wanted to build should be, there were many different ideas. Some wanted a sort of monarchy or feudal lord system because it was familiar and comforting. But the majority knew that what was needed was something never before seen; a free and sovereign nation where the people were not subservient, but rather were the true power of the nation. They were right.

Through the years the Constitution (which is a fluid document – otherwise you couldn’t make amendments), has remained the guiding rule for government and a civil rights insurance policy for the people. But slowly, beginning in the mid to late 20th century, the policy began to be manipulated and twisted through fractured interpretations, so that many of the protections we are due as the intended power of the country, have been stripped away.

I would like to spend a little time over the next few blogs discussing what I think we have lost and see if I can convince you where we are headed, while there still may be time for us to stop it.

On March 4th 1789, the members of the First United States Congress met in New York to hammer out the law of the land. One part of this turned out to be a Bill of Rights. Something that was not unanimously thought to be a good idea; luckily for us there were more Jeffersonians than Hamiltonians and so we received those very important first ten amendments. That is what we shall study.

Amendment 1 - Point by Point

Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; - Okay, this should be a simple statement to grasp but nonetheless it is debated endlessly. It simply says that our government can’t make Catholicism or Mormonism or Protestantism or Voodoo the officially sanctioned religion of America. While in point of fact no law has ever been passed naming a national religion, it was still found to be acceptable to put “In God We Trust” on our currency and insert “Under God” into the pledge of allegiance in the 1950’s. Our government holds national prayer breakfasts, and I don’t know of a single president (in my lifetime at least) that has not said, “God bless America.” The old saying that actions speak louder than words is evident here for anyone who will see it; We the People have allowed our government to present to the world the face of a Christian Theocracy that tolerates, to a certain extent, those who believe otherwise. If this were not the case, a fanatical Christian like Rick Santorum couldn’t be seriously considered for the GOP nomination. Look. I don’t want a fanatical anything – Muslim, Christian, Zionist, Jew or Wiccan, you name the flavor – to be elected president. I don’t mind if my elected officials are spiritual, I just want them to keep it to themselves and not shove it down the country’s collective throat. As far as government as an entity is concerned, if one belief is represented, all must be, or you are violating both the establishment and free exercise portions of the amendment. One last thing about what the founders thought. I believe that most of them were Christian and when they used words like “creator” most were thinking of the Christian God, but not all were. There were some humanists and even some agnostics who worked to hammer out our founding documents. The words were chosen carefully though so as not to identify the creator. That way each citizen was free to interpret it in their own way. Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; What’s so hard about understanding that?

. . . or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; - Ask yourself this question; “Am I free to say anything I want?” The answer is no. Aside from the old “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater” or the more recent “you can’t yell bomb on an airplane,” clichés, there are a great many things we are not permitted to say, that under the constitution, we are lawfully permitted to say. For instance, you are by law permitted to walk up to the fence that surrounds the White House and begin chanting F-you at the residents. So long as your words are not accompanied by an act or threat of violence, you are not breaking any laws and you are exercising your first amendment rights. However, you will be forcibly removed, made to stop your chant and most likely jailed. They will probably charge you with disorderly conduct and you will face a little jail or a hefty fine or both. Your free speech has just been abridged.

As far as the press goes, the financial market is driving the direction of press freedom more than the government. But with the new media formats such as this one we are using right now, come attempts by the government to exert control over the internet. (We’ll touch on this more when we get to the 4th Amendment).

. . . or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. We have briefly touched on the assembly issue with the way that federal, state and local governments are dealing with the Occupy movement. For my friends in the TEA Party, it could just as easily be one of your gatherings that could be interrupted by law enforcement. You don’t really believe they would do it, and they will be hesitant, because some of you are armed, but make no mistake, if the government felt like you were possibly raising enough of a fuss to actually threaten the establishment (not the party balance, but the real power players) they would and could shut you down. They have more and better weapons and equipment, I don’t care what you have, it’s not enough. As far as a redress of grievances, that has become the sole realm of the Supreme Court, which is kept stocked by elected officials.

Now for the hardest to accept part of my argument;

There is no one to blame but ourselves.

It’s true. For all the ranting and raving that both the politically active and ignorant do about “how the damn politicians are ignoring us and doing what they want” and blah, blah, blah . . . it is the American people who have allowed these abuses to take root. It happens because of the team mentality – two party system we have. We are quick to criticize and demand concessions from those on the other side of the aisle, but silent when our guy or gal is doing the same thing. I heard damn few Republicans criticize President Bush when he enacted the PATRIOT Act because it was for our safety, but the Democrats were vocal. Then a few years later when President Obama kept the Act in place and then stiffened it by giving the office the right to arrest and detain American Citizens indefinitely the Republicans were beside themselves, but the Democrats were for the most part silent.

Hey, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, so it’s not like this is something new.

We are letting them take our rights away for the sake of what? Safety? I am now becoming more concerned about what my government is going to do to me than I am about what some terrorist might try to do. I have a chance against a terrorist; I stand no chance against a power hungry empire.

This one ran long, I guess because I’m happy about being back. I’ll shoot for brevity in the future. Next time we’ll look at the realities of the Second Amendment. Lock and load.

I’m not so nostalgic about 9-11, I’m still pissed

So now that the 10th anniversary of 9-11has passed us by and the recitation of the names and rerunning of the old news footage has been packed away for another year, I think its time to take a look at what I call the downfall of my beloved America.

My wife and I were talking about the attacks Sunday, as many Americans did, and in doing so, I had time to revisit my thoughts after the attacks and quite simply we as a country missed the boat on ensuring this never happens again.

From the very second that the first plane hit the Twin Towers, international terrorism won. Now, I know you don’t want to hear that, but it is nonetheless true. After the initial shock wore off, our government, led by President Bush knuckled under to fear and doubt and began a systematic stripping away of our personal freedoms and rights on a level that would make the Founders puke in their wigs. President Obama, for all his criticisms of Bush, took the baton and has kept them in place.

To be sure, I’m not the kind of guy who should be President, hell; I probably should stay out of politics altogether because I’m sort of a nationalist at heart. Not an isolationist; trying to make it without allies, isn’t practical and never has been. No, I’m a nationalist with the protection of the homeland and her citizens from all enemies foreign and domestic at my core. I swore and oath to do that, and it didn’t come with an expiration date.

When America was attacked by the Japanese in 1941, we did not sit back and debate what we should do or look for ways to settle old scores and we damn sure didn’t worry about what the world would think of our actions. What we did was put our military machine in gear and turned the generals loose to get pay back. When President Truman was handed the devastating power of the atomic bomb, he didn’t buckle under it. Yes, the Executive branch and the War Department discussed the ramifications of the use of the bomb, but they saw that the hell released by the bombs would ensure that the enemy who attacked us would never do so again. And that nobody else would consider it wise to try, and they didn’t for a long time. But they forgot and we let them.

Somehow, along the way to 9-11 America’s political machine lost its stones and began to play fair, instead of paying to win. Not playing to win is anti-American. But then it has been a long time since the function of government was about being American.

Korea, Vietnam, even the Gulf War were all winnable but the politicians wouldn’t let us. What, you think the Gulf was a win? Sorry, if it had been a win then Hussein wouldn’t have been around in 2001 for Bush 43 to have an excuse to attack. No, if Bush 41 would have ignored the weak spirits in the UN and the bleeding hearts in Congress and let Stormin’ Norman roll us into Baghdad most the problem would have been solved.

Following the attacks on America we should have brought the full force of our military might down upon the countries that harbored and financed the terrorists. I am talking Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Afghanistan. I am not talking about ground forces, I mean the full payload, everything short of nukes unless we ran out of bombs before we ran out of real estate. Yes, I know innocents would have died, but innocents did die here too.

The world has learned over the last couple of centuries that our government, regardless of which party is in charge, will only go so far before they cry uncle. War is a messy and awful thing; it should be, so we don’t do it unless we have to. We had the ability to crush not only their ability to hurt anyone again, but also their will to want to.

Our country is dissolving; our government is completely broken, our economy is a global laughing stock and we are no longer safe from our elected leaders or our enemies. If we do not do something about it, this empire will fall.

As President Jefferson once said, “a little revolution now and then is a good thing.”

One final point

While the 9-11 memorial at Ground Zero is very moving and while it is good to remember the victims, the real 9-11 Memorial should have been built in Shanksville, PA where the first battle of the war was fought by regular American’s who were not going to allow the enemy win. Those heroes are often overshadowed by the praise lauded on the Police and Fire Fighters who lost their lives that day. But let’s be honest, those men and women went to work everyday knowing that they could lose their lives. The passengers on Flight 93 were just living their lives when they were faced with the reality of that day. They did not hesitate, when they saw it was up to them, they acted. The site of their valiant deaths would be much more fitting as a memorial than the site of the victims of that day.

FULL DISCLOSURE NOTE – I voted for President Bush in 2000 and 2004, any decisions he made I have a share of the responsibility for; along with everyone else who voted for him. Being that I voted for him and by default hired him to do a job, I can complain about what my employee did. Not hypocrisy, I own my portion of the responsibility.

Political Soup

In better days, Todd Poole and Virginia Foxx speak with yours truly prior to Foxx's debate with Democrat Billy Kennedy in Oct. 2008.



What a wacky first half of August for all those things political that are happening in relation to Ashe County, NC and/or our elected officials. Almost feels like we are heading into campaign season a bit early, but that’s what feeds the political junkie’s monkey so let’s look at a few things you and I.

Inked Out
As I tried to drive through West Jefferson the other day I thought about my friends living in WJ and those in the occupied territories of the ETJ.
Sadly seeing all the empty storefronts I couldn’t help but be amazed at how the, always forward thinking West Jefferson Board of Aldermen, have put the official NOT WELCOME HERE stamp on tattoo shops as part of their regressive plan for the town’s slow death.
This stems out of last year’s vote to stop one local man from opening a tattoo ship, too close to the other evil town business, the ABC store. Maybe the tattoo artists should have considered offering a monthly payoff, I mean, payment to the board as the ABC does?
Seriously though, this board is dragging this town backwards in time in some attempt to make us a cute little mountain town / drive through petting zoo for tourists. They think somehow if we look more charming and Norman Rockwell like that it will bring tourists out 221 to . . . what? Visit a gallery, buy a little cheese? Great but what about the rest of us and those from neighboring towns that just come to town to, shop or get ice cream or just to walk around? For us, it is home, not a theme park.
Along with banning certain “unsavory” businesses, we have seen the removal of our downtown stop lights, to be replaced with stop signs. Sounds to me like those looking into future planning either have the wrong idea of what moving forward technologically means, or they have a little dyslexia problem. Signs to lights not the other way; what’s the next step? Will Chief Rose be forced to put his officers out to work the intersections with whistles and white gloves?
At this rate the town will soon have a dress code written sometime in the late 50’s.
Want to make the town more inviting? Here’s a thought; how about putting businesses into the dead looking open storefronts downtown? Hanging quilts is cute for a minute, but empty is empty and nobody is being fooled.
Want to make the drive into town look better and less desperate? I hate to say it, but mass yard sales do not convey an image of prosperity. Damn, at least build a Flea Market so it looks organized.
Communities that begin to pick and choose the types of legal businesses they allow admittance, are heading down the road to an economic crash. You may think you can turn back time and things will be like they were, but you can’t. We are a mountain community with good people living here and that is enough. Our elected officials need to plan for us, not for those who might visit.

Okay, we can do it this way
Well, the Dan McMillan - Ashe BOC saga is not going away in the discussions around Hardees, Smithy’s and the WJ Coffee Shop along with all the other place people gather to complain about government; and I’m sure not letting it drop.
It was nice to see Jesse Campbell pick up the ball and beat the bushes a little with his latest piece in the AMT, but there is so much more going on here than even Campbell got out of the reluctant interviewees.
Folks, we have elected officials hiding behind incorrect interpretations on Freedom of Information Act requirements and are still not giving their tax paying – voting, constituents anything more than window dressing.
What happened to bring about the request of McMillan’s resignation? The different visions line is a smokescreen used when nobody is supposed to talk. That’s fine with private business. I left the AMT because I and the company had different visions of . . . blah, blah, blah. See what I mean?
Here’s the difference; I was an employee of a private business, McMillan was an appointed government official working, supposedly, for elected officials. There are no secrets and no information too privileged (aside from medical and family data) to be off limits to the public.

Chapter 4, page 67-68 of the NC Media Law Handbook states, "in Chapter 132 of the NC Gen. Statutes that the public and the media have a right of access to most documents made or received by state and local governments."
A public record is defined in the NCMLH as, "documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes electronic data-processing records, artifacts or other excluded because of physical form."
As far as what information is public record, the NCMLH defines public, "the records of an agency of NC government or its subdivisions, which means the records of every public office, public officer (state or local, elected or appointed), institution, board, commission, bureau, council, department, authority or other unit of government of the State or of any county, unit, special district or other political subdivision of government. That means all levels of government from the General Assembly to local boards and commissions.”

McMillan said he had no contract. Other than that being just plain stupid on behalf of the county commission at the time, it wasn’t too smart of McMillan since he had no protections. The truth of what happened from the decision to hire the man by the board seated then to the decision to get rid of him by the current board.
Some partisan Democrats are trying to beat the drum of Republicans getting rid of a Democrat, but the Republicans have had the majority and the chair since 2008, so that argument won’t hold water. If it were a partisan issue, he would have been gone long ago. No, something happened and the board doesn’t want us to know what it was, but they want us to pay for it anyway. Am I alone in thinking that $45,000 plus a retirement package is something that shouldn’t be awarded to an employee you are in actuality firing?
Here’s a thought; is there an attorney out there that would consider taking a class action suit to force the board to open the books? If enough citizens get together and file the suit it might get their attention and make them understand that we really are fed up with the business as usual in our local politics.

Be fair when assigning guilt by association:
Just a few words here in defense of all those associated with people who find themselves in trouble with the law.
For nearly a week now the news trolling sites I use have been blowing up about Todd Poole’s (local Virginia Foxx employee) DUI bust over in Watauga County. This situation has no doubt caused embarrassment to the Foxx camp and Poole. But it is a bit unfair for people to bash Foxx for any part of this, as has been the case on some blogs and discussion boards. You can hate the woman for her politics or social views but, you can’t hang this stone around her neck.
Poole will be gone after Foxx’s staff ensures he gets the help he needs to deal with his demons, but that is the extent of their responsibility.

Really, you don't smell a rat here?

During the years that I covered Ashe County government, I listened to scores of complaints about, now former, county manager Dan McMillan generated by one particular rumor mill or the other. I myself could never pin anything to him that wasn’t circumstantial or too thin to corroborate, but that didn’t stop the mills from grinding away.

This past week when word surfaced that McMillan was stepping down as county manager, I wasn’t surprised in the least. I also wasn’t surprised that the commissioners were so silent about it. Without McMillan to tell them what to say, it may be some time before they find their own voice.

McMillan’s control over the direction of the county gave me the impression from my first council meeting until my last, that he was running the commissioners, not the other way around. Some of you reading this have heard me say so before and conversations I have had with past and present commissioners have led me to believe that McMillan was prone to overstepping his bounds. Something he complained about with other county employees.

No, I wasn’t shocked to see the McMillan era come to an abrupt end, but I have been surprised at the coverage such an important story has been given by our local news outlets.

While both newspapers covered the story and repeated the non-statement statements of Judy Poe and Pat Mitchell, and printed excerpts of McMillan’s resignation letter, there was no digging done as to the many possible whys. Instead of putting a bow on the story our local media has left it as questionable as a UFO sighting. Something happened, but we can’t really be sure what it was.

The Mountain Times online, not the Ashe Mountain Times, reported that McMillan was leaving just three months shy of retirement and would receive a severance through the end of the year that will make him eligible for retirement benefits. Yet there was no reason according to Poe for his surprise resignation and the Times just said, "okay, we’ll accept that." The Jefferson Post didn’t even bother to tell us how much McMillan would be getting from the county’s taxpayers through the end of the year and neither gave us any info on his retirement package. WKSK just sort of followed suit and went with the commissioners’ spin. But to be fair, they aren’t really a news outlet.

Other questions I have are why don’t we know why Larry Rhodes voted against the resignation? Did he not want McMillan to resign? Did he want the county to fire McMillan? Did he want the county to give McMillan a raise to stay? Why didn’t anyone ask the board, why they didn’t keep him on the job until a replacement is hired? Why get him out so quickly? We don’t know because nobody pushed for an answer to these and other questions.

Look, someone in a position like McMillan had, with great pay, benefits and a good relationship with his bosses (the commissioners) doesn’t just quit with no reason.

Trust me on this; if a person quits a job in this economy, they have reasons.

Not to mention that people in powerful positions that unexpectedly resign are usually doing so to avoid pending disciplinary action and their bosses give them a chance to save face. It happens all the time.

But we get no answers to these and other questions, because the Post and the AMT didn’t do the digging needed to get them. They had time to dig or at least put the questions out there in the arena for debate, but they did neither.

That’s a major problem with media in general today, they want the quick and easy story to fill the page and offset the advertising but they don’t want to take the time to go for the meat of a story. Local media needs to do better than that.

Dan McMillan did not quit because he was bored, he did not quit because he had nothing better to do with his time and he did not quit because everything was great. Saying that he and the county commissioners were just seeing different futures for the county is a cop-out at best, and an all out lie at worst. The county commissioners did not accept his resignation because the county is in such great shape that they can afford to operate without a manager.

This county is in political and economic turmoil and McMillan had a large hand in it getting to that point. Mainly because the commissioners wouldn’t put any reins on him. No, there are reasons for his departure and we as taxpayers in this county deserve to know them. We as voters can kick commissioners out of office if they want to keep secrets. This isn’t a case of national security. Tell us commissioners, why is he gone, and did you do it for our benefit or your own?

I would suggest you begin to bombard the commissioners with letters and calls to get the answers. Since nobody else is going ask them, you better. After all, McMillan will be paid more by county taxpayers for sitting on his ass for the rest of the year than many of us will make working all year long. We deserve to know why our money is going to him and why the commissioners think it was a good idea to pay him more than $45,000 to do nothing.

See, that’s my problem with non-profits

I know that since I took this little column of mine online, I have not necessarily limited myself to writing about my beloved Ashe County. I guess that since I’ve been out of the flow of county life for several weeks, I took my eye off the ball a little.
I was reconnected today, not that it was a pleasant reconnection, with one of the things I haven’t thought about for a little while; that is how suspicious I am of non-profit organizations.
For the most part, I have personally seen very few non-profit organizations that really operate how they say they will. Yes, some do, and if you belong to one that does, then I’m not talking about you, so don’t write me complaining.
My problem today was with one particular NPO in the county; the Ashe County Humane Society.

The story actually began last Saturday morning as my wife and I were driving out Three Top Road about three miles from our house. As we rounded a curve, we spotted this little pup (pictured above), running with everything he had uphill in the center of the road. Well, what else could we do but stop and try to get the little guy to a safe place? The pup came right to me trying to jump into my arms when I got out of the car and so he sat in my lap all the way to Blowing Rock. I was helping my wife with a wedding she was in charge of and we didn’t have time to look for its owner. We brought him home that night and took care of him, sure that we could find his owner on Sunday.
Sunday afternoon I drove around to a few houses near where we picked him up, but it soon became evident that I wasn’t going to reunite the little guy with his family, so I brought him back home.
Over the next couple of days, my wife and I tried to find a home for him but as the week wore on, we saw that it wasn’t going to happen. So, today I decided that if I was going to keep the pup from possible euthanasia at the pound, I was going to have to get some help from people who are always preaching “save the animals.”

I took a drive out to the Ashe County Humane Society office and was very impressed at how nice it looked. There was a nicely constructed house with one of the best constructed, and longest, wooden wheelchair ramps I have ever seen and not very old looking galvanized chain link fencing around a backyard with fairly expensive looking igloo shaped dog houses; I’ve seen the prices of them at local big box stores and they aren’t cheap. I honestly thought when I pulled up, “man they have a nice set-up here, this little guy lucked out.” I also thought that they must be doing a good job because there were no animals to be seen. Sometimes I lose my head in the clouds too.
When I stepped inside, wow! I have been to a few humane society shelters in my time, but I have never seen one so pristine and sanitized as the one here in Ashe. Although the place was filled with empty kennels, there wasn’t a hint of old animal smell about the place. It was, in fact, cleaner than some downtown West Jefferson businesses I could mention, but won’t.
Man, I was happy, because I knew I had made the right choice in brining this little guy there, these are the folks who can find him a home and apparently pretty quick.
Have you ever been so wrong about something that it nearly makes your head explode? That’s how I felt about two minutes after walking in.

The very pleasant young lady who was volunteering (yes, I know they are all volunteers) looked at me as if I were holding something strange and alien when I indicated to her that I expected them (her, since she was the only one there) to take the pup and place him in one of the kennels or put him in the great little backyard and then thank me for being a lover of animals and for brining him to them instead of animal control . . .
I couldn’t have been more wrong, if I had tried.
The young lady checked the phone messages to see if anyone had reported a missing dog and when there was none, she told me, in a cheerful voice, that she would be happy to give me directions to the animal control office where I could take him.
I thought I would pass out, my head sort of got a little fuzzy. I asked her what they were there for “if not to keep animals from going to the pound?” She answered by telling me she fostered two dogs already.
Nothing I could say would convince her to take the dog so, frustrated, no, pissed off, I left telling her that I would do just what I am doing now; letting you know.

My question here is what does this organization even exist for, if not to take care of lost animals in need of a home? I don’t have to ask what the donations go to because, as I said, they have a great facility; it’s empty, but it’s really nice.
If they are there only to hold adoptions on the weekends as their webpage says, (wonder how much that costs), why have the building? There are several places more convenient and with higher foot traffic to hold weekend adoptions. The parking lot across from the old Dodge dealership in West Jefferson where the yard selling goes on is just one. I bet that the ladies at Happy Tails Pet Store would be agreeable to loaning part of their large parking lot. Friends for Life do it in Boone all the time.
I know, everybody hates Boone comparisons, but this time it fits.
Why have a building, why pay utility bills and staff it if you aren’t going to do anything six days of the week but check messages. Tell me it’s not just so you have a place to hang your adoption pictures, or for bored summer residents to kill time, please.

Of course the best part was after coming home and letting off some steam on my facebook page, someone actually wrote to me and said I should have lied about where I found the dog. That I should have said a neighbor moved and abandoned him. So, in order to do something morally right I needed to lie. Does anybody else see a problem with that?
The bottom line is, if you are an NPO and you ask for and receive donations to perform a service, perform the dang service. That isn’t happening at the good old ACHS.

Somebody will surely ask the question, “why don’t you just keep him, you picked him up?” or admonish me for criticizing ACHS when I won’t keep the animal. The answer is simple, I don’t advertise that I have animals for adoption (free in some local news products) and I don’t ask for money to care for and find homes for animals, but they do.
Of the two dogs that are part of my pack, one is a rescue dog and she is wonderful. I just can’t afford to keep another animal. And my landlord wouldn’t be too happy about it either. If I could, I would, because this little guy is going to make a great dog.
Just be aware Ashe County folks, if you find an animal and you consider helping it out, that you might be left holding the bag. The ACHS isn’t going to help you out.

By the way if you want him check my facebook page for my contact info and give me a call. First good home to ask gets him. Hey, everybody loves free puppies. Well, except maybe for the ACHS.

Be Quiet and Eat Your Play-Dough

When I was a kid I used to spend a lot of time chewing on window sills. At least that’s what I’m told by my parents and my older sister. Of course she used to eat potting soil, so she lets me alone about all the led based paint I ingested during my teething years.

I bring this up because of something one of my daughters brought up to me the other day after they came home from an appointment with our granddaughter’s doctor.

“Dad, the doctor said she has Pica.”

Taken aback by the revelation that this sweet kid had some terrible disease, I asked her, “what is Pica?”

She explained to me that it is when a child chews on and tries to eat things that aren’t food. You know, like putting flowers or rocks in their mouths or chewing on book corners and eating the paper. I had a son that tried to eat dog food and another granddaughter who likes to snack on lady bugs when she can catch one.

Feeling that this must be some sort of miscommunication between my daughter and the doctor I did what any 21st century person with a question does; I entered into the Googleverse where I found this statement;
“Pica is the persistent eating of substances with no nutrition, such as dirt or paint.” Now, aside from the ironic fact that this could have been written with me and my dirt eating sister in mind, the fact remains that we have turned into such a victim driven, mental disorder fueled society that the absolutely normal act of a kid picking something up and putting it into its mouth, now must have a clinical diagnosis.

Another quote from the article said, (click to it at http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/mental-health-pica) “Before making a diagnosis of pica, the doctor will rule out other disorders -- such as mental retardation, developmental disabilities, or obsessive-compulsive disorder -- as the cause of the odd eating behavior. This pattern of behavior must last at least one month for a diagnosis of pica to be made.”

Come on, really? “Medical Experts” are actually going to put it into a young parents mind that if their kid starts chewing on twigs when he’s playing in the yard that he might be retarded?

And do you know how they say you should treat it? With positive reinforcement of what is and isn’t food, and “close supervision of children known to put things in their mouths.”

In other words, do your job as a parent; because that’s where the problem is.
Parents have known for as long as there have been kids, that the little monsters stick everything in their mouths. Most of us accept that as a part of the learning process. It’s the same reason they want to stick their little fingers in a candle flame, a window fan or an electrical outlet. It’s not because they are into self-mutilation, it’s because they don’t know any better and we are supposed to teach them.

Did any of you reading this ever go to school with a paste eater? I knew a couple and I bet you knew at least one. Nobody ever diagnosed one of them with Pica, nor were the straw chewers, the spitball marksmen or the nail biters.

I tried to explain to my daughter that there was nothing wrong with her child other than the fact that she is two years old full of fire. And I believe that with all my heart because she isn’t the first two-year old I have encountered in my life and they are all completely nuts.

Today it seems that the medical profession, bolstered by the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry, is pushing parents of younger and younger children to consider any unusual behavior as some sort of treatable mental disorder.
As the article suggests, “close collaboration with a mental health team skilled in treating pica is ideal for optimal treatment of these complex cases.”

Hmmm, what do you think the optimal treatment might be? Medication maybe?

I say; if your kid eats dirt, teach him not to do it. Tell him “no.” I understand that such harsh language is frowned upon by today’s child psychologists with concerns of emotional scarring of the child to consider, but it will be fine. I promise.

Look, if a child has a serious developmental issue, then of course they need help; nobody is going to argue that point. But if your kid wants to chew a blade of grass, let him chew the grass. Just make sure you keep an eye out for where your dog does his business.

Children, especially two-year olds chew on things, it’s not a disease. It is the same thing you see on Animal Planet or Discovery when they show a young chimpanzee testing things to learn what he can and can’t eat; it’s called curiosity and it’s the way we mammals learn. His Mama isn’t going to let him eat something that will hurt him, human Mamas, and Daddies, are capable of the same attentiveness.

All Sped Up with No Place to Go

Folks who know me know that I have very little patience with public and political officials who go around with a sense of entitlement about them. Usually, most of us are able to ignore them unless of course they do something stupid and get arrested, suspended or kicked out of office. But sometimes you just can’t ignore them because they force their sense of entitlement right down your throat.
So, I’m getting ready to pull onto Jefferson Avenue in West Jefferson today and I see an approaching SUV, so I wait for it to pass. When it does I notice two things immediately; one, the vehicle is traveling well over the posted speed limit and two, it’s a police vehicle.
As I pulled onto the road, I couldn’t help but think that if our places had been reversed, then I would be getting pulled over about then and ticketed.
We all see it every single day, everywhere you drive, from sea to shinning sea, a government vehicle, usually, a police vehicle of some sort; state, county or local is driving faster than is legal and for no apparent reason, endangering the safety of other drivers. No lights on, no siren, just cruising faster than anyone else can.
I have to wonder what the result of such driving is. Really, I have no choice but to wonder, because after searching for some time on the interweb, I found that there is no publicly available data on accidents caused by unsafe driving by law enforcement officials. I’m sure that data is someplace but it isn’t readily available.
I myself had an unnerving encounter with a police officer a couple of years ago as I drove back to Ashe County from Boone late at night.
I was driving on NC Highway 421 when I came upon a slower moving vehicle, as sometimes happens when you drive. I checked my mirrors and saw that the only vehicle behind me was a good distance back, leaving more than enough time to pass. (I’ve been driving for more than 30 years, so I trust my judgment in these areas.) Speeding up to 65 mph, I started to pass the slower vehicle, when out of nowhere the headlights that had been a half-mile or better behind me rushed up into my rearview mirror and then disappeared below view as the vehicle drew within inches of my bumper. Fortunately, the proximity of the vehicle’s headlights to the back of my Cherokee illuminated the vehicles front and I saw with agitation that it was a police vehicle.
With the cop riding my bumper close enough to read my radio dial and the vehicle I was passing just beginning to fall behind us, I pressed the accelerator to the floor and pushed the old engine as hard as I could to get out of the way. When I finally was able to safely merge right the officer pulled up along side of me and glared over at me as if I had done something wrong and stayed there for 100 yards or more. I obviously hadn’t been doing anything visibly illegal, because he proceeded up and over the next rise and was gone. I want to point out that at no time before, during or at the end of our encounter, did the officer ever turn on his blue lights or make any indication that he was on any type of official business.
Just a short distance down the road I saw two police vehicles on the side of the highway. I slowed as I approached and looked over, like you do, and noticed that two officers had two young ladies out of a vehicle speaking with them. I didn’t get a closer look at them because one of the officers (I’m assuming my new friend) pointed the beam of his flashlight directly at my windshield really screwing up my vision for a minute or two. Not the best thing to have happen at 6o mph.
Did I call and report the incident? Well, I tried to, but since I didn’t have a vehicle number or exact time and location of the incident, “there isn’t much we can do,” I was told. This was, by the way, pretty much the answer I expected. After hanging up I realized that the exercise had been about as productive as arguing with a drunk man in WalMart, without the possibility for a spot on Springer.
Of course there is another group of ‘public servants’ that take supposed entitlement to the next degree and those are volunteer firefighters. Seems like everyplace you go since 9-11 you see pick-up trucks, SUVs and just about everything else sporting a VFD plate and an ass load of red lights and light bars and usually some sort of, “Ain’t we all heroes,” type of bumper sticker. I only know one NYFD Fireman who was at ground zero. He’s retired and has far too much class to act entitled. His humility is why he is such a good man. But many of these guys (and most are male) fly down the highway with no lights on as if they were on a call, only to be seen a few miles away stopping at the BP station for a cold drink or in the McDonalds drive through lane.
Look, I don’t want to fly down the highway, I’m well past that stage in my life and I don’t mind somebody clicking off the long miles a few mph over the limit. But flying down the road just because you can get away with it is dangerous and shows a level of immaturity that concerns me in a public official.
The NC General Assembly needs to look closely at the conduct of police departments and officers on all levels and start weeding out the unprofessional ones so that officers with integrity are the only ones left. The motto is to “Protect and Serve,” not Endanger and Intimidate.
If you are a cop or a volunteer firefighter take this to heart. We like you, we need you and we want to respect you, but blatantly rubbing you ability to drive like a crazy person without consequence is irritating to the rest of us who have to follow the law. It kind of makes me wonder what other laws they are fuzzy on following. Does it make you wonder?

ID? I Don't, Do You?

Let’s talk about identification for a minute.
As many of you know, during my hiatus, Governor Bev Perdue vetoed the GOP led House Bill 351 to require voters to produce a photo ID at the polling place.
“North Carolinians who are eligible to vote have a constitutionally guaranteed right to cast their ballots, and no one should put up obstacles to citizens exercising that right,” she said.
While I am in total agreement with that statement, as I think most reasonable people are, I don’t agree with the Democrats’ definition of obstacles or the Republicans’ rationale for wanting the law in the first place.
You see for most Dems, the obstacles they are referring to are rooted in barring Black Americans from voting by way of violence and intimidation. This was a very real problem at one time in America but today, not so much. The only issues at the polls these days come from fanatical followers of candidates who try to harass people wearing the opposition’s campaign buttons. Nobody is standing outside with ropes and axe handles.
I have voted in two states in my life; West Virginia (my birth state) and North Carolina (my chosen home). I have also voted absentee when I was in the military. Not once in all the elections I have participated in have I ever seen anyone turned away because of what they were.
Did someone around me falsify their identity to vote? Maybe, but I doubt it. I have seen people turned away because they were not on the roll where they tried to vote and in fact, I was turned away once because I went to the wrong polling place. That was my fault and I found the right place and was still able to vote.
However, that is the GOP’s main concern; that someone will vote under someone else’s identity.
Look, when you can get the registered voters to come out and vote like they should, then worry about non-registered voters faking their identity. Until then, false voting is the least of our worries as a democratic republic.
In NC in 2010 with only 66 percent of the population even registered to vote, less than 50 percent turned out to cast ballots. Nationally, only 41 percent of registered voters cast a ballot and in 2008, our last general election, only 65 percent took the time.
Apathy is the problem, not voter fraud.
What makes you pro ID folks think that if you can’t get registered voters out that you have to worry about the people who don’t even take the time to register?
As for me, my opposition to the bill is that once again a governmental body is trying to find yet another way to get my name on an official list. And we all know if you’re not on the list you don’t get in. We also know that if the government has you on yet another list, you’ll be easier to find, when they start looking for people like you.
This type of bill is nothing more than another cow patty on the slippery slope to loss of personal freedoms.
If I am a registered voter, with a voter registration card in my pocket and I show up at my polling place, the only thing the government needs to do is check my name off the list and point me toward the polling booth.

I find it confusing that otherwise reasonable Republicans and TEA Party folks I know think that somehow more governmental control is a good thing. I find it frustrating because these folks are the same folks out there screaming that we need smaller government with fewer intrusions into the lives of citizens.
If we allow our governments, national, state and local, to start requiring official identification for voting, how long will it be until we have to provide ID to travel from one state or town to another, to buy a car, to buy food? How long until cops can stop you in the street and check you ID to see if you are local or not?
Think that sounds crazy? Think of it this way; law enforcement is permitted to set up license checks on government owned roads. Why? Because the roads are owned and maintained by the government and so they have the “legal” right to ensure that the people driving on it have the proper papers and insurance coverage.
Now look into the future a little; a man is walking down the street in an upper-class neighborhood. He’s just walking on a sunny weekend day with no destination in mind just walking around enjoying the view; let’s say he’s in Charlotte or Charleston, SC. Now he might be dressed casually, but not expensively, he is stopped by a police officer who asks him for his ID and health insurance information. The man doesn’t have any and is detained.
Don’t think it can happen?
Town and city streets and sidewalks are on government owned land, the public is permitted to use them, but they are owned and maintained by the government. Just as the government is allowed to stop you on the highway they own and ask to see your papers, the same principle can be used to stop you on city sidewalks. If national health coverage becomes law someday, they could cite you if you don’t have it when they ask for your ID.
Some people say this can’t happen, I say tell that the people of 1940’s Germany or 1950’s Russia.
The government is going to use any means at their disposal to control the citizenry, because a docile, controlled and well documented population is easy to manipulate. If we allow them to continue to put us on list after list after list, and force us to carry special IDs for various reasons we are allowing them to make cattle of us.
Like voter ID? How do you feel about a national ID card? That’s the logical conclusion to all these bills to track who you are and where you go. Then there will be no place to live free and unmolested.
I don’t think I want to go along and if you have half a brain and some healthy skepticism about the motives of government and their desire for total control, you won’t go along with it either.

Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged

If you have turned on a television or radio or god forbid picked up a newspaper in the last two days, all you have seen is Casey Anthony and her acquittal on charges she killed her daughter.
Now, I don’t know if she really did it or not. The evidence in the court of public opinion, which is argued by talking heads and pundits, had the woman convicted in 2008.
Funny thing happened on the way to the death house though, a jury of her peers said, “no, you didn’t prove she did it. Sorry.” So, she gets to go on living and doing it free.
Many people, mostly parents, are furious about this verdict and think Anthony should be lynched anyway. I say, stop complaining – the system did its job. If you want to be mad at somebody be mad at the prosecutors and investigators that blew a case that was begging to be solved.
On his official blog, Grogan's Corner, Dunwoody, Ga. Police Chief Billy Grogan lists six things that are “lessons learned” about the Anthony case, but none of them are critical of how his department’s investigators handled the case. Citing obstacles to conviction like, “the jurors want to know the cause of death,” “ police and prosecutors can only present evidence that is available” and, “jury verdicts should be based of facts not emotion,” Grogan is making it sound like they shouldn’t have had to do anything at all but show up and somehow it’s someone else’s fault that the case was lost.
"In these complex cases, jurors tend to have more confidence in forensic evidence and less confidence in circumstantial evidence. A case such as this is extremely difficult, even in the best of circumstances. It is especially difficult when the circumstances of the case leave you with little real evidence,” Grogan wrote.
Little real evidence? I thought you were supposed to have real evidence to convict somebody. I thought that was the way the system was set up. Yet people want to yelp that justice wasn’t done. Justice was done by the letter of the law as written in the Bill of Rights. What wasn’t done was an effective job by police and prosecutors.
Sometimes the system works the wrong way though, especially when the victim is a child and public outrage demands an arrest, conviction of the innocent is a real possibility, which is as much a crime as acquitting the guilty.
In 2008, Kennedy Brewer was exonerated of a 1995 murder conviction of a three-year-old girl. Even though DNA testing proved Brewer's innocence in 2001, he remained incarcerated for an additional six years not being released until August 2007. The results of the DNA tests which cleared Brewer implicated a man, who later confessed to the murder.
Of course sometimes the evidence comes too late, such as with the case of Cameron Todd Willingham who was convicted in 1992 of the arson murder of his three kids. He was put to death in 2004, but unfortunately, the Texas Forensic Science Commission later established that the evidence was misinterpreted. They also determined that not one bit of the evidence used against him was valid and that the fire really was accidental as Willingham had repeatedly said.
Look, I know that most of the folks in law enforcement and the judicial system are honest upright people who really try to do the job right. But sometimes, some less dedicated or overstretched ones cut corners because of limited resources and manpower or simple apathy.
Maybe, if they could spend a little less time doing pointless things like license checkpoints and busting college kids for misdemeanor weed possession, they would have more time and money to go after the really bad guys and girls out there.
Hey, when it comes right down to it, none of us were in the courtroom or the jury room and we do not have access to the evidence, or lack thereof as it is, so we can only rely on news reporters, who, as I said early on, had Anthony convicted three years ago.
The system said she is innocent, so, she’s innocent. If the system got it wrong, is that somehow worse than if he had been convicted and was actually innocent? I think not.
Only she knows if she killed her child. If she did then I hope there is a hell for her to burn in, if she didn’t then she’s been living in hell for a while now and it’s one she can never leave.