A Few Thoughts About The Response to SCOTUS Roe Decision

After more than a month since a draft opinion was leaked, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) released its decision last Friday on DOBBS, STATE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL. v. JACKSON WOMEN'S HEALTH ORGANIZATION ET AL.

Throughout the weekend I watched various protests, some became violent.  During some of the violent ones I saw groups, ANTIFA, join protests and commit acts of violence.  Others did not denounce the violence or move away from the violence in order that their cause doesn’t become tainted or distracted.    As I watched I wondered if the anger/ outrage over the SCOTUS decision was genuine?  If the anger is sincere and genuine it is directed at the wrong place.

 

First, I wondered if the anger was sincere because it appeared that many hadn’t read the Supreme Court decision, instead they let politicians (and others) tell them that abortions have been made illegal in the United States.  That’s not what the decision has done but the old adage is in full affect with protesters, “my mind’s made up don’t confuse me with facts”.  There are politicians that have gone out with protesters around the Supreme Court denouncing the decision and the crowd cheers them on when they should confront these politicians and demand to know why they haven’t made a real effort while in Congress to ensure the legalization of a woman’s right to chose to have an abortion?

 

From the time the original “Roe” decision was issued by the Supreme Court legal experts have said that it was a poorly written decision that lacked the in-depth facts to withstand a reversal in the future.  Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who was a fierce advocate for woman rights throughout her legal career criticized the original decision.  Instead of taking her thoughts on the original decision as a warning and using Justice Ginsburg’s thoughts as a guide to correct the deficiencies by legislative action politicians let it be.  They let it be because the issue is a great campaign fundraising tool, it is also a great weapon to attack one’s opponent.  Both political parties are guilty of using this issue as a campaign tactic and neither genuinely wanted it resolved.

 

Was anyone really surprised at the violence that occurred?  For the past couple of years politicians from all parties have not united to denounce violence.  Excuses and justifications for the conduct have been made, some politicians have even made threats towards SCOTUS Justices.  When a man was arrested recently by a Justice home and admitted that he planned to kill the Justice and harm his family we heard very little from our “leaders”.  When threats were made against the children of another Justice there was hardly a word. 

 

Finally, after the threats began targeting the children of SCOTUS Justices the U.S. Senate passed legislation to enhance security for the Justices and expand that security to their family members.  Those that wish to threaten to, and commit violence directed at the Justices and their families were encouraged and believed they had tacit support by the Speaker of the House because of her response.  When legislation was sent to the House from the Senate for action the Speaker did not immediately take it to the Floor for a vote, she decided that the safety of the Justices and their families was not important enough, it could wait until the next week.  The Speaker’s actions basically said to those wishing to do harm that you better hurry up, you have the weekend.

 

As far as the violence that occurred during protests this past weekend; the President eventually called for the protesters to remain peaceful, however, there was no condemnation of the violence from the White House or President.

 

Yes, politicians are responsible for what they say, their either supporting or refusing to denounce violence but they are not the only ones at fault.  We the voters are also responsible because we elect and reelect these politicians.  Despite what we say, violence is ok as long as it is against something, like a Supreme Court decision, that we disagree with.  Until we stop yelling at one another and start listening to opposing points of view nothing will change.

 

Even if we begin to talk with one another instead of yelling at each other, things will not change because it would also require that we hold our elected officials as well as ourselves accountable for our actions!  That is something society does not seem prepared to do.

 

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

Random Thoughts on Mass Shootings Aftermath

 In the past month there have been a number of shootings with multiple casualties, the most recent is the grocery store in Buffalo, NY and the school shooting in Uvalde, TX.  There have also been multiple casualty shootings in Chicago, IL, but such incidents are a weekly (sometimes daily) occurrences but only seem to get national attention to illustrate that strict gun laws will not work!

 

When these incidents occur my thoughts are with the victims’ families as well as the first responders who must suppress their feelings and complete their work, processing the scene, collecting evidence, notifying next of kin and watch their pain, and other things that come up during the investigation.  I also think back to my experiences throughout my 38 years in law enforcement, including my time as a Peer Support member of a Critical Incident Stress Debriefing Team (later changed to Critical Incident Stress Management), helping first responders (and in a few occasions family members of victims that arrived on the scene)

 

The next feelings I experience is anger and frustration because politicians will begin using the tragedy to push an agenda (often even before the bodies of the deceased have been removed from the scene).  They choose to hit talking points to take advantage of the tragedy for their political advantage, especially if there is an upcoming election.  I’m not only angry with politicians, I’m angry with us as a society because we allow politicians to use our emotions for their own purposes/ advantage.  Of course I also have anger because I know what’s coming and to be honest I am tired of hearing it, I am tired of gun rights advocates as well as politicians.

 

Think back over the years when there has been a mass casualty, active shooter incident, what do you hear?  One side says we need to do more to provide mental health, we need to restrict firearm purchases, we need to tighten and expand our gun laws!  The first time you hear these statements you may agree with some or all, you may be willing to work on those efforts.  However, the second, third, fourth, fifth, and more times you hear it you realized that there is no sincerity.  If you actually look at what is being said you become angry because you realize that the only concern is to gain a political advantage over one’s opponent.

 

We’re told that the loophole for online purchases has to be closed to ensure that background checks are conducted on those making online purchases, realizing that because of the emotions people are feeling following an incident they won’t realize that this loophole doesn’t exist.  When a purchase is made online the firearm is not mailed to the person, it is sent to a local gun dealer where the purchaser must go and complete the federal paperwork as part of a background check and wait to take possession of the firearm.  There is the talk of doing more for those suffering mental health issues to prevent them from committing such an act, again realizing that because of emotions over an incident people will react based on their emotions instead of fact.

It's not just politicians and anti-firearm advocates that anger me during these times, gun rights advocates anger me as well because they are no better, they play on emotions as well.  They yell about the Second Amendment and how any gun control is an infringement on “our” constitutional rights.  First, if we’re going to argue the Second Amendment, not just one section, lets discuss the entire article, especially since it is not very long;

“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.”

Those arguing for more strict gun laws argue that the Second Amendment grants the right to bear arms for a “well regulated Militia” and ignore the part that says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.  Conversely, those advocating against more gun laws only argue that the amendment says that the government shall not infringe on an individual’s right to bear arms.  Both sides ignore Supreme Court rulings over history related to the Second Amendment. They will also argue about the number of active shooter incidents that were stopped by “law abiding” gun owners.  Another argument that is made against similar and other “gun” laws is that gun registration laws will allow the government to come and seize citizens firearms, just as Stalin, Hitler, Mao and others did when they took power and transformed their countries to a socialist government.  The problem with that argument is that should the Federal Government ever get to that point they will come into your home to search for weapons regardless of any registration.

 

Before you assume you know which side I’m on let me share this with you. I own firearms, I purchased my first handgun in the late 1970’s when I was working as a security guard and applying to become a police officer.  At the time the city where I lived had a requirement that all citizens that lived or worked in that city had to register their firearms with the local police department.  I could have ignored that ordinance, however, I went to the police department and registered my firearm.  I did not have a problem doing so, it was not infringing on my ability to possess that weapon.

 

I would really like to see more sincerity and a genuine concern for finding solutions.  In the early 1990’s laws were passed increasing the confidentiality of a person’s health records, physical as well as mental.  At the same time laws were passed making schools “gun free zones” and there were arguments to remove police officers (School Resource Officers) from schools.  “We” needed to remove armed law enforcement from schools because they “scare” kids and inhibit their learning, removing officers would also make students feel safe.  Officers were removed and then when a shooting occurred there were cries demanding to know where officers were, why weren’t they at the schools.  Of course those cries were after demands that more needs to be done for mental health treatment.  Officers were eventually put back in schools, then beginning in 2015 when anti police movements spread throughout the nation demands returned to take law enforcement out of schools.

Unfortunately, none of the proposed actions will stop these mass casualty incidents! Why do I believe this, I believe this because when past incidents occurred investigations revealed current laws were not followed.  Those that failed to comply with current laws seem to go unpunished, or by the time they are punished people have moved on to something else to be angry about, there is no political advantage to praising the punishment of those that failed to comply with current laws.

 

The other problem with calls for greater mental health treatment is that they are not sincere!  If you think I’m wrong I would challenge you to just look at this country’s homeless population!  This country has pushed people out of treatment in part to reduce the cost to government!  Treatment cost money and those in need of treatment have been pushed out onto the street to reduce costs!

 

Until we start to care about and for those suffering mental health issues everyday, without these individuals being involved in a violent incident, nothing will change.  Until we make up our minds about minor children and stop sending mixed messaged, such as at the age of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 are old enough and mature enough to determine which gender they should be BUT at 18 years old you’re not mature enough to know right from wrong when handling a firearm!

 

There is an old saying, Put Up or Shut Up!  This can apply to mass casualty/ shooting incidents, until we are willing to Put Up and hold those that violate current laws we should Shut Up!  I say “we” because “we” are the ones that elect those politicians that use our emotions as their personal toy to play with.

 If the past and current actions are any indication we are not sincere about preventing future incidents and until that changes nothing else will change.

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours

What the “Slap Heard Around the World” Showed the World!

 Nearly two weeks ago the Oscars Awards program was broadcast and as most people know actor Will Smith walked up on stage and slapped comedian Chris Rock after he told a “mild” joke that referenced the appearance of Smith’s wife (Jada Pinkett Smith).  For days after the incident, it was a topic on most news and talk/ opinion shows. 

 

Everyone had an opinion, for the first 24 hours much of those, including broadcasts, either supported Will Smith’s actions or made excuses for his actions.  A couple of politicians even posted tweets applauding Smith’s actions and then deleted them, one claimed that they supported Smith because they didn’t realize that it was real and not staged.  Watching the numerous reactions and stories about “the slap heard around the world” during the following week I thought it explained a lot and answered a question that many asked the past couple of years.  How could Harvey Weinstein have gotten away with his criminal acts for as long as he did?  Yes, I said criminal acts because what Will Smith did was the criminal act of Battery (assault in some jurisdictions).

 

Harvey Weinstein was able to get away with his crimes for so long because “Hollywood” has sympathy for the offenders, the victims not so much!  Look at the way “Hollywood” reacted to “the slap”, you saw people going to console Will Smith after his actions towards Chris Rock.  When Smith was announced as the recipient of the Best Actor Award for the movie “King Richard” he received a standing ovation, not a polite applause, a standing ovation!  Will Smith slapped Chris Rock for telling a joke that he (and many of the audience) had laughed at.  It wasn’t until the Williams family (King Richard was about the family Patriarch and Serena & Venus’ father Richard Williams) spoke out against what had occurred (the slap) and others outside of “Hollywood” criticized Smith’s actions, pointing out if he had not been a wealthy celebrity he would have been arrested on the spot, then “Hollywood” began to temper their support for Will Smith slapping Chris Rock. 

 

The immediate response of “Hollywood” was to sympathize and support the offender, even though they had actually witnessed with their own eyes his criminal act.  Their concern was for the aggressor and not the victim!  That response vividly demonstrates why victims of Harvey Weinstein were fearful that their careers would be ruined just for being victims.  Of course, the media didn’t help, the descriptions of what occurred varied from a minor incident to one headline referring to what happened as a brawl.  A brawl, really!  As someone that has been in a brawl before I can assure you this was not a brawl (not even close).

 

This act also showed the world that celebrities anti violence claims are because it is beneficial to their image which in turn has an impact on their personal finances, not a genuine concern for their fellow humans (unless they happen to also be one of the entitled/ celebrity class).  It also showed that claims of the U.S. Criminal Justice System being racist were wrong.  In this incident the victim and offender were both persons of color, had the offender not been an entitled celebrity he would have been taken into custody at the time regardless of whether the victim wanted an arrest made.  The victim would have to go tell the prosecuting Attorney that they did not wish to pursue charges and then the prosecutor could drop/ dismiss the charges.  Claims that there are two systems, one for the rich and one for everyone else was given credibility by this incident.

 

Perhaps “Hollywood” should remember and try to live by an adage, “Practice What You Preach” before criticizing or passing judgement on the U.S. Judicial System again.  That would definitely add credibility to them and their alleged position on crime and the Judicial System.

 

That’s my opinion, what’s yours!

MLK Day

 Today we honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr and his legacy, I find that I have mixed emotions about today.  I am old enough that I was able to listen to his words, his interviews and speeches when they happened.  In 1963 my family lived just outside of Washington, D.C. and I still remember watching what became known as the I have a dream speech on TV, it was a moving and inspiring speech even for this child.

I said I have mixed emotions today, first and foremost I am glad that this nation has a day dedicated to Dr. King and his work for civil rights, it is well deserved.  Secondly, I am saddened/ disappointed because many celebrating Dr. King today will ignore his message tomorrow and the rest of the year.  They will advocate for changes even through violence, they will judge others by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character in the name of achieving a goal.

Dr. King’s message, his life, should be more meaningful than a day off from work and a parade.

That’s My Opinion, What’s Yours