Do we (society) really care about our kids????

I have a question. Do we really care about our kids in schools??? Cause if so we are not showing that we care. We are not addressing the issue; we are focused on agenda driven left leaning liberal socialist ideas. I bet right now you are wondering what I’m talking about and saying to yourself I thought we are addressing the issue?

Well let’s sit and talk a spell about the issue we should be talking about. The most important issue that is being over looked, and gun control or mental health isn’t it. What we should be talking about is so simple, relatively cheap, and if applied the Parkland school shooting would not have happen. Nothing the Florida legislature is trying to pass currently would have stopped the school shooting. It does nothing to address the problem. That problem is physical security, a very simple solution to the current problem. We must care about judges more than we care about our schools because; down at just about every courthouse in the country we have a very simple physical security plan. Let’s think about what happen in Parkland, the shooter was not a current student and basically walked into an unsecure building. He sat his bag down pulled out a rifle, sounded the fire alarm and began firing.  

 Let’s start by making every building that our kids are in during school to only have one controlled entrance and exit. All of the other doors are locked from the inside and used as an exit only with an alarm that will sound and alert the staff if opened. Doing this will create an easily manageable way to control access. To further this you could place personnel at the entrance to unlock the door for authorized personnel, or you could have a camera and door lock controlled from the office, or you could even add facial recognition, biometrics, or retina scans. This equipment is relatively cheap as it is on almost all new smart phones. Just this alone would have prevented the shooting. Now let’s talk about the students. They can go through metal detectors and bags ran through an X-ray machine. This will help keep unauthorized weapons from entering the building. Now up until now I have addressed the problem we are currently facing in schools without the use of guns or weapons. Now to address an extra security measure you should not restrict the option of having certain teachers/staff armed. This would have to be on a voluntary basis and they must go through a training session every 6 months to maintain certification. Certification would be gun range firing live ammunition for target practice and also would include scenario training on the virtual reality simulator. Extra pay should be included to incentivize teachers or staff to take the additional duty and risk.

If I were currently a congressman I would be trying to find something we are stupidly spending tax payer money on and try to end it, as to not, increase spending so I could give that money back to the people in physical protection grants to help us and the schools protect our kids.

So if we are really concerned about our kids why are we having this stupid debate on gun control, why are we not calling our school boards, local, state, and federal elected officials demanding that they quit trying to take our rights and freedoms away and attack the real issue of physical security? Next time you see some crap on the news talking about increasing the age to buying long rifles, or even arming teachers we need to first stop the real problem and that is securing our schools. Once that is done we can and should discuss the other issues like arming teachers etc. We need to stop letting emotion dictate what decisions or direction we go and look at the facts from a fact based stand point. (We) = society

Posted on 05 Mar 2018, 24:10 - Category: Physical security



Liberal emotion based judge

It is sad that we have a federal court district judge that exceeded its authority to stop President Trump’s Executive Order to defund sanctuary cities. This is an act of sabotage against the Constitution of the United States and its American Citizens, by a libtard/socialist judge that make decisions based on emotion and not the constitution.

The problems with sanctuary cities are by definition harboring criminals and are breaking the law. President Trump has not exceeded his authority or the constitution by signing this Executive Order. Harboring a fugitive refers to the crime of knowingly hiding a wanted criminal from the authorities. Let’s take a look at the federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1071 which requires proof of four elements:

(1) proof that a federal warrant had been issued for the fugitive' s arrest

(2) that the accused had knowledge that a warrant had been issued

(3) that the accused actually harbored or concealed the fugitive

(4) that the accused intended to prevent the fugitive' s discovery or arrest

All of which have been broken by sanctuary cities. Now you are probably questioning these facts if you just happen to be a libtard. So we will explore what the definition of a warrant.

Warrant: a document issued by a legal or government official authorizing the police or some other body to make an arrest, search premises, or carry out some other action relating to the administration of justice

 All of the criteria have been met. Tell me you liberal fruitcake how you determine President Trumps Executive Order “has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights” without using emotion? What about our constitutional rights. Why should we (the honest hardworking tax-paying law-abiding citizens) have to fund (with our tax money that is stolen from us) cities that commit crimes by harboring criminals. The facts are clear, that is they (Illegals) have no constitutional rights, only human god-giving rights. Nothing in the constitution applies to them.

I think that sanctuary cities should pay a penalty for harboring criminals. One way we might be able to get around this emotional based libtard decision would be treating the money for sanctuary cities like lettuce in a Japanese Inspection.  

“Japanese Inspection, you see, when the Japs get in a load of lettuce they're not sure they wanna let in the country, why they'll just let it sit there on the dock 'til they get good and ready to look at. But then of course, it's all gone rotten... ain't nothing left to inspect. You see, lettuce is a perishable item...” ~ Fred Thompson from the movie Days of Thunder.

We should not say that we are defunding the sanctuary cities but we could treat the money like lettuce and sit on the money till we get good and ready to give it out. I mean the federal government does it with and payments it owes to us, so why not use the same against sanctuary cities. Until the Supreme Court overturns the ruling.

I have one more thing to bring up. We should not use the term “Illegal Immigrants” it is offensive to the law-abiding people that obtained their citizenship the legal way, they are considered Immigrants. I believe we should use terms like “illegal, illegal alien, criminal, or law-breaker”.

Posted on 21 Nov 2017, 23:45 - Category: Judicial



Pages: [1]

 

Political advertisement paid for and approved by Anthony Blackmon for Congress.
Campaign Websites by Online Candidate