I weep for the future of our country.
I weep for the future of our country.
Paying people not to commit crimes? Only the government can come up with that solution.
The District of Columbia lawmakers are looking for ways to discourage people from becoming repeat offenders. (I think punishment is a great deterrent, but that’s just me.)
The AP reports that the D.C. Council voted unanimously last Tuesday to approve a bill that includes a proposal to pay residents a stipend not to commit crimes. Apparently this is already happening in other cities as it’s based on a program in Richmond, California, that advocates say has contributed to deep reductions in crime there.
Under the bill, city officials would identify up to 200 people a year who are considered at risk of either committing or becoming victims of violent crime. Those people would be directed to participate in behavioral therapy and other programs. If they fulfill those obligations and stay out of trouble, they would be paid.
Of course the bill doesn’t specify the value of the stipends. Heaven forbid one actually write a comprehensive bill! Those participants in the California program receive up to $9,000 per year.
Democrat councilmember Kenyan McDuffie wrote the legislation. He said it was part of a comprehensive approach to reducing violent crime in the city, which experienced a 54 percent increase in homicides last year. Gee, I though their strict gun laws would have solved all the crime?
McDuffie argued that spending $9,000 a year in stipends “pales in comparison” to the cost of someone being victimized, along with the costs of incarcerating the offender. “I want to prevent violent crime – particularly gun violence – by addressing the root causes and creating opportunities for people, particularly those individuals who are at the highest risks of offending,” McDuffie, a former prosecutor, said in a letter to constituents last week.
The Mayor Muriel Bowser has not committed to funding the program. And how much will this cost? Apparently $4.9 million over four years, including $460,000 a year in stipend payments, according to the District’s independent chief financial officer. Without the mayor’s support, it would be up to the Council to find money for it through new taxes or cuts to existing programs. Participants in the program would remain anonymous. Its goal would be to recruit people who are at risk of violence but don’t have criminal cases pending.
The stats in the Richmond stipend program show that 79 percent of “fellows” participating in the program have not been suspected of involvement in any gun crimes since joining the program, and 84 percent have not been injured by gunfire, the program’s executive director, DeVone Boggan, said in a report to the Council. Richmond experienced a 77 percent drop in homicides between 2007, when the program was launched, and 2014. Here’s the kicker though: how much can be specifically attributed to the stipends is unclear.
The proposal in Washington has generated scant debate as lawmakers have focused on other crime-fighting tools included in the bill. Longtime civic activist Dorothy Brizill was the only person to testify against the stipend program at a lengthy hearing last fall, saying it would waste taxpayer dollars. “These incentive programs don’t work,” Brizill said.
Nano is a 20-year-old Norwegian woman who claims she has a “genetic defect” because she was born the wrong species. You see, Nano is really a cat.
In an interview with reporter Silje Ese in a shopping mall, Nano walks around with an artificial white tail tucked under her coat, and hisses at a passing dog.
Nano claims she can hear and see things that humans can’t, like the sound of keys clinking in people’s pockets, and seeing in the dark. She meows and purrs. She hates water, and “washes” her face with her hands in big pink mittens. At home, she walks around on all fours, sleeps in the sink and on windowsills.
Nano has a male friend named Svein who, although not born a cat like Nano, has multiple personalities, one of which is a cat. They meow at each other.
So, should society start calling Nano a cat and give it a big litter box to pee and poop in?
Why not? She says she’s one!
Just as this male transvestite, with penis and testicles, says he’s really a woman.
Why are we discriminating against Nano the transspecies, but go along with Caitlyn the transgender’s delusion? As Hillary Clinton says, “What difference does it make?”
Meet Lakecha Jackson, a fast food worker in Detroit. When asked by a reporter why she should be paid more than a paramedic she said, “Because we do so much. We do more than we get paid.”
Her brief interview starts at the 2:42 mark.
We are raising a nation of wussies.
A girls’ basketball team in Minnesota claims they have been told they can no longer play in their local league because they are ‘too talented’. The Rogers Area Youth Basketball Association (RAYBA) girls’ high school team say they were told by the North West Suburban Basketball League that they would be no longer welcome to play matches due to their ‘skill level’.
The Daily Mail reports that the team says the news came in a letter just the day before they were due to play in a showcase tournament and while the girls were on a three game winning streak.
It read: ‘The Northwest Suburban Basketball League decided RAYBA does not fit into the league. The main reason they made this decision is because other teams do not want to play RAYBA due to the skill level.’
The team’s coach, Jason Hanauska, says he is mad that banning his team means the league will stop talent from developing. He told Fox 9: ‘We found out on Friday they were not going to be allowed because according to the league our girls were too talented. Three teams were threatening to I guess either forfeit the games against us or flat out quit the league. So for some reason they kicked us out.’
And the players and their parents echoed Mr. Hanauska’s thoughts, calling the decision ‘absurd’.
One of the girls’ mothers told the station: ‘Do we take the (NFL’s) Patriots or Cardinals, who are going to the championship game, and kick them to the curb because they’re too good?’
The Northwest Suburban League have yet to comment on the case. Officials from the league are due to meet with the coach Mr. Hanauska to discuss the situation.
The City of Lowell, Massachusetts has an approximate population of 110,000 and lies 35 miles north of Boston. They overwhelming elect democrats. So the following should come as no surprise. It is complete NONSENSE.
The commies in charge have enacted a new law that requires residents applying for a license to carry handguns to write “an essay” and pay upwards of $1,100 for training.
Fox News reports that this was pushed by Police Superintendent William Taylor and passed by the City Council. The law requires applicants for unrestricted handgun licenses to state in writing why they should receive such a license. Taylor has sole discretion for approving or denying the applications.
Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts, is not mincing words. He said, “It is absurd that people should have to write an essay to the town to explain why they should be able to exercise their constitutional rights. We already have a very strict set of gun laws in the state, but this is way over the top.”
Other cities and towns in Massachusetts have tough licensing regulations. Lowell’s new requirements, which also include taking a gun safety course over and above one already required by the state, prompted complaints at a public hearing last week. “I will never write an essay to get my rights as an American citizen,” resident Dan Gannon told the City Council.
The new policy was prompted in part by a year-old federal lawsuit brought by Commonwealth Second Amendment, a Bay State gun-rights group. Attorney David Jensen said the suit stems from Lowell’s history of denying qualified applicants permits to carry handguns without what the plaintiffs consider a legitimate rationale.
Jensen said the jury is still out on whether the new policy will prove a remedy or just a more formal system for rejecting applications. “The question right now is what they actually do,” Jensen said. “Our initial response to that would be that the Second Amendment secures the right to keep and bear arms. You really shouldn’t be required to write an essay explaining why you would like to exercise this fundamental right.”
Lowell Police spokesman Capt. Timothy Crowley said characterizing the written requirement as an “essay” is not accurate. “If you want a license to carry a firearm unrestricted wherever you want and whenever you want, the superintendent is just looking for some documentation as to why,” Crowley said. “That is not unreasonable to most people.”
Local attorney Richard Chambers, who often represents applicants who have been turned down, said calling the new requirement an “essay” is right on target. “An essay when you’re in school is when you write something, you turn it in and they grade it,” Chambers said. “This is an essay. And it’s also just another layer of bureaucracy they’ve tacked on to block people from exercising their rights.”
Despite the criticism, the new rules were adopted unanimously and are set to take effect this week.
Read all the details here.
Bureaucrats being bureaucrats.
A student at Gateway Middle School in Killeen, Texas, was suspended last week after he picked up a classmate who was having an asthma attack and carried her to the nurse’s office against his teacher’s instructions.
Fox News reports that Anthony Ruelas (15) said his classmate was “wheezing and gagging for three minutes.” The teacher said everyone should stay calm and wait for an email reply from the nurse in response to the situation, Texas TV station KCEN reported.
Being an observant kid, Ruelas said he knew that his friend “needed help,” which is why he decided to pick her up and carry her to the office.
The teacher’s report on the incident read:
“During 5th period another student complained that she couldn’t breathe and was having an asthma attack. As I waited for a response from the nurse, the student fell out of her chair to the floor. Anthony proceeded to go over and pick her up, saying ‘f—k that, we ain’t got time to wait for no email from the nurse.’ He walks out of class and carries the other student to the nurse.”
The school district said it was investigating the matter and released a statement in response to the incident.
“The District is unable to provide details related to the matter as it pertains to information involving student discipline and/or health records. In an effort to protect students’ rights to confidentiality granted under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the details of the investigation and/or disciplinary actions may not be provided by the district at this time. The Killeen ISD maintains the safety of our students, staff and campuses as a priority and applauds the efforts of students who act in good faith to assist others in times of need.”
How do you “maintain the safety of our students” by letting them have an attack for three minutes? Unreal.
Read the rest of the story here.