Bullying

I applaud the efforts now being made here in the State to stop bullying. Several incidences this past year have been covered extensively by the Des Moines Register and the local television channels. It has been made clear that these acts of meanness have led to physical and emotional harm as well as death. The public has now been properly conditioned to accept action by the legislature. This upcoming session should now be free to address the issue of bullying without repercussions from the electorate. No one will lose his or her job by enacting an anti-bullying statute. On the contrary those supporting such action will be able to return to their constituents with full satisfaction that they have done well and should be congratulated for dealing with the problem. Progress is currently being made. An educator with whom I am familiar has indicated that the State is now requiring schools to report allegations of bullying. Those receiving this data will be creating a meanness index. This index will have two benefits: first, those children who are reported to have bullied will be identified. A meanness score will be given to each reported allegation and a total made at the end of each child's public education career (K-12). Legislative action may be required to make this information public and should be included in any proposed statute. Each child will be given a meanness indicator number identifying that child's propensity toward meanness. This meanness indicator should be made available to any future employer, landlord, potential neighbor (realtors), etc.; second, the data will be used to categorize schools as incubators of meanness where appropriate. This information will also be valuable to any parent thinking of open enrolling their children in another school district. It will give the State the ability to take corrective measures where appropriate. It might be feasible to create a special anti-bullying police force to be assigned to any school meeting the criteria of a bully incubator. If parents are unable to inculcate kindness in their children, then the State must intervene and involve itself as it has done in so many other areas. Creating a new bullying crime is the path to follow. We must be very careful not to limit the crime to physical contact or a threat of immediate physical harm or offensive conduct--these acts are currently chargeable under the assault chapter of the Iowa Code. It must include all forms of internet communication. Stating on your facebook page that so-and-so is a weenie and eats dog poop and the next time you see him you will beat the crap out of him would not meet the necessary element of the immediate ability to do what you threaten to do, unless of course you are sitting next to him in the cafeteria. Kindness, respect, good manners must be required. The innumerable posters on the walls of every hallway of every school in the State have not had the desired effect. The legislature must act.

Election Results and Bestiality

The aforementioned election did little to satisfy the lust for incarceration either here in Iowa or nationally. Far too many Democrats were elected to expect any uptick in the number of arrests and incarcerations. It is a common misunderstanding to think that the Democrats have the same fervor for incarceration as the Republicans. The Democrats, but only relatively speaking, have been soft on crime tolerating a considerable amount of deviant behavior from the general public. The election results of yesterday have put a bad taste in the mouth of law enforcement. They realize, even if the majority of lay people do not, that more rules mean more arrests. And consequently it is a sad day when the Republicans do not carry the day. Unfortunately there was no incidence of necrophilia or bestiality to make the news prior to the election which could arouse the public into indignation demanding action by the legislature. In 2001 a bestiality chapter was added to the Iowa Code making sex between a person and an animal (an nonhuman vertebrate, either alive or dead) an aggravated misdemeanor subject to as much as two years in prison. In addition, the court must authorize psychological evaluation and treatment at the defendant's own expense. I have reviewed Chapter 692A and it does not appear that a person convicted of having sex with an animal is required to register as a sex offender. What could be more egregious than having sex with an animal. If having sex when criminally enjoined from doing so is not a sex crime, what is? I think even Democrats could be persuaded to amend Chapter 692A to include bestiality as a crime requiring sex offender registry. It would open up a whole new area of regulation and therapy. For instance, new sections could be added to the chapter to prohibit the offenders from living within two thousand feet of a stock yard, sale barn, veterinarian office, kennel, or any registered pet owner. The safety of our pets and live stock should be paramount. A new field of expertise would come into existence: person-animal sex therapists. PETA would approve. It is true that the code section in issue here, 717C, currently requires psychological evaluation, but this really misses the mark. What will be needed are therapists specializing in person-animal sex. I know that I am not alone in my concern for our pets. If you share this concern, do the responsible thing and contact your legislators demanding action.

Legitimate Rape

Its election day and we can only hope that the Republicans will prevail here in Iowa so that we can then have an intelligent discussion of rape. Our criminal code does not distinguish between legitimate rape and illegitimate rape which is a legitimate concern-hopefully not being unduly playful with the wording. This being a serious subject and one that needs clarification, readers should not believe for an instant that I am not serious when I say we need clarification which clarification should be enacted this next legislative session. Too many men are subjected to prison and requirements of life-time sex offender registration where the rape has not been legitimate. Is one "No, I don't want to have sex", enough to classify the sex act rape. Should the person being raped be required to say it three times? If one of the sex partners is immobilized by ropes, handcuffs, or other devices, can we call this legitimate rape? The popularity of the book Fifty Shades of Gray would seem to indicate that this would not be legitimate rape. If one of the sex partners is drunk, should this be classified as legitimate rape? It would seem to me that the whole purpose of getting drunk would be to have sex especially in a frat house or some like establishment. We need clarification. The police and prosecutors need better guidance as to what may be deemed legitimate and what illegitimate. There are instances where women have been charged with rape and in most cases these are instances of illegitimate rape. The latest example to read about in the papers is the female teacher having sex with high school boys. Being a man myself and having once been a high school student, it is difficult to think that I or any of my friends would have objected to having sex with an attractive, young high school teacher. From what I gather from the Des Moines Register, this young, attractive, female high school teacher is being prosecuted for sexual abuse and faces prison and sex offender registration. This is but one more example of what should be considered illegitimate rape. The new legislature must immediately put together a study committee to examine the current laws on this subject and make recommendations for changes. I would advise strongly against inviting experts, social workers, sex counselors, prosecutors, or police to be on the committee for they usually have an economic interest in the number of people prosecuted for rape. The committee should only consist of legislators and ordinary citizens who have no economic interest in the matter.

To End Welfare

As I have argued previously, crime is an economic activity. The distribution of illegal drugs certainly qualifies as does most other illegal conduct. Property crimes are a major contributor to the economic life of the nation: theft, fraud, forgery, burglary, robbery, to recount just a few. Congress has in its power to increase the incidence of property crimes ten fold with the correct legislation. We should discontinue disability payments to those unemployable for whatever reason they might have such as mental or physical disabilities. Schizophrenics find it difficult to maintain employment-of any kind. People of below marginal intelligence find it difficult to keep a job for any length of time. And of course, substance abusers are notoriously unfit for the job market. There are many, especially Republicans, who continually bemoan the handouts to these people. They should work for a living just like us responsible citizens. I am in agreement with those who wish to terminate disability payments, welfare for women who keep having illegitimate children, food stamps, and other forms of free handouts to ne'er-do-wells. By ending these nefarious forms of redistribution of wealth, we would have an veritable explosion in crime, especially property crime and drug dealing. It would be an immense benefit to the economy. The money spent to replace what was stolen, burgled, robbed, and otherwise taken illegally, the money spent to hire law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, jailers, prison guards, counselors, social workers, probation and parole officers, clerks of court, the increased insurance premiums, the construction of additional jails and prisons would be far in excess of sums doled out to the unemployable. One might think that the return of begging and the vast increase in homelessness would be a significant problem. Not so. Our legislatures would bring back the crimes against begging, panhandling, loitering, and other infractions meant to keep the miscreants off the streets. Its very annoying to have people come to your door begging for food, or rushing up to you as you exit your vehicle requesting they be allowed to wash your windshield for a few bucks, especially if they have children tagging along. If children are found on the streets, we have an army of social workers able and willing to snatch them up and file children in need of assistance petitions based upon neglect. These parents will be unable to fulfill the numerous requirements imposed on them for the return of their children such as court appearances, parenting classes, substance abuse counseling, and in no time at all a termination of parental rights petition will be filed and the parent-child relationship be permanently severed allowing some deserving family to adopt. Complaints about burglary, home invasions, robbery, pick pockets, shop lifting, etc. will not be tolerated. Homes must be burglar proofed, security cameras must be purchased, razor wire must be installed--money must be spent. The Gross National Product will jump from the now measly two percent to four or five; jobs will be created; the deficit shall be reduced: taxes will decrease. All will be for the good.

Trivial Pursuit

There should be commenced a contest among law enforcement agencies such as police departments, sheriffs, high patrols, etc. on which agency can give citations for the most trivial infractions. A central state agency should be created to monitor the contest and award prizes which prizes would be substantial enough that the various law enforcement agencies would participate. The prizes probably should be monetary as well as the granting of public accolades to those individual officers who have issued the citations for the most trivial offenses and to the local agency whose officers have issued the most. An issue that should be decided in advance is whether both arrests and citations should be considered. It would seem appropriate that an arrest would be worth two or three citations considering the inconvenience to the officer making the arrest. It takes a substantially longer time to arrest someone, transport them to the local jail, and fill out the necessary reports than it does to simply write a citation. An officer could be writing numerous citations during the time it takes to arrest one person. Possibly we should count an arrest as ten citations--that might be the solution. Traffic citations, it is expected, would be the constant source of trivial violations. Very few citizens actually drive the speed limit. A speeding ticket for one mile over can be easily issued. Fix-it tickets for equipment failure probably should not be counted, unless, of course, the code specifically determines that the failure is a criminal violation such as head lights, rear lights, license plate lights, and turn signals. The number of traffic violations that exist is practically infinite. Sitting at an intersection with traffic control lights would bring a constant flow of citations such as entering the intersection on yellow or failure to use the turn signal. One almost gets giddy just thinking of the number of possible citations. There would be the usual grumbling though. Those officers not having traffic duty will complain. The drug task forces will be at a disadvantage. They should not despond quite yet though. Arrests could be made for one marijuana seed found during a trash rip. If a search warrant is executed and numerous articles used in the ingestion of controlled substances are found in the residence, separate charges could be filed on each item. For instance, if three marijuana pipes, two meth pipes, and four empty folds were found, nine separate simple misdemeanors could be charged along with the felonies. Although in this particular contest, felonies do not count as they are not trivial. And, further discussion could be had prior to developing the rules for the contest to determine the weight of the particular citations or complaints being filed. The goal would be to have as many law enforcement agencies and individual officers as possible participate in this contest. Making it fair to all would encourage participation. This contest of trivial pursuit would have the added benefit of helping the state treasury: it would be bountiful. The amount of money flowing into the local clerk's offices would be multiplied. The legislature would be ecstatic; it might even cause Governor Branstad to renew his effort to decrease property taxes which would be very helpful to us operating small businesses in Iowa. The contest would encapsulate the very goal of every good Republican to "get tough on crime". Only the morally deficient would complain, and they don't count. We need volunteers to organize and present a proposal to the Department of Public Safety and if legislation should be required, a spokesman could be named to present the plan to the appropriate legislative committees.

Jury Nullification

Nothing would be more ill-advised than allowing juries to think they can simply ignore the law and find a defendant not guilty. Juries are instructed that they must follow the instructions as given to them by the judge and any indication of insurrection should be immediately addressed. In this great republic of ours, we delegate the authority to make and enforce laws to our elected representatives and any sign that the general public might not agree with a certain enacted crime should be dealt with as it occurs. No indication should be given during a criminal trial that the law was enacted for the benefit of just those chosen to decide the case; and it makes not a whit of difference if the jury agrees with it or not, they must find the defendant guilty. Anarchy would result if juries were free to find defendants not guilty simply because they had the notion to do it. Many a defense attorney has wanted to stand in front of a jury in closing argument and argue that the crime for which the defendant is being prosecuted is really stupid and the twelve people deciding the case can find him not guilty whether he did the act or not. I suspect a mistrial would be instantly declared, the attorney either held in contempt or severely reprimanded, and the defendant required to go through the entire process a second time--probably with more compliant defense counsel. It is an unfortunate fact that a jury trial is the single, only, specific instance of a citizen having a direct say in what the law should or should not be. And I say unfortunate advisedly. No small group of citizens, such as a jury, should be able to nullify the power of either the state or the federal government. In any other form of insurrection, the group would be instantly jailed and charged with some crime or another and be held to account. As a jury, they can do whatever they want and nothing can be done about it. We need to fix this. We need our legislatures to address this issue and enact some sort of crime whereby jurors can be prosecuted if they do not follow jury instructions. If a legislative body takes its valuable time to pass a law, and the multitude of law enforcement agencies extant make the effort to enforce it, we can't have a group of twelve people ignoring it. Too much time, effort, and money has gone into the process.

Prescription warning

I recently took the deposition of a task force officer as a result of a raid on a residence with full ninja outfits, battering ram, and other accoutrements of home invasion and during the course of his testimony he indicated that he took a bottle of pills and for which the resident was charge with Possession of a Prescription Drug without a Prescription. Even though the prescription was to a family member whose name was on the search warrant and presumably thought to live there, but was not present at the residence during the entry and subsequent search, the resident who was present, also named on the warrant, was charged with Possession of a Prescription Drug without a Prescription in violation of 155A.21 of the Iowa Code which states: "A person found in possession of a drug or device limited to dispensation by prescription, unless the drug or device was so lawfully dispensed, commits a serious misdemeanor." Other than for the fact that the section is barely intelligible, a prescription label appeared on the bottle indicating lawful dispensation. The most difficult part of this to understand is why the resident would be charged with a violation of 155A.21 or charged at all for that matter. What is it in the character of the charging officer to file it? Are we so anxious to charge people with crimes, thereby being able to define them as criminals, that law enforcement will use any method possible to do so? If this were a stand alone charge, the resident would be subject to jail, cost of bond, cost of legal defense, disruption of activities for court appearances. A word of warning to all of you who have recently departed children whether through college, marriage, job, or whatever reason, you better check your medicine cabinets for according to the local drug task force you are committing a crime and are subject to arrest. Not only are you subject to arrest but you probably will be arrested and find yourself on an escorted trip, in handcuffs, to the local jail. In the first place, section 155A.21 states that there must be a valid prescription. In this instance there was and it was apparent. So where is the violation? Secondly, the code section does not indicate in any way that the one person can not hold the prescription medication of another person. So where is the crime here? There is no crime and someone associated with the drug task force should know it. It is difficult to understand.