Sex Offender Ponzi Scheme

Ponzi schemes are investment strategies where individuals help facilitate other like-minded individuals by purchasing or acquiring an idea or product with the hopes of an economic safety and security outcomes. These elaborate schemes take time to manifest and mature. Those that refuse or suspicious are usually labeled as missing an opportunity of a lifetime or misanthropic. Once the moment of collapse of Ponzi schemes unravels then does the distrust of those that invested harming families, security, public trust, and overall accountability.

The most massive Ponzi scheme that America has been selling for decades is the sex offender registry. It too has a pyramid scheme that allows investment in public policy and administrative oversight. Individuals such as John Walsh have raked in over $42M for his charities and amassed a net worth of $20M. States receive over $200M annually from the Edward R. Byrne grant program that helps fund offender registries nationwide. All while Walsh increases his rhetoric and scare tactics to increase funding and additional non-compliance penalties, states are struggling to keep up the pace where jails are beginning to fill up because of Ponzi styled policies backed by law enforcement agencies seeking to cash in on the opportunity.

All while sex offenses appeared to decrease overall, the recent #metoo and #timesup movement helped contribute the Ponzi effects by rescinding statute of limitation policies to dig some thirty plus years in the past adding to what appeared to be a stabilized registry. High profile additions have created the registry as a method to keep registry legislation, and pyramid schemes are breathing another sigh of relief that funding will indeed increase. While others are warning of the critical effects and possible backlash, the registry grows wildly into a mishmash of anyone easily or conveniently targeted.

But will the sex offender Ponzi scheme find itself on the brink of collapse? Many states are seeking registered offender to pay an annual fee to keep the registry requirements relevant all while continuing to acquire millions in government grants intended to pay for those that cannot contribute. It is usually Ponzi schemes that begin asking for investors to invest more or seeking undisclosed payments similar to what states are introducing to registrants. Citizens are starting to ask questions about the overall effectiveness of the registry and if it has gotten out of hand. The same similarities were asked by those wary of Bernie Madoff but went ignored for over a decade. Eventually, the world came crashing down around those that invested or supported Ponzi or pyramid schemes. It was ordinary folk and families that were ultimately destroyed by the cause and effects.

In general, the sex offender registry is nothing more than an elaborate and complicated Ponzi scheme. It promises an immediate return on investment by providing a secure community and added protections to educating those that choose to access it. In the past decades, it has produced no such reliability nor has an outlook that provides security at all. States continually add to the already convoluted and confusing laws or policies introduced, struck down, or amended on a quarterly basis leaving those affected by the registry entirely in the dark and vulnerable. This not a sign of an adequate return on investment. It is a sign that Americans have been duped out of billions of dollars at a failed experiment. It sounds more like a FEMA recovery plan for Puerto Rico with similarities of homelessness, hunger, no work, and a bleak outlook for the future.

Advertisements

Why I Support Open Carry Laws

There are many debates about gun control laws. Some states are witnessing an increase in concealed carry permits (CCP) while other states have some form of open carry laws. Naturally, the issue surrounding gun debates are somewhat personal to me and complex. This is why I think there are so many differing opinions on how to tackle gun control in America. Call me a traditionalist or perhaps a bit old fashioned, but I fear the more we control legal gun ownership in America creates a problem where those that illegally have guns will outnumber those that have firearms legally.

Owning a gun in America may be a right, but it should also be a privilege. That right and privilege should not be a published document to identify who and where gun owners live. If so, it must be kept highly confidential so that burglary crimes won’t target the homes of gun owners. Owning your first firearm should require a minimum of a basic training course. If gun training is good enough for the military, then it should be good enough for the civilian world. It shouldn’t be cumbersome but should provide a basic overview of when a firearm should be unholstered.

Some people may not agree with my assessment that open carry of a gun is acceptable. A key reason for my approval of open carry laws is that law enforcement is currently stretched thin. In some cases, not all, an open carry situation may be a deterrent rather than an escalating issue. There are some cases where open carry pistols may not be the best or practical ideal setting. This is where common sense and discretion should be used. Thus, perhaps why training is so important for first-time gun owners. There are plenty of laws on the books that gun owners must abide by such as storage safety, castle doctrine, and going armed to terrorize. A majority of legal gun owners are mindful not to draw attention to themselves. But there are cases where gun ownership and open carry has a conflicting issue such as K-12 schools, religious or funeral services, and courthouses.

Let’s face facts. America today is a much more dangerous place than it was let’s say twenty years ago. Police resources are stretched thin and personal crimes such as carjackings, daytime home invasions, and random acts of violence seem to be on the rise. Open carry laws and those that abide by open carry may be providing a better deterrent than given credit for. The same could be said for concealed pistol permits. This is why I am a Democrat and support open carry laws. It is one of the few remaining laws that truly protects family and personal liberties from criminal and violent behaviors.

Georgia HB 51 May Be Right

Recently the State of Georgia introduced legislation that could actually challenge parts of the Title IX law. Under current law, a college or university student could use Title IX to bring a criminal investigation for an alleged sex offense against another student without notifying law enforcement. Presently a victim can make a choice to tell campus administrators, police, or both if a sexual assault or rape has occurred. What Georgia has introduced is House Bill 51 (HB 51) that would require a victim to immediately report an allegation to police and not to campus administrators. The bill that could be made into law would sidestep campus administrators and student conduct boards altogether by providing a thorough criminal investigation.

First, I support Title IX as a law that provides equality in school and university athletics programs. However, I cannot support a mission creep clause that allows victims of alleged sexual assaults to sidestep police that is equipped to investigate felonious crimes. No campus administrator should be in hindering an alleged criminal process. When school leadership interferes with criminal cases, then it has a similar smell of the infamous Duke Lacrosse scandal or the Virginia University gang rapes that Rolling Stone magazine had to resend due to the fact it never happened.

Title IX is a bad law that eliminates due processes of the accused instituting a “he said she said” determination. There are no other administrative processes in the military, private sector, or municipalities that would extend such an offer of choices for an accusation of rape or sexual assault. Title IX sexual conduct reporting is only applicable to higher learning institutions. Another reason why it is dangerous is that an accused could be erroneously listed as a sexual offender by the school but not on a sex offender registry. That’s right. Because the campus utilizes FERPA and other privacy concerned processes a false allegation or inadequate investigation by university authorities would expel the accused as a sex offender but not be required to register because authorities were never notified a sexual assault that took place.

Rape is a serious accusation. The weights of justice should have a compelling timeline, physical evidence, and evidence that the act was not authorized. But to have a university administrator, a person not in a position to administratively rule on law or holds a law license should never be engaged in the efforts Title IX loosely provides. HB 51 may be what college campuses need to keep campus behaviors in line with states laws and statutes.

My Amazon Echo is my Alibi?

I could not resist mentioning the recent case involving the Amazon device known as “Echo.” I admit that I have one of these devices. When I heard that an Echo device was being subpoenaed to court because it may have listening data I knew that this story would grow into all sorts of hype. While I understand that police in this particular incident want to comb over every inch of potential evidence, I think we may be opening looking into a Pandora’s Box that may have ramifications.

It was last year a murder case in California had Apple and its iPhone applications at the center of controversy. There was much legal wrangling over consumer data, texts, and other meta information. But what was the most interesting part that differs versus the case of Amazon is that the government wanted to hack into the iPhone. There are currently features such as Siri, Cortana, Google Assistant and countless other devices that seek voice recognition to wake the device. I fear that our home may inadvertently become a crime scene in waiting if we do not stop the overreach of particular law practices and standards.

imgres-1.jpg

I can remember a time where law enforcement tools have evolved from wanted posters to police radio, patrol cars and social networks, such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. Community policing today has also expanded through social networking to locate missing children, alert neighbors of suspicious activity, and even inform the public about crimes committed in their neighborhoods. But it seems that police and other law enforcement organizations are migrating its way into our kitchens, bedrooms, and living rooms. I have nothing to hide. However, I do revere in a bit of personal privacy. The art of secrecy or personal privacy has slowly succumbed its deathbed. Our computer, smartphone, Echo device, automated garage door opener, car and almost anything with a way of connectivity can tell on us. Most disturbing is if there is a time management flaw in the code because that could be the powerful indictment within the law they look for. What can you do to protect yourself from your own devices?

imgres-2.jpg

At one time I was worried about hackers with accessibility to my home security camera, laptop, iPhone and other electronic devices. That later shifted towards foreign governments hacking into my network to do harm to our nation. Within months that seems to have slipped into me being a bit concerned that my own devices are watching me because the police have a suspicion. Folks, all this can be done without much of a warrant. In no way am I eluding that Edward Snowden was correct in his assessment of big brother? But what he shared has had a greater significance on a plausible concern that we no longer have rights to reasonable privacy. If this was a traffic camera where I am behind the wheel near a crime scene, then I can accept that. Hopefully, my alibi would be a credible witness either that saw me or was with me. But I find it difficult for me to grasp that my future alibi may be my Amazon Echo device. That alone is a scary scenario with multitudes of problems written all over it.

imgres-3.jpg

I am an advocate of free will. I do my best to protect animals by working in shelters. I hopefully write witty blogs about the concerns that I see most of you talk about but find little room to do anything about. I embrace technology, pay my taxes, go to school, work hard and have wonderful friends. One thing I will say is that I own my electronic devices. They shouldn’t be considered mature enough to exhibit free will. This means that they are not of legal age, at least of maturity to do human-like things on its own. Therefore I do not consent my electronic devices to exhibit free will or testify on my behalf. That should be where we are today with certain meta or data issues. It is too infantile and too scattered to properly become a reliable alibi for anyone or anything. I don’t want to hinder police from an effective investigation. But we must place a fair and reasonable balance between people and the reach of the law. We may live in America. But with actions like the Amazon Echo warrant, it is beginning to look more like the Soviet Union each and every passing moment. What kind of liberty is that?

Student Conduct is Dangerous

If you ever attended a college or university, you may have heard of student conduct or an office at the college that regulates conduct and conflict resolution. These organizations became a part of the school to mainly deal with arguments in housing, cheating in the classroom and to help reduce underage binge drinking. Over time student conduct offices have morphed into a significant oversight from criminal charges to mental health regulatory affairs. This is where I think there should be a line drawn for such organizations like campus student conduct.

The first problem is Title IX. Title IX is a comprehensive federal law that prohibits discrimination by sex in any federally funded education program or activity. But like any good law, there is flaws and room for critical error. Title IX allows any student to bypass law enforcement authorities to bring a claim of sexual assault to student conduct. This means that law enforcement is completely out of the picture with no investigation either in process and evidence is not professionally captured or preserved. Instead the Respondent or accused must appear before a student conduct committee, usually run by students, with no lawyers present to defend his/her accusations. This is like somewhat like calling you boss at work to claim that you were sexually assaulted at your desk. The boss will immediately inform the police, human resources, corporate security and other agencies to secure a potential crime scene. Most disturbing about campus student conduct boards is that due process is completely thrown out the window. If the board “believes” the story of the accuser then that’s all it takes to expel a student. That’s right folks, you will have an expelled labeled “sex offender” on campus that is not a sex offender because police were never called or informed about the situation. Another disturbing fact is that if the accuser loses his/her case before student conduct, then they under Title IX be charged with filing a false report. There is a small clause in the title that prohibits this because there no police report was filed. It is an internal matter controlled by inexperienced faculty with no training in law or law certified to practice in a capacity of an administrative judge.

imgres.png

All I can think about is the Rolling Stone article about Virginia Tech or the Duke Lacross scandal. In each of these scenarios, lives were destroyed because student conduct initially took the lead and police were either not called, or police botched the crime scene because the campus stood in the way of a proper criminal investigation. While Title IX is essential to the protections of fairness, it lacks balance when it comes to sexual violence claims. Instead, universities should immediately engage professional law enforcement authorities at the first indication of sexual assault. A band of self-appointed academics that label themselves as the morality police of student conduct should not be engaged in any serious criminal allegations.

0624-student-conduct-staff-22-cropped.jpg

I have no problems with student conduct providing life examples of proper social conduct on campus. But student conduct should not be involved in slapping wrists over illegal drug activity on campus while people not enrolled or living on campus experience the heavy hand of the law and police. It is nothing more than a double standard of protections and provides a level of inequality and prejudice. Student conduct should only be involved in conflict negotiations, academic cheating, and concern notifications. Student conduct should not be in the business of determining what is criminal versus its ability to pick and choose what it deems it can handle. This opens up universities to massive liabilities and loses the credibility of overall safety and the spirit of the effective due process. A campus cannot be judge, jury, and executioner. But as long as student conduct remains, then that is what it will continue to be.

Homophobic States of America

A recent study published in the American Journal of Public Health mentions lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual (LGBT) individuals are disproportionately incarcerated, mistreated and sexually victimized in U.S. jails and prisons. Lead study author Ilan Meyer, the Williams Distinguished Senior Scholar for Public Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law says “The high rate was so shocking, I had to check it three times to make sure we weren’t making any mistakes.” Sadly, the report may be a reflection upon the hidden agenda of prejudice in America when it comes to LGBT relations.

All you have to do is mention gay marriage or lesbian adoptions and the hate nonsense immediately begins. We may also hear garrulous and pointless discussions about LGBT members clandestine maneuvers to “turn” a person gay or fall prey to their sexual innuendos. It is not only absurd but utterly bizarre to think in this manner. But we do hear it and fail as a society to stop this insane way of thinking. There are people out there, perhaps you know a few, that still think there are a gay agenda and plan to disrupt society. Perhaps I was asleep at the wheel, but I missed my copy of that gay agenda. Could someone please send me a copy?

imgres.jpg

What bothers me the most about this published report is that it comes hundreds of years too late. We are aware that homosexuality, in general, has been habitually persecuted when it began in the Colony of Virgina and the rest of the world. The people of Virginia before the United States was formed criminalized male sodomy, making it punishable by death. Most notable is when Oscar Wilde in England was sentenced to two years hard labor in prison for gross indecency. The list of persecutions aroud the world went on and somewhat still continue today. It was California that created the modern day sex offender registry. That particular registry was to list every known homosexual even while still incarcerated and alert communities about known homosexuals. Today that registry is a mixed bag of every offense treating and labeling it as a final sum. It’s not a registry; it’s a stigma list. Creating anti-gay laws or lists will eventually bring death in some form or another.

Of course, those practicing law or law enforcement will lean towards being anti-gay. After all, law enforcement is a macho uniformed paramilitary culture while law is a formal dark affair of backroom deals rather than actual justice.  Female police officers must cross genders to be accepted among their peers. Female attorneys do their best to look like men rather than who they are. This is where the shift begins not to identify fairness but to recognize the strong macho identification of emulation. American culture is somewhat vigilante in nature by suggesting sayings to those that will or are incarcerated as, “I hope they become someone’s bitch in prison” or “Soon, Bubba will have a new bunkmate.” These suggestions only confirm that LGBT individuals incarcerated are mistreated and sexually victimized. It further suggests that we as a society are not doing anything to protect LGBT communities nor providing an advocacy of equal justice under the law. As long as politics, judicial prejudice and bigotry occur then, there will always be a disproportion within our jails, schools, and society. I once heard the saying, “This is why homophobia is a terrible evil: it disguises itself as concern while it is inherently hate.” Our society, leadership, and judicial officers are responsible for providing equality to all and immediately discovering ways to stop the disproportioned. How many more hundreds of years must pass before we do something?