Forum Activity for @harold-powell

My favorite Welsh Americans are Ceri Shaw and Swansea Jack. Granted they're not historic but iconic.

Ceri, I have modified my view a bit on that subject. The President chose his daughters' school based on having an armed security detail on premises. This protection for his daughters is over and above the individual secret service protection provided for each.My own daughter went to high school with one of our former Governor's sons and shared several classes each day. The lad was always shadowed by a plain clothes Highway Patrol officer. As for the officer, I can't imagine what horrible thing he did in a past life to deserve being forced to attend high school twice in this life.

A friend of mine suggested schools could use retired police officers for this duty. He also pointed out that our Catholic schools in town already have armed security. They use Nuns armed with large rulers.

I have been told that even a life sentence with "no chance of parole" cannotnecessarily be taken at face value. I will also say that I have mixed feelings about some of the highly publicized cases where convicted felons are released after DNA testing. First of all, the DNA evidence was gathered at a time when no one even knew it was evidence. Then it sat unprotected in evidence rooms devoid of modern means for preservation. The case is reopened years or decades later with many of the principals now dead including witnesses, jury members, prosecutors and/or judges and even those who remain alive, retain memories growing fainter each day. To me there is no doubt that DNA gathered and preserved properly should factor prominently in the legal proceedings. And the idea that any defendant was convicted wrongfully is unacceptable. Nevertheless, knowing the rationale and lengths some members of the defense bar are willing to go, I remain a bit skeptical.

Jeff, I cannot agree more on the subject of "truth in sentencing." It's a phrase I've used for years. A few years ago I heard of man in Kansas City being sentenced to 4 life sentences plus 1 day. I asked a friend in the court system what on earth that meant? He said something to this effect, "By adding 1 day to 4 life sentences the judge was attempting to guarantee the killer would have to stay in prison no less than 20 years. Otherwise," he said, "The killer could becomeeligiblefor parole in seven."

The killer knew what the sentence meant. His lawyers knew what it meant. The prosecutor knew what it meant. Only the general public is left wondering will he or will he not get out of prison someday and kill again. In my opinion, this lenient judicial system and its revolving door policy is the ONLY reason many people reluctantly support the death penalty. If families of the victims were 100% sure that the killer would remain absolutely,positively behind bars for the rest of his life, they would feel no need to see the murderer executed. A system that is too lenient fails everyone--including the criminal.

Three and a half centuries before Christ, Plato provided this maxim, "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."

The NRA (love 'em or hate 'em) has long advocated and lobbied incessantly for laws mandating the harshest of penalties against anyone who uses a gun to commit a crime. In other words, if a gun is used, loaded or unloaded, in any fashion (including simple possession) during the commission of a crime, the criminal should receive mandatory punishment many times greater than the statutory punishment for that crime. To me it's only logical. If a criminal uses a gun to steal beer and lottery tickets from a local convenience store, it means that he has determined, or premeditated, that he is willing to kill for wanton and trivial gain. Why shouldn't that criminal receive the harshest of punishment? Yet, the American Left (not to be confused, I think, with normal right/leftpoliticsin other countries) steadfastlyresists these tougher sanctions.

Gaynor, That's a good observation. It's already the case that the real guns in those movie scenes have sound added later. When firing "blanks" there is flash, a small amount of smoke and a popping sound; but it sounds entirely different from the real thing. Much of the sound we hear from a real gun is essentially caused by a small "sonic boom" when by the projectile leaves the muzzle. Even a "silencer" cannotsuppressthat "boom." That's why the preferred weapon of assassins is a small caliber handgun, silencer and a very light load (much of the gun powder is removed from the cartridge). They have to keep the projectile beneath the speed of sound to effectively suppress the sound.

Pennsylvania girl, 5, suspended for threatening to shoot a girl with pink "Hello Kity" toy gun that blows soapy bubbles

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/19/pennsylvania-girl-5-suspended-for-threatening-to-shoot-girl-with-pink-toy-gun/#ixzz2IQqejizb

A school official overheard the threat at the school bus stop and immediately searched the kindergartner's backpack. The weapon was not found. Nevertheless, the next morning she was called to the office and questioned until she was in tears--then suspended from the school.

Six year old suspended from Maryland school for forming imaginary gun with his fingers while playing a game of "cops and robbers" during recess

http://www.kvue.com/news/Child-suspended-for-using-finger-as-imaginary-gun-187349051.html

I wonder...

When New York State passed the newest, strictest gun control law in the country, did it make provisions for the continued use of guns in film and television? After all, these weapons are the staple of crime fighting television shows filmed in New York City. Most of these guns are real and fire "blanks." The barrel can't be "plugged" or else the gun would explode when fired. I wonder if Hollywood was accorded special "privileges"within the new law even though it didn't even provide allowances for New York's own police officers and swat teams. I predict this oversight will eventually be called Albany's "Barney Fife" incident.

In Governor Cuomo and New York State's eagerness to be the first to impose tough new gun laws in response to the Newtown massacre they have apparently made it illegal for most of their police officers--including Swat teams to bear arms. At least, from their current arsenal.

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news%2Flocal%2Fnew_york&a...

The public shouldn't worry because I doubt the police officers will arrest themselves. The embarrassed Governor and State Legislature have promised that they will overhaul their overhaul of State's gun laws quickly.

Meanwhile, in the interim before the flaw is corrected, one might expect a few months hence (based on the extremely litigious nature of the defense bar in that State), to hear motions in court for dismissal of evidence against helpless, "innocent" clients because armed police apprehended said clients using illegal firearms. Furthermore, I shouldn't be too surprised to hear, in some of the more "compassionate" and lenient judicial circuits, that the motions are sustained.

Lovely! There may be some market potential in these!

My daughter was telling me just a couple of nights ago that anacquaintanceof hers, a college professor, was grading papers and he kept seeing references and quotes in one of his student's term papers to "*Brown." When he read the bibliography at the end he saw that she based much of her paper on the "DaVinci Code." I think in addition to the Illuminati we should to look into the Free Masons and the Knights Templar.