[This irresponsible decision by the Department of Homeland Security reflects callous disregard for the People and stunning political arrogance. What are they doing to our country?]
Homeland Security suspends immigration agreements with Arizona police
The Washington Times
The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.
Administration officials, speaking on condition they not be named, told reporters they expect to see an increase in the number of calls they get from Arizona police -- but that won't change President Obama's decision to limit whom the government actually tries to detain and deport.
"We will not be issuing detainers on individuals unless they clearly meet our defined priorities," one official said in a telephone briefing.
The official said that despite the increased number of calls, which presumably means more illegal immigrants being reported, the Homeland Security Department is unlikely to detain a significantly higher number of people and won't be boosting personnel to handle the new calls.
"We do not plan on putting additional staff on the ground in Arizona," the official said.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Arizona may not impose its own penalties for immigration violations, but it said state and local police could check the legal status of those they have reasonable suspicion to believe are in the country illegally.
That means police statewide can immediately begin calling to check immigration status -- but federal officials are likely to reject most of those calls.
Federal officials said they'll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.
Officials said they had concluded the seven agreements they had signed with various departments in Arizona weren't working and took the Supreme Court's ruling as a chance to scrap them.
[Read the complete article here.]
Showing posts with label security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label security. Show all posts
Monday, June 25, 2012
Righteous dissent
"After [Arizona v. United States] was argued and while it was under consideration, the Secretary of Homeland Security announced a program exempting from immigration enforcement some 1.4 million illegal immigrants under the age of 30."
"The husbanding of scarce enforcement resources can hardly be the justification for this, since the considerable administrative cost of conducting as many as 1.4 million background checks, and ruling on the biennial requests for dispensation that the non-enforcement program envisions, will necessarily be deducted from immigration enforcement. The President said at a news conference that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light of Congress's failure to pass the Administration's proposed revision of the Immigration Act. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so.
"But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind."
"...There has come to pass, and is with us today, the specter that Arizona and the States that support it predicted: A Federal Government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States' borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude. So the issue is a stark one. Are the sovereign States at the mercy of the Federal Executive's refusal to enforce the Nation's immigration laws?
"A good way of answering that question is to ask: Would the States conceivably have entered into the Union if the Constitution itself contained the Court's holding?"
"Arizona has moved to protect its sovereignty -- not in contradiction of federal law, but in complete compliance with it. The laws under challenge here do not extend or revise federal immigration restrictions, but merely enforce those restrictions more effectively. If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State."
(U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting from the Court's majority opinion in the case of Arizona v. United States. Read the Opinion of the Court here; Justice Scalia's scathing 22-page dissent begins on page 30 of the pdf document.)
"The husbanding of scarce enforcement resources can hardly be the justification for this, since the considerable administrative cost of conducting as many as 1.4 million background checks, and ruling on the biennial requests for dispensation that the non-enforcement program envisions, will necessarily be deducted from immigration enforcement. The President said at a news conference that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light of Congress's failure to pass the Administration's proposed revision of the Immigration Act. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so.
"But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind."
"...There has come to pass, and is with us today, the specter that Arizona and the States that support it predicted: A Federal Government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States' borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude. So the issue is a stark one. Are the sovereign States at the mercy of the Federal Executive's refusal to enforce the Nation's immigration laws?
"A good way of answering that question is to ask: Would the States conceivably have entered into the Union if the Constitution itself contained the Court's holding?"
"Arizona has moved to protect its sovereignty -- not in contradiction of federal law, but in complete compliance with it. The laws under challenge here do not extend or revise federal immigration restrictions, but merely enforce those restrictions more effectively. If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State."
(U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, dissenting from the Court's majority opinion in the case of Arizona v. United States. Read the Opinion of the Court here; Justice Scalia's scathing 22-page dissent begins on page 30 of the pdf document.)
Friday, June 15, 2012
Border crossing
This is today's big news -- so far, anyway -- as reported by Reuters:
Despite what we're hearing from the Right, however, the move isn't illegal. It's not unconstitutional nor is it dictatorial. And although it does award de facto immunity to more than a million young illegal immigrants, granting them an official blanket exception to existing work-permit regulations, it's not amnesty per se.
Immigration law hasn't changed -- this is an enforcement decision. It's the federal equivalent of a local police department choosing how to allocate its finite resources, something that happens every day.
It's also shameful disregard for the will of the People.
The new DHS policy is wholly unacceptable to this independent citizen-patriot. It reflects the Obama administration's indisputably poor grasp of both economic issues and national security. Worse, it smuggles the ill-conceived DREAM Act through the back door.
In that sense, the action announced today is extra-constitutional, yet another example of the federal bureaucracy operating beyond the reach of representation.
That isn't in the best interest of our country -- but then, this is about election-year politics, not governing.
"The Obama administration will relax enforcement of deportation rules for young people brought to the United States without legal status...."It's a transparent attempt to pander to Hispanic voters and the open-borders crowd -- no doubt about that.
"U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said on Friday that illegal immigrants up to 30 years old who came to the United States as children and do not pose a risk to national security would be eligible to stay in the country and allowed to apply for work permits.
"'Our nation's immigration laws must be enforced in a firm and sensible manner,' Napolitano said in a statement. 'But they are not designed to be blindly enforced without consideration given to the individual circumstances of each case.'"
Despite what we're hearing from the Right, however, the move isn't illegal. It's not unconstitutional nor is it dictatorial. And although it does award de facto immunity to more than a million young illegal immigrants, granting them an official blanket exception to existing work-permit regulations, it's not amnesty per se.
Immigration law hasn't changed -- this is an enforcement decision. It's the federal equivalent of a local police department choosing how to allocate its finite resources, something that happens every day.
It's also shameful disregard for the will of the People.
The new DHS policy is wholly unacceptable to this independent citizen-patriot. It reflects the Obama administration's indisputably poor grasp of both economic issues and national security. Worse, it smuggles the ill-conceived DREAM Act through the back door.
In that sense, the action announced today is extra-constitutional, yet another example of the federal bureaucracy operating beyond the reach of representation.
That isn't in the best interest of our country -- but then, this is about election-year politics, not governing.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
In truth, fact
"It seems to me that the federal government just doesn't want to know who is here illegally and who's not."
(Chief Justice John G. Roberts of the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking to U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli during today's oral arguments over Arizona's controversial immigration law. The federal government, represented by Verrilli, wants to prevent Arizona from requiring that state law-enforcement officials determine the immigration status of anyone they stop if an officer has reason to suspect that a person may be in the U.S. illegally.)
(Chief Justice John G. Roberts of the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking to U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli during today's oral arguments over Arizona's controversial immigration law. The federal government, represented by Verrilli, wants to prevent Arizona from requiring that state law-enforcement officials determine the immigration status of anyone they stop if an officer has reason to suspect that a person may be in the U.S. illegally.)
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
'The base of organized self-protection'
In September of 1950, the National Security Resources Board presented its report, United States Civil Defense, to Pres. Harry S. Truman. In the hands of Congress it became the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, which Truman signed into law the following January.
To be sure, the report and subsequent legislation sired a massive bureaucracy -- the FCDA and its inertia-bound grandchildren, FEMA and DHS. But rather than making this a jumping-off point for a harangue about bloated government, I want to focus attention on a simple illustration in the NSRB document.
"The National Civil Defense Pattern" appears on the report's second page. It depicts four concentric rings of civil defense, from local to federal. Notice what's at the center of the pattern:
A 61-year-old cartoon got the concept of preparedness exactly right. Ideally, it begins with individuals taking personal responsibility for their own readiness. Individuals build a "base of self-protection" within the household, on the family.
Readiness spreads from homes to neighborhoods and communities. Reliance on government is a last resort.
Look at where we are today, as a nation. We lean on government like a drunk on a lamppost. We're soft, complacent and dependent -- and we're not ready. Only tin-hatted kooks think about preparedness and home defense, don'tcha know. Hell, nearly half of all Americans want to rob the rest of us of the right to defend ourselves.
The difference between that old civil-defense illustration and what we've become is the difference between Fargo and New Orleans.
We can't fix this ill-prepared culture of entitlement -- really, we can't -- but we can refuse to be part of it. We can declare independence from the dependent masses and act in the best interests of our families, our neighborhoods and our communities.
We know that preparedness begins at home, and we don't need government to help us take care of business.
To be sure, the report and subsequent legislation sired a massive bureaucracy -- the FCDA and its inertia-bound grandchildren, FEMA and DHS. But rather than making this a jumping-off point for a harangue about bloated government, I want to focus attention on a simple illustration in the NSRB document.
"The National Civil Defense Pattern" appears on the report's second page. It depicts four concentric rings of civil defense, from local to federal. Notice what's at the center of the pattern:
THE INDIVIDUALAlso within the inner circle are NEIGHBORHOOD and COMMUNITY. Governments occupy the outer rings -- "if needed" and "as needed."
Calm and well-trained
THE FAMILY
The base of organized self-protection
A 61-year-old cartoon got the concept of preparedness exactly right. Ideally, it begins with individuals taking personal responsibility for their own readiness. Individuals build a "base of self-protection" within the household, on the family.
Readiness spreads from homes to neighborhoods and communities. Reliance on government is a last resort.
Look at where we are today, as a nation. We lean on government like a drunk on a lamppost. We're soft, complacent and dependent -- and we're not ready. Only tin-hatted kooks think about preparedness and home defense, don'tcha know. Hell, nearly half of all Americans want to rob the rest of us of the right to defend ourselves.
The difference between that old civil-defense illustration and what we've become is the difference between Fargo and New Orleans.
We can't fix this ill-prepared culture of entitlement -- really, we can't -- but we can refuse to be part of it. We can declare independence from the dependent masses and act in the best interests of our families, our neighborhoods and our communities.
We know that preparedness begins at home, and we don't need government to help us take care of business.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Attention spanned
Anti-government protests have been simmering in Egypt for a week now. I'm taking notice, naturally, but I haven't been seduced by an oppressed people's quest for freedom -- it's a waste of energy for us, personally and nationally, to impose American democratic values on other cultures. I won't get sucked into discussing whether the U.S. will be on what Sen. John McCain calls "the right side of history," either.
Foreign policy isn't a zero-sum game. We'll let it all play out and deal with the result. History writes itself.
Fretting about what the unrest will do to our gas prices -- Egypt controls the Suez Canal and the Suez-Med Pipeline -- is likewise futile. They'll do what they'll do. Five bucks might be wishful thinking.
No, what rivets me are the responses of authorities and citizens as Egyptian society breaks down -- protesters driving hated civil-defense forces from the streets, government deploying the military and, most interesting to me, citizens forming private militias to defend their neighborhoods against looters (not to mention the thousand or so prison inmates released by authorities).
I notice, too, how the people are arming themselves -- sticks, clubs and pipes, knives and (reportedly) even Samurai swords. If an Egyptian is lucky enough to have a firearm, it's most likely an antique revolver. Predictably, ammunition is (to put it mildly) scarce.
As common as popular uprisings are in this world, it's rare that we see such events unfold on this scale in a (largely) Westernized nation. It bears watching and, for those of us who cultivate a preparedness mindset, it's instructive as hell.
Speaking of preparedness, here in the American Midwest an entirely different kind of threat has our attention. Meteorologists are tracking a winter whopper that's predicted to have a significant impact on 100,000,000 Americans.
Advisories stretch from the northern Plains to Texas and from New Mexico to Maine. It looks like we're going to get a mix of sleet and snow around here, followed by a half-inch of freezing rain.
I just hate that shit -- I'd rather shovel two feet of snow.
This morning's send-receive brought my regular e-mail from The Art of Manliness, a permanent link to which appears in the right-hand column of KintlaLake Blog. Today's subject: "22 Manly Ways to Reuse an Altoids Tin."
After my tin heart, those guys are.
Since writing about a gift-card tin earlier this month, I've found two more minty Altoinatives: Newman's Own Organics and Penguin. Each comes in a package virtually identical to the standard Altoids tin.Notes: Penguin mints are caffeinated and Newman's mints contain organic sweeteners. Newman's tins are made in England; Penguin gets its tins from China. (The mints are made in Mexico and the U.S., respectively.) Nell Newman, daughter of Paul, uses company profits to support a range of causes.
The graphics on the Newman's tins are a departure from the style favored by Altoids and, in my opinion, quite striking.
Also pictured: a half-ounce Penguin tin, slightly larger than an Altoids Smalls tin; and a vintage-repro peppermints tin from Cracker Barrel.
A burgeoning revolution, a looming winter storm, a couple of mint tins... yup, I think that about covers it.
Monday, October 25, 2010
'Life never gives you more leaves than you can handle'
(& other scattered thoughts from the weekend)
A meteorologist would call the past few days "unseasonably warm." We simply call it "Indian Summer."
Today it's breezy and, for late October, balmy. A gray sky hints at storms by afternoon.
(The image at right, by the way, clipped from Dan Beard's 1920 classic American Boys' Handy Book of Camp Lore & Woodcraft, is completely unrelated to anything in this post. I just happen to like it.)
This time yesterday I was chasing fallen leaves, racing a 1pm NFL kickoff. The younger spawn pulled gutter duty while I cleaned up the edges of the yard, alternating between vac and blower. Then I fired up our walk-behind mower and mulched (twice) the leaves that remained on the lawn. (Look for an upcoming installment of Urban Resources inspired by the exercise.)
I finished my yard work by the middle of the first quarter of Browns-Saints. As a long-suffering Cleveland fan, I'm delighted to say that I got to watch the Browns answer the question, "Who Dat?"
It wasn't pretty, and nobody really believes that Cleveland is better than the defending NFL champs, but escaping the Superdome with a 30-17 win is worth celebrating.
It'd be unwise of me to gloat too much, though, since Mrs. KintlaLake is a big Saints fan. In fact, three of her favorite teams -- WVU, LSU and New Orleans -- all lost over the weekend. (Her Colts didn't play.)
Ohio State, on the other hand, bounced back from last week's loss to obliterate Purdue on Saturday. The Buckeyes were up 42-0 at halftime, on the way to a 49-0 final. Nice recovery, guys.
My wife and older spawn watched the rout from our seats in C Deck while I killed time outside The 'Shoe. I watched law-enforcement assets re-deploy (but not stand down) after ticketholders entered the stadium, taking special note of one particular piece of hardware.
You're looking at one of Big Brother's mobile cousins -- a compact, trailer-mounted surveillance rig equipped with a pair of pan-tilt-zoom cameras that can automatically track moving objects. It travels with its own on-board video server, and the communications dish atop the 30-foot telescoping mast can link to the state's new monitoring hub in Columbus.
It's good knowing that this sort of technology is out there -- I mean, it's better being aware that it's in use -- but it doesn't have me all paranoid or anything. Actually, I think it's pretty damned cool.
Mrs. KintlaLake and the 18-year-old emerged from the game asking for a snapshot with the stadium in the background. As I readied my camera, an older gentleman, walking alone, passed behind my subject. I did a double-take before calling out to him.
"Coach?"
He stopped, turned and smiled. "Yessir?"
"Would you mind posing for a picture with my family?"
He graciously agreed, still smiling that smile. We shook hands as we parted, and I fumbled for something to say.
"Pay forward -- right, Coach?"
He cocked his head. "You bet, young man." He walked briskly away, waved over his shoulder and repeated the affirmation.
"You bet!"
On Homecoming Day at OSU, a day when Elvis starred in TBDBITL's halftime show, I wasn't the least bit surprised that the old Coach decided to make an appearance, too.
A meteorologist would call the past few days "unseasonably warm." We simply call it "Indian Summer."
Today it's breezy and, for late October, balmy. A gray sky hints at storms by afternoon.(The image at right, by the way, clipped from Dan Beard's 1920 classic American Boys' Handy Book of Camp Lore & Woodcraft, is completely unrelated to anything in this post. I just happen to like it.)
This time yesterday I was chasing fallen leaves, racing a 1pm NFL kickoff. The younger spawn pulled gutter duty while I cleaned up the edges of the yard, alternating between vac and blower. Then I fired up our walk-behind mower and mulched (twice) the leaves that remained on the lawn. (Look for an upcoming installment of Urban Resources inspired by the exercise.)
I finished my yard work by the middle of the first quarter of Browns-Saints. As a long-suffering Cleveland fan, I'm delighted to say that I got to watch the Browns answer the question, "Who Dat?"It wasn't pretty, and nobody really believes that Cleveland is better than the defending NFL champs, but escaping the Superdome with a 30-17 win is worth celebrating.
It'd be unwise of me to gloat too much, though, since Mrs. KintlaLake is a big Saints fan. In fact, three of her favorite teams -- WVU, LSU and New Orleans -- all lost over the weekend. (Her Colts didn't play.)
Ohio State, on the other hand, bounced back from last week's loss to obliterate Purdue on Saturday. The Buckeyes were up 42-0 at halftime, on the way to a 49-0 final. Nice recovery, guys.
My wife and older spawn watched the rout from our seats in C Deck while I killed time outside The 'Shoe. I watched law-enforcement assets re-deploy (but not stand down) after ticketholders entered the stadium, taking special note of one particular piece of hardware.
You're looking at one of Big Brother's mobile cousins -- a compact, trailer-mounted surveillance rig equipped with a pair of pan-tilt-zoom cameras that can automatically track moving objects. It travels with its own on-board video server, and the communications dish atop the 30-foot telescoping mast can link to the state's new monitoring hub in Columbus.It's good knowing that this sort of technology is out there -- I mean, it's better being aware that it's in use -- but it doesn't have me all paranoid or anything. Actually, I think it's pretty damned cool.
Mrs. KintlaLake and the 18-year-old emerged from the game asking for a snapshot with the stadium in the background. As I readied my camera, an older gentleman, walking alone, passed behind my subject. I did a double-take before calling out to him.
"Coach?"He stopped, turned and smiled. "Yessir?"
"Would you mind posing for a picture with my family?"
He graciously agreed, still smiling that smile. We shook hands as we parted, and I fumbled for something to say.
"Pay forward -- right, Coach?"
He cocked his head. "You bet, young man." He walked briskly away, waved over his shoulder and repeated the affirmation.
"You bet!"
On Homecoming Day at OSU, a day when Elvis starred in TBDBITL's halftime show, I wasn't the least bit surprised that the old Coach decided to make an appearance, too.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
The United Kingdom of Ohio
They call it "the surveillance society."By one estimate there are 4.2 million CCTV cameras in use in the UK -- one camera for every 14 people.
It's all in the name of public safety, of course. (This from a nation that hasn't yet met a nanny it didn't love.)
Back on this side of the Pond, today we learned that $2 million of Homeland Security money has brought Mary Poppins to Ohio. The camera-integration project, approved by the Ohio Controlling Board, links cameras statewide to a hub in Columbus, where Ohio officials will be able to access real-time video feeds.
My wife and I actually got wind of this a couple of years ago. We heard credible reports that businesses were being quietly encouraged to install at least one camera and a DVR. A link-up scheme, though not explicitly proposed at the time, obviously was the goal.
And now it's here.
The deterrent effect of video surveillance is negligible. It serves safety and security primarily by facilitating identification of bad actors after they've committed bad acts -- no one should harbor the illusion that a blanket of video monitoring somehow makes us safer.
It doesn't.
Anyone who wants to waste time opposing Ohio's plan or trying to block its implementation should know that the civil-liberties ship sailed years ago. Those of us who surf the Internet or use mobile phones, swipe credit cards, subscribe to magazines or visit the ER already volunteer our personal information to the State.
No matter what you call it -- Big Brother, Nanny State or New World Order -- it's real, inescapable and here to stay. As I said yesterday, the best we can do is be aware of it and act accordingly.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Gameday notes
When the Bobcats of Ohio University stepped out of the MAC and into The 'Shoe yesterday, no one gave them a chance to beat The Ohio State University -- and no one should've.
The Buckeyes' offense clicked and the defense smothered everything that Ohio U. tried to do. (Dig the photo showing seven Silver Bullets on the ball.) OSU was up 27-0 after one quarter and 34-0 by halftime. The final score was a merciful 43-7.
Since falling 7-6 to Oberlin in 1921, Ohio State is 41-0-1 against in-state football competition. (Wooster managed a 7-7 tie in 1924.) A few opponents have come close -- Ohio U. in 2008 and Cincinnati in 2002 -- but this wasn't to be the year for an upset.
* * *
Best game-day slogan, seen on the back of a t-shirt:
* * *
After the season-opener against Marshall I commented on the level of security around Ohio Stadium, noting specifically the "roll-through checkpoints" we observed. This week Mrs. KintlaLake discreetly snapped a couple of photos as we passed through a chicane on Woody Hayes Drive, in the middle of the bridge over the Olentangy River.
Notice the Ohio State Highway Patrol SRT trooper with the dog, posted just prior to where vehicles enter the checkpoint.
The white delivery van in front of us was ordered to pull to the side and was swept individually.
Looking back toward the security chicane reveals how truly tight it is. The magnified perspective shows that we were the second-to-last in our six-vehicle group to clear scrutiny. At the intersection in the distance, several hundred yards west, traffic is stopped awaiting officers' instructions to proceed toward the checkpoint.
I'm careful, of course, not to post a lot about the hows and wheres of game-day security. We respect the integrity of the effort, as well as the men and women behind it.
A friend of ours has command responsibility for much of this deployment -- my wife and I spent a half-hour chatting with him yesterday morning, actually -- and we're privy to details that most folks will never know.
Suffice it to say that some of those details would curl your hair.
The Buckeyes' offense clicked and the defense smothered everything that Ohio U. tried to do. (Dig the photo showing seven Silver Bullets on the ball.) OSU was up 27-0 after one quarter and 34-0 by halftime. The final score was a merciful 43-7.Since falling 7-6 to Oberlin in 1921, Ohio State is 41-0-1 against in-state football competition. (Wooster managed a 7-7 tie in 1924.) A few opponents have come close -- Ohio U. in 2008 and Cincinnati in 2002 -- but this wasn't to be the year for an upset.
* * *
Best game-day slogan, seen on the back of a t-shirt:
"I may cheer for the Buckeyes, but I drink like a Bobcat."An inside joke, playing off of Ohio U.'s reputation as a party school.
* * *
After the season-opener against Marshall I commented on the level of security around Ohio Stadium, noting specifically the "roll-through checkpoints" we observed. This week Mrs. KintlaLake discreetly snapped a couple of photos as we passed through a chicane on Woody Hayes Drive, in the middle of the bridge over the Olentangy River.
Notice the Ohio State Highway Patrol SRT trooper with the dog, posted just prior to where vehicles enter the checkpoint.
The white delivery van in front of us was ordered to pull to the side and was swept individually.
Looking back toward the security chicane reveals how truly tight it is. The magnified perspective shows that we were the second-to-last in our six-vehicle group to clear scrutiny. At the intersection in the distance, several hundred yards west, traffic is stopped awaiting officers' instructions to proceed toward the checkpoint.I'm careful, of course, not to post a lot about the hows and wheres of game-day security. We respect the integrity of the effort, as well as the men and women behind it.
A friend of ours has command responsibility for much of this deployment -- my wife and I spent a half-hour chatting with him yesterday morning, actually -- and we're privy to details that most folks will never know.
Suffice it to say that some of those details would curl your hair.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Lockdown
Every so often, I'm reminded that this isn't the world I grew up in.
A disturbing sequence of events began unfolding yesterday afternoon when our older spawn called his mom with news that his school had gone into emergency lockdown and that the campus was crawling with cops. My wife called me from her office, and I turned on my desktop scanner to see what I could find out.
Sure enough, the channels were crackling with transmissions among city and county units, as well as a chopper dispatched from a nearby metro department. It wasn't long before I learned that there was an armed threat, from outside the area and against one particular student, believed to be en route to the school. A BOLO was issued for the suspect and the stolen vehicle he was said to be driving.
After the target was in protective custody and the buildings and grounds were secured, school officials released students to their buses, under watchful eyes and heavy security. Next, parents were permitted to pick up their kids, and then students who drove their own cars were allowed to leave. Every inbound and outbound vehicle was checked by law enforcement.
All after-school activities were canceled. Our spawns drove directly to a relative's house, the closest "safe" place for them to be.
The suspect never did show up at the school -- he was apprehended 12 hours later and 20 miles away, passed-out drunk in the stolen car. He now faces multiple charges.
Disconcerting as it was, threats like this no longer are uncommon. I'm glad to say that our local law-enforcement professionals responded quickly and no one got hurt.
I'm somewhat less thrilled with our suburban school district's emergency-communications system, an automatic e-mail alert that's supposed to go to parents immediately when their child's school goes into lockdown.
Oh, I got my alert -- time-stamped at the moment that the lockdown was lifted. Another e-mail, informing me that students were being released, didn't arrive until almost an hour later. Today I'll be letting the district know that its system needs some serious tweaking.
Soon my wife and I will sit down with our spawns to talk through what happened yesterday. When we do, we'll have more to learn than we have to teach -- after all, an armed threat at school wasn't part of our childhood. Sadly, it's part of theirs.
A disturbing sequence of events began unfolding yesterday afternoon when our older spawn called his mom with news that his school had gone into emergency lockdown and that the campus was crawling with cops. My wife called me from her office, and I turned on my desktop scanner to see what I could find out.
Sure enough, the channels were crackling with transmissions among city and county units, as well as a chopper dispatched from a nearby metro department. It wasn't long before I learned that there was an armed threat, from outside the area and against one particular student, believed to be en route to the school. A BOLO was issued for the suspect and the stolen vehicle he was said to be driving.
After the target was in protective custody and the buildings and grounds were secured, school officials released students to their buses, under watchful eyes and heavy security. Next, parents were permitted to pick up their kids, and then students who drove their own cars were allowed to leave. Every inbound and outbound vehicle was checked by law enforcement.
All after-school activities were canceled. Our spawns drove directly to a relative's house, the closest "safe" place for them to be.
The suspect never did show up at the school -- he was apprehended 12 hours later and 20 miles away, passed-out drunk in the stolen car. He now faces multiple charges.
Disconcerting as it was, threats like this no longer are uncommon. I'm glad to say that our local law-enforcement professionals responded quickly and no one got hurt.
I'm somewhat less thrilled with our suburban school district's emergency-communications system, an automatic e-mail alert that's supposed to go to parents immediately when their child's school goes into lockdown.
Oh, I got my alert -- time-stamped at the moment that the lockdown was lifted. Another e-mail, informing me that students were being released, didn't arrive until almost an hour later. Today I'll be letting the district know that its system needs some serious tweaking.
Soon my wife and I will sit down with our spawns to talk through what happened yesterday. When we do, we'll have more to learn than we have to teach -- after all, an armed threat at school wasn't part of our childhood. Sadly, it's part of theirs.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Shakeup call
As SoCal earthquakes go, yesterday's magnitude 5.4 temblor was something of a yawner.Swimming pools churned for a few seconds. Some stores' shelves emptied themselves. Water gushed from a couple of broken L.A. mains and from a ceiling at LAX. Reportedly, there were few injuries.
Ok, so it was the strongest quake in 15 years, and 80-plus aftershocks (most of which are noticed only by seismologists) might be a bit unsettling. Judging by the media's breathless coverage, however, you'd think it was The Big One.
Maybe they're just practicing.
Beyond natural human compassion and understandable political wariness, most of us don't really care what happens "out there" in the People's Republic of California. Earthquakes, wildfires and mudslides, competitive rehab, puzzling legislation and restrictive regulations -- it's just more TV. Self-absorbed Californians might want us to care, but for the most part, we're not even curious.
I know I'm not.
One things I do care about is personal preparedness. On that subject, the media's over-the-top coverage of the Chino Hills quake did yield an interesting nugget, in the form of a CNN.com "Quick Vote":
According to that unscientific snapshot, fewer than one out of four respondents is prepared for the worst. I'd be willing to bet that a statistically sound sampling would show that the real number is no higher than 10%, probably lower.
If you've prepared, as my family and I have, great -- but contentment is the last thing we should be feeling right now. Answering the wake-up call implicit in the poll above, or in my more pessimistic prediction, we'll see that virtually all of our neighbors will do one of four things in the event of a disaster:
- They'll suffer alone, unaided and unprepared;
- They'll rely on non-profit or government agencies;
- They'll try to share in what we have; or
- They'll try to take what we have.
With that harsh reality in mind, answer the question again: Are you prepared?
Monday, June 16, 2008
Cold, cold water
In an earlier series of posts, I wrote about my family's approach to "bugging" -- by no means gospel, not even a primer, simply a humble and personal description of what we do.
Preparedness accounts for security, survival and defense "when the worst happens." Some call that SHTF, others TEOTWAWKI -- whatever the label, the scenario or the scale, "the worst" involves clear and present threats to our survival.
Preparedness is neither a game nor an obsession -- it's a mindset. It's an attitude that allows us to live our everyday lives, yet be ready to confront and dispatch threats when they present themselves.
On the last page of the June issue of S.W.A.T. magazine is a column by Louis Awerbuck, one of the nation's top instructors in gunhandling, marksmanship and tactics. Entitled "Welcome to the Jungle," it delivers a blunt and sobering perspective on surviving a "doomsday scenario."
The column concludes:
As raw as Mr. Awerbuck's words may be, don't recoil from them and, whatever you do, don't dismiss them. Let them sink in.
Our society, in the midst of a crisis, operates exactly as he describes. Arguments to the contrary are pure fantasy.
Is he giving us a do-or-die choice? Absolutely -- the stark picture he paints is as accurate as it is disturbing.
It's a bucket of ice water in our faces, leaving us with but one responsible course of action.
Prepare now.
Preparedness accounts for security, survival and defense "when the worst happens." Some call that SHTF, others TEOTWAWKI -- whatever the label, the scenario or the scale, "the worst" involves clear and present threats to our survival.
Preparedness is neither a game nor an obsession -- it's a mindset. It's an attitude that allows us to live our everyday lives, yet be ready to confront and dispatch threats when they present themselves.
On the last page of the June issue of S.W.A.T. magazine is a column by Louis Awerbuck, one of the nation's top instructors in gunhandling, marksmanship and tactics. Entitled "Welcome to the Jungle," it delivers a blunt and sobering perspective on surviving a "doomsday scenario."
The column concludes:
"No, you don't have to be Mad Max, Rambo, or paranoid. But it would be nice, for example, for those of you who have families, if you could make your way back home to protect your spouse and ankle-biters when that never-going-to-happen disaster hits. The first of the loot-shoot-scoot brigade will deploy immediately after a disaster, looking for an easy mark. Those who have nothing to lose will be ready to take, and the sooner they start, the more they can take.
"Traffic will be snarled within 15 minutes and there will be no emergency response units available to solve your little problems -- so you'll have to do it all by your lonesome -- and on foot. And even if you find a desirable route, perhaps you've forgotten about that gun thingummybob I mentioned earlier. One teensy-weensy bullet through your head and I now own your Hummer and everything in it -- including your address. You know -- that place where your widow and kids are waiting. Sorry about that, but survival of the fittest and all that good stuff, don't you know.
"Remember the Los Angeles riots, post-Katrina New Orleans, or New York during the infamous eight-hour Con-Ed blackout? The shooters and looters were at work within the first hour.
"Now decide if you want to be the chef or the entree, because the Hell Restaurant is open for business, and only the man with the carving knife and the full belly is walking out alive."
As raw as Mr. Awerbuck's words may be, don't recoil from them and, whatever you do, don't dismiss them. Let them sink in.
Our society, in the midst of a crisis, operates exactly as he describes. Arguments to the contrary are pure fantasy.
Is he giving us a do-or-die choice? Absolutely -- the stark picture he paints is as accurate as it is disturbing.
It's a bucket of ice water in our faces, leaving us with but one responsible course of action.
Prepare now.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
'Castle Doctrine' comes to Ohio
In an earlier post, I discussed a law commonly referred to as "Castle Doctrine." Thanks to tireless grassroots activism and a favorable political climate, this fundamental right to armed self-defense soon will be law in Ohio.
S.B.184 has cleared its last legislative hurdle. Gov. Ted Strickland is expected to sign it in the coming weeks. And while the law won't go into effect for three months, here's what Castle Doctrine will mean for all law-abiding citizens of Ohio:
S.B.184 has cleared its last legislative hurdle. Gov. Ted Strickland is expected to sign it in the coming weeks. And while the law won't go into effect for three months, here's what Castle Doctrine will mean for all law-abiding citizens of Ohio:
- If someone breaks into a person's occupied home or temporary habitation, or if someone breaks into a person's occupied car, that person has an initial presumption to act in self-defense.
- Victims of crime will be immune from civil actions from their attackers (and their attackers' families) for actions that harm or kill an attacker.
Specific to law-abiding gun owners:
- A citizen won't need to have a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) to carry a concealed handgun lawfully in their own home.
- An "unloaded firearm" will be defined as one with no ammunition in the firearm or in magazines or speedloaders, regardless of where else ammunition is stored.
- The law will allow CHL holders to pick-up and drop-off students in school safety zones.
- Lawful concealed carry will be permitted in state-owned shelters, restrooms and parking garages, and lawful concealed carry in privately owned parking garages will no longer be a crime.
- Landlords will no longer be allowed to prohibit their tenants from owning or carrying firearms.
- CHL holders will be permitted to carry a firearm in an unlocked glove compartment or center console.
(For more information, visit the Buckeye Firearms Association.)
Remember, Castle Doctrine isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card in Ohio, nor does Castle Doctrine apply in every state. It's also important to note that the law almost never permits armed defense of property -- only life. Each of us must know the law and make our choices accordingly. And if we do choose to make armed defense part of protecting self and family, professional training is a must.
That said, however, all Ohioans should celebrate the legalization of armed self-defense. It's about time.
Remember, Castle Doctrine isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card in Ohio, nor does Castle Doctrine apply in every state. It's also important to note that the law almost never permits armed defense of property -- only life. Each of us must know the law and make our choices accordingly. And if we do choose to make armed defense part of protecting self and family, professional training is a must.
That said, however, all Ohioans should celebrate the legalization of armed self-defense. It's about time.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Bugging, Part III: In or Out?
Should I stay or should I go now?
Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
And if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know
Should I stay or should I go? (The Clash)
Many of us consider evacuation more likely than it actually is.
Outside of the geographic areas that regularly deal with floods, wildfires, hurricanes and other natural hazards, in most crises the vast majority of Americans should stay put, at least in the short term.
Whatever the crisis, whether my family stays or goes, our over-riding concern will be our own safety, survival and defense. Those considerations -- not sentiment or the well-meaning advice of public officials -- will drive our decisions.
What's more, altruism and benevolence have no place in our plan. Sound selfish? You bet it is -- becoming a charity during a serious crisis is akin to committing suicide.
Let the prepared survive.
Stocked for Survival
Naturally, our home holds the largest stores of what we'd need to survive for an extended period:
There's No Place Like Home
Where we live, there are few reasons that my family and I would need to "bug out." As described in Part II, we've researched hazards and threats, and we've concluded that our best shelter and most defensible position is right here -- what's known as shelter-in-place.
Safety, survival and defense become more difficult while on the move and, ideally, most everything is simpler in familiar surroundings -- by itself, that's reason enough to shelter-in-place. In addition, our home is well-equipped and well-stocked, and yes, we know what it can provide, but we've gone beyond everyday familiarity and stockpiling.
Within a two-mile radius of our home, for example, we know where natural water supplies are located. (We're mindful, of course, that surface water may not be an option under some circumstances.) In the same area, we know where we can forage for edible plants and hunt game. We've practiced small-scale sustenance gardening, with the goal of expanding it if the need arises. And since the nature of home defense changes during a prolonged crisis, we've created a precise map of the perimeter around our home, out to 600 yards.
The last point I'll make is the need, in my opinion, to keep a low profile. Since most people won't be adequately prepared for a crisis, the quickest way for a prepared family to become a target family would be to shelter-in-place with generator whirring, house lights aglow, and gas-fired grill sizzling on the deck -- dumb and dangerous.
Time to Go
If we do choose to leave our home behind, we'll make that decision because it's in the best interest of our family's safety, survival and defense. We won't leave because everyone around us is leaving, and we won't stay for sentimental reasons.
That said, we've prepared for two bug-out scenarios: Light (one or two people) and Full (family).
Our grab-and-go packs are subsets of our shelter-in-place stores. Each member of our family has ultra-minimalist kit for a light evacuation. Obviously and necessarily, we'd tote more in a full bug-out. Again, our supplies include provisions for water, food, shelter, etc.
We've mapped primary and contingency routes, rendezvous sites and retreat locales, along with potential hazards and threats -- a calculated bug-out, if you will, not a random dash. Our destinations do not include public shelters -- we refuse, categorically, to join the masses of refugees who chose not to prepare.
Note that I haven't mentioned the word "evacuation" to describe my family's plans. We prefer to call it "bug-out" or "retreat," because we have our own routes and destinations. Despite the fact that we may be putting distance between ourselves and a threat or a hazard, we'd be moving toward something, not merely running away.
Bugging home
Finally, here's an often-ignored piece of the preparedness puzzle: the virtual certainty that our family won't be conveniently assembled when the SHTF. I may be at home, my wife at work, the spawns at school.
That's when preparedness planning becomes especially crucial. Everyone must know the plan and execute their responsibilities -- no freelancing. My wife will bug home if she can; ideally, she'll pick up the spawns on her way. If it's apparent that shelter-in-place is impossible and a bug-out is called for, the drill is to follow the primary route and try to assemble at established checkpoints.
And so on.
Of course, as countless military leaders have observed, "No plan survives first contact with the enemy."
Still, whether we stay or go, we're glad that we have a plan.
We hope we never have to use it.
Bugging, Part I: Securing the Castle
Bugging, Part II: My Tin Hat
Bugging, Part IV: The Right Stuff
Should I stay or should I go now?
If I go there will be trouble
And if I stay it will be double
So come on and let me know
Should I stay or should I go? (The Clash)
Many of us consider evacuation more likely than it actually is.
Outside of the geographic areas that regularly deal with floods, wildfires, hurricanes and other natural hazards, in most crises the vast majority of Americans should stay put, at least in the short term.
Whatever the crisis, whether my family stays or goes, our over-riding concern will be our own safety, survival and defense. Those considerations -- not sentiment or the well-meaning advice of public officials -- will drive our decisions.
What's more, altruism and benevolence have no place in our plan. Sound selfish? You bet it is -- becoming a charity during a serious crisis is akin to committing suicide.
Let the prepared survive.
Stocked for Survival
Naturally, our home holds the largest stores of what we'd need to survive for an extended period:
- Water, or the ability to gather & purify water
- Food, or the ability to gather & prepare food
- Shelter & warmth, or the ability to find shelter & create warmth
- Tools
- First aid & medical
- Communications
- Defense
I won't include a detailed checklist here -- that's not really the point of this installment, and besides, each of us has different needs -- but I do suggest taking full advantage of the WWWeb. Among the resources we've found useful:
- Ready.gov
- FEMA
- American Red Cross
- PandemicFlu.gov
- State, county & municipal homeland-security & emergency-management agencies
- Preparedness & survival forums
- Survival books
- Military field manuals
There's No Place Like Home
Where we live, there are few reasons that my family and I would need to "bug out." As described in Part II, we've researched hazards and threats, and we've concluded that our best shelter and most defensible position is right here -- what's known as shelter-in-place.
Safety, survival and defense become more difficult while on the move and, ideally, most everything is simpler in familiar surroundings -- by itself, that's reason enough to shelter-in-place. In addition, our home is well-equipped and well-stocked, and yes, we know what it can provide, but we've gone beyond everyday familiarity and stockpiling.
Within a two-mile radius of our home, for example, we know where natural water supplies are located. (We're mindful, of course, that surface water may not be an option under some circumstances.) In the same area, we know where we can forage for edible plants and hunt game. We've practiced small-scale sustenance gardening, with the goal of expanding it if the need arises. And since the nature of home defense changes during a prolonged crisis, we've created a precise map of the perimeter around our home, out to 600 yards.
The last point I'll make is the need, in my opinion, to keep a low profile. Since most people won't be adequately prepared for a crisis, the quickest way for a prepared family to become a target family would be to shelter-in-place with generator whirring, house lights aglow, and gas-fired grill sizzling on the deck -- dumb and dangerous.
Time to Go
"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man." (Gen. George S. Patton)A stay-or-go "pivot point" may present itself at the outset of a crisis, or something may force our hand later, or it may not happen at all.
If we do choose to leave our home behind, we'll make that decision because it's in the best interest of our family's safety, survival and defense. We won't leave because everyone around us is leaving, and we won't stay for sentimental reasons.
That said, we've prepared for two bug-out scenarios: Light (one or two people) and Full (family).
Our grab-and-go packs are subsets of our shelter-in-place stores. Each member of our family has ultra-minimalist kit for a light evacuation. Obviously and necessarily, we'd tote more in a full bug-out. Again, our supplies include provisions for water, food, shelter, etc.We've mapped primary and contingency routes, rendezvous sites and retreat locales, along with potential hazards and threats -- a calculated bug-out, if you will, not a random dash. Our destinations do not include public shelters -- we refuse, categorically, to join the masses of refugees who chose not to prepare.
Note that I haven't mentioned the word "evacuation" to describe my family's plans. We prefer to call it "bug-out" or "retreat," because we have our own routes and destinations. Despite the fact that we may be putting distance between ourselves and a threat or a hazard, we'd be moving toward something, not merely running away.
Bugging home
Finally, here's an often-ignored piece of the preparedness puzzle: the virtual certainty that our family won't be conveniently assembled when the SHTF. I may be at home, my wife at work, the spawns at school.
That's when preparedness planning becomes especially crucial. Everyone must know the plan and execute their responsibilities -- no freelancing. My wife will bug home if she can; ideally, she'll pick up the spawns on her way. If it's apparent that shelter-in-place is impossible and a bug-out is called for, the drill is to follow the primary route and try to assemble at established checkpoints.
And so on.
Of course, as countless military leaders have observed, "No plan survives first contact with the enemy."
Still, whether we stay or go, we're glad that we have a plan.
We hope we never have to use it.
Bugging, Part I: Securing the Castle
Bugging, Part II: My Tin Hat
Bugging, Part IV: The Right Stuff
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Bugging, Part I: Securing the Castle
First thing every morning, I confront a stark reality: This is not the world I grew up in.
Howdy Doody Time is over. The Beaver has left the stage. Happy Days? Only in re-runs. By any measure, this is a far more dangerous world than the one in which we lived even a decade ago.
Our enemies, once marked by flags and isolated from us by borders and oceans, now are shadows that move among us. Law enforcement and homeland-security professionals, brave and dedicated as they are, cannot stem the tide of illegal immigration or prevent grandstand-style homicides. Home invasions are as common as fender-benders on the freeway.
It's time to live our lives accordingly -- not paranoid, but prepared.
The first and best place to tackle today's reality, I believe, is at home. Secure castle, hearth and family, then expand security preparations outward.
My family and I have spent a lot of time on home security and defense. Here, in general terms, is our approach.
Security
I married well -- my bride was working in private security when we met, trained professionally in security and defensive tactics. For the purposes of home security and defense, however, her skills are perhaps less relevant than her mindset.
When we bought our home, we addressed locks and lighting immediately. We also scouted the property and formulated our plan for electronic measures.
Then we chose a system installer -- a 20-year-old moonlighter, the relative of a co-worker -- and that's when the fertilizer met the ventilator. Hard.
The kid's electrical work was solid, if slow, but he hit a wall when it came to programming the system. When we told him that we'd withhold further payment until the system was operational, he bolted for our basement and started ripping live electrical lines from the joists. Fortunately, my hand-to-hand skills weren't as rusty as I thought, and I was successful in persuading him (and his brother, who made the fracas two-on-one) to leave.
What happened to us was the embarrassing result of several bad choices, illustrating how important it is to choose a skilled, experienced and trustworthy installer. Get professional and personal references -- don't make the choice based on an infomercial or a Yellow Pages ad.
Or nepotism, for that matter.
Long story short, we now have three-level electronic security, with a fourth to come. Belt and suspenders, if you will.
Defense
Even the best security system is no guarantee against intrusion, so the next step was preparing to defend our home.
My personal choice of a home-defense handgun was based largely on my wife’s primary. Why? They share the same manual-of-arms and the same caliber, which means that we don't have to perform mental gymnastics if one or the other becomes a backup under stress. Likewise a pair of kissing-cousin shotguns, which join a rifle kitted specifically for home defense.
Because our spawns are in their curious and hormone-charged teens, our defensive weapons and ammunition are always secured -- but they’re secured in such a way that my wife and I can access them in seconds.
Finally, we acknowledge that the most important part of choosing firearms to defend our home is professional training. As Col. Jeff Cooper said:
Completing the picture, in no particular order:
Bugging, Part III: In or Out?
Bugging, Part IV: The Right Stuff
Howdy Doody Time is over. The Beaver has left the stage. Happy Days? Only in re-runs. By any measure, this is a far more dangerous world than the one in which we lived even a decade ago.
Our enemies, once marked by flags and isolated from us by borders and oceans, now are shadows that move among us. Law enforcement and homeland-security professionals, brave and dedicated as they are, cannot stem the tide of illegal immigration or prevent grandstand-style homicides. Home invasions are as common as fender-benders on the freeway.It's time to live our lives accordingly -- not paranoid, but prepared.
The first and best place to tackle today's reality, I believe, is at home. Secure castle, hearth and family, then expand security preparations outward.
My family and I have spent a lot of time on home security and defense. Here, in general terms, is our approach.
Security
I married well -- my bride was working in private security when we met, trained professionally in security and defensive tactics. For the purposes of home security and defense, however, her skills are perhaps less relevant than her mindset.
When we bought our home, we addressed locks and lighting immediately. We also scouted the property and formulated our plan for electronic measures.
Then we chose a system installer -- a 20-year-old moonlighter, the relative of a co-worker -- and that's when the fertilizer met the ventilator. Hard.
The kid's electrical work was solid, if slow, but he hit a wall when it came to programming the system. When we told him that we'd withhold further payment until the system was operational, he bolted for our basement and started ripping live electrical lines from the joists. Fortunately, my hand-to-hand skills weren't as rusty as I thought, and I was successful in persuading him (and his brother, who made the fracas two-on-one) to leave.
What happened to us was the embarrassing result of several bad choices, illustrating how important it is to choose a skilled, experienced and trustworthy installer. Get professional and personal references -- don't make the choice based on an infomercial or a Yellow Pages ad.
Or nepotism, for that matter.
Long story short, we now have three-level electronic security, with a fourth to come. Belt and suspenders, if you will.
Defense
Even the best security system is no guarantee against intrusion, so the next step was preparing to defend our home.
My personal choice of a home-defense handgun was based largely on my wife’s primary. Why? They share the same manual-of-arms and the same caliber, which means that we don't have to perform mental gymnastics if one or the other becomes a backup under stress. Likewise a pair of kissing-cousin shotguns, which join a rifle kitted specifically for home defense.
Because our spawns are in their curious and hormone-charged teens, our defensive weapons and ammunition are always secured -- but they’re secured in such a way that my wife and I can access them in seconds.
Finally, we acknowledge that the most important part of choosing firearms to defend our home is professional training. As Col. Jeff Cooper said:
"You are no more armed because you own a gun than you are a musician because you own a piano. The instrument is not the answer; the skill to use the instrument is the answer."Other hardware & software
Completing the picture, in no particular order:
- Our mobile phones are either on the belt or charging at the bedside.
- We're equipped with weapon-mounted and hand-held SureFire flashlights and numerous handy Maglites.
- A pair of alarm dogs are effective flesh-and-blood adjuncts to our electronic system.
- We've posted generic electronic-security signs conspicuously around the property, to discourage opportunists.
- We cultivate a good relationship with our monitoring service, which knows our duress and hostage codes.
- Our system incorporates a “cell backup” in case our land line is down or has been cut.
- Each member of our family carries a panic fob.
Plan & drill
We believe that the real key to surviving a threat is our plan. We've designated a primary "safe room," and our spawns have “safe places” where they can hunker down in relative concealment and cover until we can reel them into the safe room (or if we can’t).
We've established code words to communicate threat (intruder), acknowledgement (the equivalent of “Marco...Polo”) and all clear. That may seem like a contrivance, but our spawns know the difference between “C’mon out, everything’s ok” and the code for that condition -- no secret word, no safety, stay put.
Most important, we drill our plan -- daylight, low light and no light -- with the goal of survival-in-place until law enforcement arrives. No heroics, no machismo.
Security first, survival second, defense as a last resort.
About Castle Doctrine
Preparing to employ armed defense to protect oneself and one's family is a personal choice and, thanks to our elected officials, not at all a simple one.
The crux here is called Castle Doctrine, and whether or not it applies varies from state to state. It designates a person's place of residence (and in some states a person's vehicle or workplace) as a "castle" in which that person may expect to enjoy protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It gives a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that "castle," and other innocent persons legally within, from violent attack or intrusion which threatens violent attack.
Fundamentally, Castle Doctrine enables a person's right to self-defense, trumping the misguided "duty to retreat" principle and the idiotic mandate that a person use only proportionate force against an attacker. And legally speaking, it permits the criminal defense of "justifiable homicide" when the use of deadly force actually causes death.
Castle Doctrine is not a get-out-of-jail-free card, and again, it's not universal. It's also important to note that the law almost never permits armed defense of property -- only life. Each of us is obliged to know our state and local laws and make our own choices. And if we choose to make armed defense part of protecting self and family, professional training is a must.
Bugging, Part II: My Tin Hat
Bugging, Part III: In or Out?
Bugging, Part IV: The Right Stuff
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
