In response to "New Truancy Laws"

I responded to Katherine Turcios blog regarding "New Truancy Laws" on her blog Texas Will Be Texas.

I would agree with you Katherine but I would caution the way you categorize the children with special needs as “them” it may bother families with children with special needs even upsetting them.

My brother was special needs and attended school in Williamson County. I'm interested in what county this incident happened in. We all know that Williamson County is tough and my brother missed a lot of school due to his Cerebral Palsies, seizures, and other medical conditions and when the truancy judge received the information on my brother being special needs he disregarded the charges. With that said I think it falls on the judge and their decision to fill charges on children with special needs or not.

If they loosen up the laws all students will take advantage of the more lenient laws. Williamson County did so for my brother and other counties should have judges who understand that there are exceptions to every law and a child with special needs and their health is a major exception to the truancy law.

Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg: Should she resign from office?

 

The big talk around Travis County lately has been about District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg and her DWI arrest. There has been a petition filed to remove her from office by lawyer Kerry O'Brien. Lehmberg has been served with the petition which she will not be able to respond to the petition until she completes her 45 days of jail time.

Lehmberg's behavior at time of arrest and in detention was very damaging to her appearance. An apology does not help restore the damage already done. Lehmberg used the do you know who I am card as if she was trying to obtain special treatment. Once arrested she was asking for her handcuffs to be removed as if she did not know that while in custody being transported handcuffs must be worn for officer safety. Lehmberg refused a Breathalyzer test so a blood alcohol level was ordered. The blood draw that was take happened well over an hour after her arrest and came back with the results of a .23. That is almost three times the legal limit.

Yes Lehmberg pleading guilty and wanting to begin her punishment as soon as she did was admirable of her, but she also had no other choice because the evidence against her was solid. A BAC of .23 and an open container in her front passenger seat gave her little room to contest it.  Lehmberg knows the law as she is the one who prosecutes those who break them and her choices that night lead to her breaking laws.

I do believe that ethically Lehmberg should step down from office as she has now broken the lines of trust with the citizens, law enforcement and her staff. When she took office she knew that she was going to be a high ranking official that was voted into office and would serve the citizens of Travis County. Being a high ranking official Lehmberg is supposed to be an example of what citizens should do. Lehmberg can no longer be that example and should resign from office.Lehmberg prosecutes individuals who do this very same thing and is not lenient with them, so why did she expect to get special treatment than the rest of the DWI offenders? Lehmberg being in jail these 45 days is not allowing her to work at the moment so why is she still getting paid to do DA duties if she is not working and has broken the law herself.

In response to "Texas should curb its prison population"

I responded to Hosea's post regarding the prison systems on his blog The STATE of Texas.

I do not agree with your post. Many inmates will not go back to the street after being released to be a productive member of society. In my studies through the criminal justice program at ACC I have read studies that show the former inmate will not settle for a mediocre minimal paying job. Especially those that have drug charges, they know how they can make money fast they will then think why work all these hours when I can work the street and make what I would in a week in a couple of hours.

On top of that you can not force an inmate to a rehabilitation facility or help if they do not want it. Probation and Parole are not part of the inmate system these are programs that are designed to keep many from reoffending. Unfortunately the person will be tempted as long as you return them to the same environment they were in before they went into prison.

The inmate may have been a model citizen in the prison to be released and start reoffending again. Unless like I stated before the inmate must really want to change and have a new environment to not fall back into the temptation that took them down the wrong path in the fist place. Yes punishment is high and many have tried probation or parole but give up. Rather than receiving the help available through those programs they choose to quit. They see just serving their time will be better than receiving help in this case what is to be done with the inmate? They have already decided they will not comply with the terms and have given up on the rehabilitation so they receive the punishment that fits the crime they committed.

And in response to you talking about Louisiana there is a documentary out about two officers that tried to rehabilitate ten drug offenders by purchasing them new clothing, cutting their hair, giving them educational training, and helping them write resumes. Out of the ten offenders they were helping only three successfully completed the program and were fully rehabilitated. The rest reoffended and went back to prison. No matter what you can not force help on the offender if they do no want it. These seven men volunteered but their environment and need for fast money suckered them in again.

Yes we have a high incarceration rate but you have to think we offer rehabilitation not many want it or are willing to follow through with it.

Texas Senate passes a bill that pleases citizens

Senate Bill 275 will make the punishment for a hit and run tougher than it is now, for failure to stop and render aid people are currently charged with a third degree felony. SB 275 will make failure to stop and render aid a second degree felony which is equivalent to intoxication manslaughter. The punishment will now be two to twenty years in prison and a fine not to exceed $10,000. SB275 will be enacted in September of this year.

I agree with the Senate in applying this tougher punishment because too many people are leaving the scene and failing to help the person they hit to avoid charges. With the cases that have happened lately the person that was hit has died in the accident. With failure to stop and render aid now carrying a tougher punishment there is hopes that those who commit this act will remain at the scene.

The Gabrielle Jane Nestande case was one of the cases that was influential to bringing this bill to be a top priority for the Texas Legislators. Nestande was charged with criminally negligent homicide for an accident she committed and where she failed to stop and render aid. She received the punishment of ten years of probation, six months in jail, a $10,000 fine, drive in a vehicle with an ignition interlock for four years and complete 600 hours of community service and an electronic ankle monitor for six months. Residents of Austin do not feel that the punishment she received was harsh enough especially because she was not charged with failure to render aid. Since then citizens have been asking for a harsher punishment with which I agree with.

Gun ownership and kids scaring US citizens

On the political blog URBANGROUNDS I found a blog about an illegal attempt to search a family's home. the blog is entitled "New Jersey: Police Attempt Illegal Search of Man’s Home for Guns After Posting a Picture of His 11-Year Old Holding a .22 Rifle" which was written on March 20, 2013. I would have to say the author is trying to target an audience who firmly believes in owning firearms and have the choice in registering them with the state or not.

In New Jersey they are much like Texas when it comes to gun ownership. You can purchase a gun and you do not have to mandatorily register it with the state. The father did not have that gun registered with the state of New Jersey. The father in question gave his son a .22 caliber semi-automatic riffle  to go turkey hunting with. The father then took a picture of his son, the riffle, and the deceased turkey and posted it to his Facebook account for his family and friends to see. The problem came when somebody on Facebook saw the picture and called the Department of Family Services which sent Child Protective Services and four uniformed officers over there. They wanted to enter the family's home and see the gun safe. The issue with that was they wanted to enter the home and search the safe without a warrant which is a violation of the family's constitutional rights. The father called his attorney while this was happening to help guide him in the situation.

The issue of gun safety and control came from the Sandy Hook incident. People are asking for stricter gun laws, background checks, and mandatory psychological testing. His child holding the gun has been taught how to safely handle a gun properly, but that picture the father posted probably bothered someone whom was a believer that our gun laws are not strict enough. The police department of New Jersey handled the situation in the wrong way by just demanding to enter his property. If the police department was really in fear for the child's safety the would have taken a warrant.

The blogger uses an exert of another article where the father told the reporter that he had the right to own that gun so he did not have to follow what being told because they were violating his rights. The blog posted goes along with my beliefs that gun safety and ownership should be taught to children. They should be allowed to handle guns for leisure and protection if need be as long as the parents are teaching them proper safety. The government can not begin to violate citizens rights when they see guns because everyone is on a gun craze. Citizens of The US will not let go of their right to own guns and many will oppose stricter gun laws because they do not want to lose their right to bear arms or worry about their privacy being violated.

Immigration changes need to happen

In the Corpus Christi Caller-Times I found an editorial regarding immigration. The article "Immigration's fatal path shows need for reform" was written on February 22,2013. I would have to say that the editor is trying to target the attention of voters to get more funds to Brooks County.

In Falfurrias there is a major check point with Border Patrol that checks citizenship status of everyone who crosses the check point. But about four to five miles before you get there you have the people that are transporting illegals dropping them off and having them hide between bushes and travel to five miles north of the check point. If you have not been to the Falfurrias area it is dry and hot land, dessert like. Leaving the illegals out there without any water leaves them vulnerable to perish in the tough elements.

The issue now is that they are finding several bodies out there that they can not identify due to the county having a lack of funds and no mortuary to take DNA samples of the bodies they find. The city has been given the option to ship the DNA samples to Center for Human Identification at the University of North Texas Health Science Center in Fort Worth, but the county has to pay for the shipping and the amount of samples that need testing can get expensive to ship leaving the county wondering if the funding given to them will be enough. and they are not sure how long this will be an a solution. There is also a large amount of unmarked graves in Brooks County and they do not have funding at the moment to expand the cemetery so the lack of resources is becoming a major issue for this border town.

The author used evidence of the county size, the available funding, and the number of county officials to make a valid point to what the county needs to be able to solve the issues of immigration. The article does convince me that this area of the state needs more funding because a small county does not have the ability to tackle immigration and the issues it brings alone. The article has reinforced my thinking's but has also opened my eyes to how bad it truly is in South Texas.  The state and federal governments need to provide more funding to counties on the border to help solve the issues of illegals entering and what may happen to them once they enter  the USA. I have always believed this to be an issue and did not have to change my mind about any beliefs when I found this article. Brooks County and their citizens are losing in the lack of funding.

Texas School Finance System Unconstitutional?

The article I found and would like to introduce was located in The TexasTribune it covers the Texas school finance case that began on October 22.The article is by Elena Schneider and Morgan Smith published on Febuary 4,2013 titled School Finance Ruling Favors Districts. State district Judge John Dietz ruled that Texas is violating the constitution of our state by not adequately funding public school education. The case involves three fourths of the school districts that serve Texas children versus the State of Texas. Since 1984 the state has been sued six times due to state funding to schools. State district Judge John Dietz said the state has created a tax that shifts paying for K-12 education to local level instead of the state taking care of the bill its self. The case will most likely go to the Texas Supreme Court to be appealed but as of now the school districts have won. If the appeal does not go through it is believed that K-12 funding will be reviewed in 2014 durning a special session.