Lack of Enforceability

There’s been some debate in the Louisiana State Legislature lately about a ban on automatic weapons. Gun-rights advocates view the move as an infringement. Those favoring gun control applaud the move. But as several people have mentioned, even if the law passes, enforcing it will be near impossible.

That got me thinking about all of the other laws, rules, regulations and policies we face on a daily basis. The majority of them are only enforceable after someone has committed the crime.

I suppose it should be that way, making us all accountable for our own actions. For many of the laws, that seems to work well enough. There are others, though, that are noble in their purpose—like a ban on automatic weapons—but seem ridiculous once signed into law. It’s a feel-good measure that comes with a hefty price tag, and, because there are no measures that actually prevent ownership in the first place, law enforcement officers and the general public are no better off than before.

Consider this: possession of illicit drugs is illegal. Yet, we have an enormous drug problem in this country. And the costs of fighting it are astronomical, when you consider all of the costs involved in loss of life, drug treatment, prosecutions and incarceration. Anti-drug campaigns have had some good effect, but they are underfunded and only have a beneficial effect on a percentage of the population that can participate.

We need more proactive funding to support these protective laws, not reactive enforcement once the bad deed’s been done.

:: :: ::

Finally Calling People Out

Yesterday, while answering questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Director Robert Mueller did the unthinkable—he called out the people he had asked privately for additional funding in a public forum. You can hear NPR’s report here.

His frustration comes from the fact that violent crime is on the rise, yet makes it only to number 8 on the FBI priority list. He is forced to do more with less, based on counter-terrorism mandates from the Bush administration.

Say what you will about Mueller, I’m certainly not one of his biggest fans, but he finally did the right thing by calling people out. No there is no money available. He’s asked for it and been told no. Domestic crime problems cannot be a top priority.

Earlier this week, this story came out about the Urban Institute’s assertion that the proliferation of iPods has led to the increase in crime. While there may be some truth to that, I would argue that the problem stems from underfunded law enforcement focusing on protecting U.S. citizens from each other.

I’ll agree that the threat of terrorism requires certain protections. As does the threat of devastating hurricanes. As does the threat of gang violence, drug lords and white collar crime.

Maybe, just maybe, the problem is that we have made some unwise moves over the last eight years or so, leading to the largest deficits this nation has ever seen, an ever-weakening dollar and skyrocketing oil prices. All resulting in our collective inability to protect ourselves, sadly, from ourselves.

So here are some of my ideas, though making them work may not be so easy or popular:

• Implement a monetary policy to strengthen the U.S. dollar
• Allow Bush’s tax plan to expire and design one that actually supports the majority of the U.S. population
• Cut much of the waste currently in the defense budget, estimated at nearly $8 billion (in fairness, Congress has, except from the wrong places and replacing those cuts with pork)
• Give more funding law enforcement funding for domestic initiatives without diminishing counter-terrorism

And this only addresses one major issue. There’s more to come. I’m on a bit of a roll.

What say you?

:: :: ::

Use Your Head

Since the summer of 2007, a shopping mall near our house has had a curfew in place on weekends for anyone under the age of 17. If those kids are without someone 21 years old or older, and it is after 4 p.m., they are to leave the premises.

I’ve been there at those times, with dozens of kids ratting around un-chaperoned. Sure the policy was in place, but it wasn’t enforced. Until now.

The mall recently announced it would begin strictly enforcing the curfew. This move comes in the wake of vandalism, fights, a food court employee getting beaten by teenage patrons, drug use and kids as young as 13 having sex in the parking lot. And the fact that they had a policy already in place.

The announcement of this enforcement, however, came with great fanfare. The local television media showed up in droves to cover the story. Some teens felt it unfair. Most adults and employees at the mall celebrated it.

A few teens, though, took it a little too far. Sure there was the standard-operating-protest-procedure call for a boycott. But one used his MySpace page to suggest a violent response. Another commented on his page that they should “all take our guns and go in and kill everyone.” Those two boys have been arrested. I guess they didn’t realize that because they were 17 the curfew didn’t effect them.

There are too many problems at play here, including a lack of strong parental involvement, appropriate role models and sufficient security.

For now, let’s just look at the policy and the associated response. First, the call for violence reinforces the need for the curfew in the first place. In fact, it gives the mall a reason to have the curfew in place at all times.

Second, go ahead and boycott the mall, especially on Fridays and Saturdays after 4 p.m., when you’re not supposed to be there without a chaperone anyway. I don’t have the figures in front of me, but I would venture to say that your presence in the mall, even if you aren’t one of the hoodlums, added much economic benefit.

Third, some teens complained that it wasn’t fair to punish everyone for the bad acts of a few. They’re right it’s not fair. But don’t blame the mall, blame the few bad actors. By not having a blanket, enforceable policy in place, mall security and the sheriff’s deputies would be forced to profile the teens hanging out there, which leads to far greater problems and could cause them to misjudge in both directions, allowing young criminals in and keeping rule-followers out.

This situation, instead, provided teens an opportunity to demonstrate smart thinking, some maturity and a hefty dose of innovation and imagination. Here are a few examples:

• Work with the mall to create a Teen Zone, an area dedicated to them
• Negotiate for a later time in the day for the curfew
• Institute a special identification card that allows them in to the mall outside of the curfew and without a chaperone, if they promise to follow the rules; violating any rules would result in loss of the card; the fee for the card would go to adding mall security
• Put together a business plan for a venue that caters directly to them

This was (and maybe still is) the teens’ time to shine. To show that not everyone under the age of 17 is the same. To make a case for being able to gather with friends at the mall. And to maybe even make that time together more fun.

Oh well, I guess parents are just going to have to spend more time with their kids or find other ways to keep them out of trouble.

:: :: ::