Homeless in Arizona

Shine a light on backroom Arizona union employee deals

I think firemen are the same way. And again in most city governments most of the employees are cops followed by firemen. And again most city budgets the police department is the most expensive item on the budget followed by the fire department budget.

I also think that in Arizona a large number of teachers are also union employees, so they have their salaries set in these secret backroom deals too.

Source

Shine a light on backroom union deals

Posted on December 19, 2012 | Author: Nick Dranias

Secret government union collective bargaining is the law in eleven states, including Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, and Wisconsin. By statute, these states expressly require secrecy in collective bargaining.

Similarly, in Arizona, at least eight major cities keep collective bargaining with government unions in the dark. The secrecy imposed by towns like Avondale, Chandler and Maricopa even expressly prohibit anyone from sharing records of negotiations with elected officials and the news media. Elected officials and the public simply cannot meaningfully check and balance collective bargaining negotiations when they do not oversee them and the law keeps them and the news media blind, deaf and dumb during the process. When total secrecy in negotiations is combined with laws forcing Arizona cities to engage in collective bargaining—euphemistically called “meet and confer” ordinances—government unions are free to deploy maximum leverage in negotiations while hiding from any meaningful oversight.

That leverage has a price. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that state and local government employees make nearly 43 percent more per hour on average in total compensation than private sector workers. Even when controlling for similar occupations and skills, a study commissioned by Citizens Against Government Waste found state employees in Arizona make nearly 20 percent more per hour on average than their private sector counterparts.

The presence of government unions and the strength of collective bargaining laws explain a large portion of the pay gap between government employees and private sector employees. Arizona could save $550 million every year in excessive pay to public employees simply by banning government union collective bargaining. But the next best reform involves shining a light on the backroom deal making.

It’s time for public labor unions to conduct their negotiations in the light of day.

Arizona group says allowing guns in schools is overdue

Arizona group says allowing guns in schools is overdue

Associated Press Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:36 PM

A group that advocates for pro-gun, state legislation said Wednesday guns should be allowed in Arizona public schools to provide protection against shootings such as the one in Connecticut.

“It’s long past time to, at the very least, allow our school faculty and staff the option to be trained and armed,” the Arizona Citizens Defense League said in a statement. “Only then will they be capable of dealing with a situation like this.”

Amid public debate over what to do in response to the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, the league is “now looking at things that can be done to heighten security in schools,” spokesman Charles Heller said during an earlier interview. “We hadn’t been before.”

Arizona law now generally bans taking guns on school grounds.

The statement by the league decried the violence in Connecticut and stopped short of announcing a 2013 legislative proposal to allow guns on campuses.

Heller said his group is considering options, but he couldn’t discuss specifics. The session starts in mid-January, and no proposed bills filed as yet deal with gun issues.

Gun control proposals went nowhere in the Republican-led Arizona Legislature after the January 2011 shooting that wounded then-Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson.

In the next two legislative sessions, state lawmakers twice approved bills to allow guns in many public buildings without airport-style security and once to allow them on higher-education campuses.

However, Republican Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed all three versions of those two bills that reached her desk. She said in May her veto of the latest such bill reflected public unease.

A Brewer spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the league’s statement.

Arizona has permissive gun laws and a Wild West heritage. Guns can be carried openly, sometimes jolting newcomers, particularly in urban areas.

On Monday, Brewer sounded disinclined to weaken the right to bear arms in response to the Connecticut shooting.

“I’m not sure if it’s something that needs to be addressed in that respect,” Brewer said, adding that a stronger behavioral health system “would probably be something that we ought to look into.”

Hildy Saizow, president of Arizonans for Gun Safety, said relaxation of gun-free zones at schools and other places would be “really extremist legislation.”

Instead, now is the time to support national legislation that should include toughening requirements for background checks of gun purchasers, Saizow said.

Alan Korwin, a Scottsdale author and publisher of books on gun laws, said the media is whipping public sentiment into a “mob mentality” in favor of new gun restrictions after the Connecticut shootings.

That ignores the benefits of allowing guns where they’re not now allowed, he said.

Gun-free zones “enable criminals and infringe on the rights and abilities of Americans to protect themselves and their children,” Korwin said. “We trust teachers with our children. Certainly they should be qualified” to have guns at schools.

An Arizona legislator who sponsored a bill after the 2011 Tucson shooting to prohibit extended magazines that hold more than 10 bullets said it would be dangerous to allow guns at schools.

“I do not see anything good of a massive arms race on our college campuses or, God forbid, on our elementary schools,” said Rep. Steve Farley. “There’s no good that’s going to come of that.”

Farley, a Tucson Democrat who becomes a state senator in January, said he won’t re-introduce a new version of his bill in 2013. Such restrictions are best handled by Washington to avoid a patchwork of state laws, he said.

Farley said he proposed the 2011 bill because Tucson shooter Jared Loughner fired 30 shots from a handgun with an extended magazine. Six people were killed and 13 injured in the attack, and Farley said there would have been less carnage if Loughner had to reload sooner.

Farley’s bill died after not getting a hearing from a House committee.

Farley also said he wants the Legislature to consider providing adequate funding for programs to identify and treat mentally ill people and to protect children from physical abuse so they don’t develop psychological problems.

LA County County Assessor receives his $197,000 salary despite being in jail

Of course when you read articles like this, you realized that my previous statement is 100 percent BS.

Our government rulers are our royal masters who consider us serfs that are supposed to support them like royalty. They don't work for US, they work for themselves.

And as this article shows they steal every cent they can from US and give it to THEMSELVES.

Source

Noguez will keep salary — with raise — despite being in jail

By Jack Dolan and Abby Sewell, Los Angeles Times

December 19, 2012

Los Angeles County Assessor John Noguez will keep receiving his $197,000 salary in jail. The Board of Supervisors discussed his fate behind closed doors Tuesday and did not remove him from office.

Noguez has been in jail since mid-October. He is charged with taking $185,000 in bribes from a tax consultant — and campaign fundraiser — to lower property taxes for his clients.

Noguez, who was elected assessor in 2010, has not worked since June, when he placed himself on paid leave of absence to concentrate on preparing a legal defense to the corruption allegations swirling around him.

While on leave, he got a cost-of-living raise in July, boosting his annual salary from $192,000 to $197,000.

Elected officials in California typically can't be removed from office unless they are convicted of a job-related crime or voted out in a recall. On Tuesday, the supervisors considered invoking a rarely used provision that would have allowed them to remove Noguez for failing to perform his duties for three consecutive months.

After the closed session, Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich said, "My personal feeling is he has not abandoned his job by virtue of choice — he's been incarcerated for allegations of corruption and until a court of law convicts him of a crime, he's still the assessor of Los Angeles County."

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said the board will continue consulting with attorneys regarding options, but he did not expect any "concrete response" until the new year.

On Sept. 12, nearly 90 days after taking his leave, Noguez met briefly with assessor's office staff, effectively resetting the clock. But sources say that he has not had any meaningful contact with the office since then.

Noguez has been in jail since Oct. 17, unable to make his $1.16-million bail. He must prove that any money he uses for his defense was not obtained through criminal means.

Attendance was sparse at two recent fundraisers hosted by friends hoping to get him out.

If county supervisors had determined that Noguez's prolonged absence constituted abandonment of his job, they could have appointed someone else to take his place and collect the assessor's salary. The most likely candidate was Santos Kreimann, a veteran county manager selected to run the assessor's office in June after Noguez took his leave.

Noguez's $5,000 raise in July was not reviewed or approved by the supervisors, said county spokesman David Sommers. Under county code, the assessor's salary goes up every July 1 in accordance with the consumer price index. The same applies to the sheriff and the district attorney, who are also elected.

Other county employees have not received a cost-of-living raise since 2009, Sommers said.

jack.dolan@latimes.com

abby.sewell@latimes.com

Emperor Obama goes into gun grabbing mode!!!!

Obama demands new gun policies after shooting

Associated Press Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:16 PM

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday demanded “concrete proposals” on curbing gun violence that he could send to Congress no later than January — an urgent effort to build on the growing political consensus over gun restrictions following last week’s massacre of children at a Connecticut school.

It was a tough new tone for the president, whose first four years were largely quiet on the issue amid widespread political reluctance to tackle a powerful gun-rights lobby. But emotions have been high after the gunman in Friday’s shooting used a semi-automatic rifle to kill 20 young children and six adults at the school, shooting many several times and at close range, after killing his mother at home. He then killed himself.

“This time, the words need to lead to action,” Obama said. He said he will push legislation “without delay” and urged Congress to hold votes on the bill next year.

“The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing,” Obama said. “The fact that we can’t prevent every act of violence doesn’t mean we can’t steadily reduce the violence.”

The president listed eight people across the country who had been killed by gun violence since Friday’s shooting.

As part of his call for “real progress, right now,” Obama pressed Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. He also called for stricter background checks for people who seek to purchase weapons and limited high-capacity clips.

Vice President Joe Biden, a longtime gun control advocate with decades of experience in the Senate, will lead a team that will include members of Obama’s administration and outside groups.

The administration will have to make its gun control push in the middle of tense negotiations with Congress to avoid the “fiscal cliff” of billions of dollars in tax increases and deep spending cuts that will kick in at the end of the year without a deal.

Notably, the first question asked of Obama during a press conference after his gun announcement was about the fiscal talks.

In the days since the shooting, Obama has vowed to use “whatever power this office holds” to safeguard the nation’s children after Friday’s shooting. Funerals for the victims continued Wednesday, along with the wake for the school’s beloved principal.

The shooting has prompted several congressional gun-rights supporters to consider new legislation to control firearms, and there are concerns in the administration and elsewhere that their willingness to engage could fade as the shock and sorrow over the shooting eases.

The most powerful supporter of gun owners and the gun industry, the National Rifle Association, broke its silence Tuesday, four days after the shooting. In a statement, it pledged “to help to make sure this never happens again” and has scheduled a news conference for Friday.

Obama challenged the NRA to join the broader effort to reduce gun violence, saying, “Hopefully they’ll do some self-reflection.”

With the NRA promising “meaningful contributions” and Obama vowing “meaningful action,” the challenge in Washington is to turn words into action. Ideas so far have ranged from banning people from buying more than one gun a month to arming teachers.

The challenge will be striking the right balance with protecting the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Firearms are in a third or more of U.S. households, and suspicion runs deep of an overbearing government whenever it proposes expanding federal authority.

Many pro-gun lawmakers also have called for a greater focus on mental health issues and the impact of violent entertainment like video games. Obama also prefers a holistic approach, with aides saying stricter gun laws alone are not the answer.

Obama said Wednesday that the U.S. needs to make access to mental health care as easy as access to a gun.

Still, much of the immediate focus is on gun control, an issue that has been dormant in Washington for years despite several mass shootings.

The policy process Obama was announcing Wednesday was expected to include input from the departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services. The heads of those agencies met with Obama at the White House on Monday. The Department of Homeland Security is also expected to play a key role.

Pressure for change has come from several sources this week.

As shares in publicly traded gun manufacturers dropped, the largest firearms maker in the United States said Tuesday it was being put up for sale by its owner, private equity group Cerberus Capital Management, which called the shooting a “watershed event” in the debate over gun control. Freedom Group International makes Bushmaster rifles, the weapons thought to have been used in Friday’s killings.

In California, proposed legislation would increase the restrictions on purchasing ammunition by requiring buyers to get a permit, undergo a background check and pay a fee.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors wrote Obama and Congress calling for “stronger gun laws, a reversal of the culture of violence in this country, a commission to examine violence in the nation, and more adequate funding for the mental health system.”

The mayors asked for a ban on assault weapons and other high-capacity magazines, like those reportedly used in the school shooting; a stronger national background check system for gun purchasers; and stronger penalties for straw purchases of guns, in which legal buyers acquire weapons for other people.

Formerly pro-gun Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said “a thoughtful debate about how to change laws” is coming soon. Republican Sen. Charles Grassley has said the debate must include guns and mental health. And NRA member Sen. Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat, said it’s time to begin an honest discussion about gun control and said he wasn’t afraid of the political consequences.

The comments are significant. Grassley is senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which probably would take the first action on any gun control legislation. Reid sets the Senate schedule.

Religious Leaders Push for Gun Control

Religious Leaders Push Congregants on Gun Control, Sensing a Watershed Moment

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

Published: December 19, 2012

Religious leaders across the country this week vowed to mobilize their congregants to push for gun control legislation and provide the ground support for politicians willing to take on the gun lobby, saying the time has come for action beyond praying and comforting the families of those killed.

A group of clergy members, representing mainline and evangelical Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims, plans to lead off the campaign in front of the Washington National Cathedral at an event on Friday timed to mark the moment a week before when a young gunman opened fire in a school in Newtown, Conn.

The cathedral will toll its funeral bell 28 times, once for each victim, including 20 children, 6 teachers and school administrators and the mother of the killer, as well as the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, who shot and killed himself.

“Everyone in this city seems to be in terror of the gun lobby. But I believe the gun lobby is no match for the cross lobby,” said the Very Rev. Gary Hall, dean of the Washington National Cathedral, in an impassioned sermon on Sunday that has become a rallying cry for gun control. People in the cathedral’s pews rose and applauded.

Dean Hall said in an interview that he and Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington were calling on their parishioners to support four specific steps: bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, tightening rules for sales at gun shows and re-examining care for the mentally ill.

Clergy members have been involved in gun control efforts for at least three decades because, they say, they are the ones called to give the eulogies at funerals and comfort victims’ families. But they acknowledge that they have been unable to mount a sustained grass-roots movement against gun violence — partly because they have not made it a priority, and partly because their efforts have been overshadowed by the organizational and fund-raising power of the gun lobby.

Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence, a two-year-old coalition that now counts 40 religious groups as members, has only one part-time employee, Vincent DeMarco, who is simultaneously organizing coalitions on obesity, health care and smoking. Asked his budget, he laughed and said, “de minimis.”

However, Jim Winkler, general secretary of the United Methodist Church’s public policy arm, the General Board of Church and Society, said he was seeing some signs that the shooting in Newtown could be a watershed. His office immediately sent out an “action alert” on gun control to bishops and other church leaders, and he said he was surprised how many wrote back thanking him effusively.

“I could tell there was this real need, real hunger, at least in my denomination, for there to be some response that is not only prayers and expressions of sadness, but also a call to action,” Mr. Winkler said. “And it came from some who wouldn’t normally care that much about public policy action, but who would be more interested in spiritual responses.”

The primary organizer of the news conference on Friday, Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, in Washington, said, “This is not likely an issue that we’ll have a sustained campaign on in the absence of political leadership. But if political leaders act, the religious community will be strongly engaged.”

On Wednesday, President Obama said in a news conference that he would make preventing gun violence a legislative priority, but that it would take “a wave of Americans” to move it forward.

Religious groups that sent out calls for action on guns to their members in the last five days include the Council of Bishops of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the PICO National Network, an advocacy group, and many Jewish organizations.

But advocating limits on guns is controversial within many religious groups, and many evangelicals are opposed. A CBS News poll conducted Dec. 14-16, after the massacre in Newtown, showed that while 69 percent of Catholics said they wanted stricter laws on gun control, only 37 percent of white evangelical Christians agreed.

The evangelical leaders expected at the cathedral event on Friday are relatively moderate: the Rev. Richard Cizik, president of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good, and Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition.

Mark DeMoss, a prominent evangelical who recently served as an adviser to the campaign of the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, stepped forward after the tragedy in Newtown, telling Politico.com that measures to address gun control, mental health treatment and violence in the media should all be on the table.

But he said in an interview that evangelicals were unlikely to support gun control efforts because they do not want to break ranks with the Republican Party, and because they tend to see gun violence as a concern to be addressed spiritually, rather than through policy change.

He said he also considered violence a spiritual problem, but said he saw a “double standard” at work. Evangelical clergy, he said, have boycotted the manufacturers of violent video games and pornography, but on guns they say, “No, this is just as spiritual matter of the heart.”

The Rev. Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, said in an interview that his group had never taken a position on gun control but might now “take a harder look.” He pointed out that a rarely read part of the Christmas story is King Herod’s slaughter of the innocents.

“Mary and Joseph fled. It’s a part of the story, and they took decisive action. This is now a part of our story,” he said, referring to shooting rampages, “and we need to take decisive action.”

Obama wants to take your guns!!!!!

Obama Vows Fast Action in New Push for Gun Control

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR

Published: December 19, 2012

WASHINGTON — President Obama declared on Wednesday that he would make gun control a “central issue” as he opens his second term, promising to submit broad new firearm proposals to Congress no later than January and to employ the full power of his office to overcome deep-seated political resistance.

Leading House Republicans responded to the president’s pledge in the aftermath of the Connecticut school massacre by restating their firm opposition to new limits on guns or ammunition, setting up the possibility of a bitter legislative battle and a philosophical clash over the Second Amendment soon after Mr. Obama’s inauguration.

Having avoided a politically difficult debate over guns for four years, Mr. Obama vowed to restart a national conversation about their role in American society, the need for better access to mental health services and the impact of exceedingly violent images in the nation’s culture.

He warned that the conversation — which has produced little serious change after previous mass shootings — will be a short one, followed by specific legislative proposals that he intends to campaign for, starting with his State of the Union address next month.

“This time, the words need to lead to action,” Mr. Obama said. “I will use all the powers of this office to help advance efforts aimed at preventing more tragedies like this.”

At an appearance in the White House briefing room, the president said that he had directed Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to lead an interagency effort to develop what the White House said would be a multifaceted approach to preventing mass shootings like the one in Newtown, Conn., last week and the many other gun deaths that occur each year.

As evidence of the brutal cost of gun violence, Mr. Obama said that since Friday’s school shooting in Connecticut, guns had led to the deaths of police officers in Memphis and Topeka, Kan.; a woman in Las Vegas; three people in an Alabama hospital; and a 4-year-old in a drive-by shooting in Missouri. They are, he said, victims of “violence that we cannot accept as routine.”

Accompanied by Mr. Biden, the president signaled his support for new limits on high-capacity clips and assault weapons, as well as a desire to close regulatory loopholes affecting gun shows. He promised to confront the broad pro-gun sentiment in Congress that has for years blocked gun control measures.

That opposition shows little signs of fading away. While the death of 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday appears to have persuaded some Democratic lawmakers to support new gun control measures, there has been little indication that Republicans who control the House — and are in a standoff with Mr. Obama over taxes — are willing to accept such restrictions.

House Democrats urged Speaker John A. Boehner on Wednesday to bring a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines to a vote by Saturday — a step he is highly unlikely to take.

Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, an influential conservative leader, said in a statement that “it is clear that criminals will always find ways to acquire weapons and use them to commit acts of violence.”

“Passing more restrictions on law-abiding citizens will not deter this type of crime,” he said.

Mr. Jordan and other House Republicans declined to be interviewed, saying through aides that it was time to mourn, not to debate policy.

“There will be plenty of time to have this conversation,” said Brittany Lesser, a spokeswoman for Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, “but it is not amidst the funerals of these brave young children and adults.”

This week, Mr. King told an Iowa radio station, KSCJ, that “political opportunists didn’t wait 24 hours before they decided they were going to go after some kind of a gun ban.” He also expressed doubt about gun control measures, saying, “We all had our cap pistols when I was growing up, and that didn’t seem to cause mass murders in the street.”

Representative Howard Coble, Republican of North Carolina, said in an interview that he thought the talk of gun control was “probably a rush to judgment” that missed the real issue.

“I think it’s more of a mental health problem than a gun problem right now,” he said. “Traditionally states that enact rigid, inflexible gun laws do not show a corresponding diminishment in crime.”

While Mr. Coble said he would want to study any proposal made by the president, he said fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, which would consider any gun recommendations, probably agree with his views.

One senior Republican, Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, signaled an openness to review Mr. Obama’s proposals.

“As the president said, no set of laws will prevent every future horrific act of violence or eliminate evil from our society, but we can do better,” Mr. Sensenbrenner said in an e-mailed response to questions.

Mr. Sensenbrenner noted that he had co-sponsored the Brady gun control bill in the 1990s. “Our country must also grapple with difficult questions about the identification and care of individuals with mental illnesses,” he said.

On Wednesday the president said that Mr. Biden’s group would propose new laws and actions in January, and that those would be “proposals that I then intend to push without delay.” Mr. Obama said Mr. Biden’s effort was “not some Washington commission” that would take six months and produce a report that was shelved.

“I urge the new Congress to hold votes on these new measures next year, in a timely manner,” Mr. Obama said.

White House aides said Mr. Biden would meet with law enforcement officials from across the country on Thursday, along with cabinet officials from the departments of Justice, Homeland Security, Education and Health and Human Services.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York praised Mr. Obama’s announcement and said he offered his “full support” to Mr. Biden in a phone conversation on Wednesday. But Mr. Bloomberg, a vocal advocate of tougher gun control, also urged the president to take executive actions in the meantime, including making a recess appointment of a new director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Republicans have blocked an appointment to the post for years.

“The country needs his leadership if we are going to reduce the daily bloodshed from gun violence that we have seen for too long,” Mr. Bloomberg said of Mr. Obama.

Gun control advocates have urged the White House and lawmakers to move rapidly to enact new gun control measures before the killings in Connecticut fade from the public’s consciousness. Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, has said she intends to introduce a new ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines on the first day of the next Congress in January.

During his first term, Mr. Obama largely avoided the issue of gun control, even as high-powered firearms were used in several mass shootings. Asked bluntly about his lack of past action on the issue, the president appeared irritated, citing the economic crisis, the collapse of the auto industry and two wars as matters that demanded attention.

“I don’t think I’ve been on vacation,” he said curtly.

He then conceded, “All of us have to do some reflection on how we prioritize what we do here in Washington.”

California gun grabbing

More gun laws on the way in California?

By Steven Harmon

Bay Area News Group

Posted: 12/19/2012 04:11:48 PM PST

SACRAMENTO -- Even with the nation's toughest gun control laws, some California legislators are seeking more restrictions following last week's deadly Connecticut shooting rampage that took the lives of 20 young children and seven adults.

Among at least four proposals, one would prohibit semi-automatic weapons like AR-15s and AK-47s from having devices known as "bullet buttons," which allow easy reloading of multi-bullet ammunition clips. Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, introduced a similar bill last year that died in the Assembly. His proposal would also prohibit add-on kits to adapt weapons for high-capacity bullet clips.

"While we cannot stop every senseless act of gun violence, surely we can strengthen our laws to limit such tragedies in the future," Yee said.

Other bills would require annual permits for ammunition purchases, mandate school safety plans and permanently deny weapons to mentally ill people.

Gun-control advocates say that a climate of permissive gun laws has made the United States one of the most violent countries in the developed world. Gun-rights groups maintain that citizens with appropriate weaponry can prevent tragedies such as the Newtown shooting because the "good guys" can kill gunmen at the first sign of a shooting spree.

California goes beyond federal law in requiring background checks on individuals who try to buy firearms at gun shops and gun shows. It also requires a 10-day waiting period for handgun and rifle purchases.

The state has approved 45 gun-control laws since 1989, when the state became the first in the nation to ban military-style assault weapons after the slaying of five children and wounding of 29 others in a Stockton schoolyard.

Yee plans to push another bill to require yearly registration and background checks for gun ownership.

Another bill, by Sen. Kevin DeLeon, D-Los Angeles, would require a background check and permit — with annual updates -- for anyone wishing to buy ammunition.

"For the sake of our children and the memory of the victims of the Sandy Hook massacre, it's time for an honest and rational debate on gun control and how to keep ammunition out of the hands of criminals," De Leon said.

Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, is relaunching a bill to firm up the school safety laws by requiring schools to establish emergency-response plans for eruptions of violence on school grounds.

"President Obama stated our first task is to care for our children," said Lieu, whose two young sons attend a public elementary school. "When children attend public school, they are in the care of the state and we better make sure they are as safe as possible."

The state does not have accurate figures on how many public schools have school-safety plans that outline emergency steps, Lieu said.

Republicans are generally opposed to gun-control laws, but Sen. Ted Gaines, R-Roseville, has a bill to keep firearms permanently out of the hands of the mentally ill.

California prohibits gun possession for anyone with a mental disorder who is found by a court to be a danger to others, or for those deemed as mentally disordered sex offenders. But, people with mental disorders can seek court approval for gun permits later. Gaines' bill would forbid them from petitioning the courts to have a gun.

"I hope everyone with any mental illness gets the treatment and rehabilitation they need to live a healthy and productive life," Gaines said. "But if the court has ruled you are a danger to others, that's it. That is your one strike. We are not going to pave the way for you to own a firearm ever again."

Contact Steven Harmon at 916-441-2101. Follow him at Twitter.com/ssharmon. Read the Political Blotter at IBAbuzz.com/politics.

San Francisco moves to ban hollow-point bullets

San Francisco moves to ban hollow-point bullets

Associated Press

Posted: 12/21/2012 11:38:13 AM PST

SAN FRANCISCO -- Hollow-point bullets and other ammunition designed to cause extreme damage could soon be banned in San Francisco.

Mayor Ed Lee, Supervisor Malia Cohen and police Chief Greg Suhr said on Thursday that high-powered, military-style weapons and ammunition have no place in the city.

The San Francisco Chronicle (http://bit.ly/Wta69J) says Cohen will introduce legislation next month that would ban hollow-point bullets and other ammunition meant to cause extreme damage. The law will also require that sellers notify police when more than 500 rounds of ammunition are being purchased.

The announcement comes a week after the shootings of 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut school.

An earlier San Francisco plan to ban automatic weapons was thwarted by the court. The mayor says the latest proposal will likely face legal challenges.

------

Information from: San Francisco Chronicle, http://www.sfgate.com

Source

S.F. seeks to crack down on ammunition

Marisa Lagos, Published 5:03 pm, Thursday, December 20, 2012

Saying that high-powered, military-style weapons and ammunition have no place in San Francisco, city leaders on Thursday announced a proposal to ban the possession of hollow bullets and require anyone buying more than 500 rounds at a time to notify the Police Department.

The announcement by Mayor Ed Lee, Supervisor Malia Cohen and Police Chief Greg Suhr came less than a week after the Connecticut school massacre in which 26 people were killed by a gunman wielding a semiautomatic Bushmaster rifle. San Francisco tried banning semiautomatic weapons altogether in city limits, but was stymied by the courts; Lee said the latest proposal will also probably face legal challenges, but city officials decided "we've got to do something more."

The legislation, which will be introduced by Cohen Jan. 15, would bar anyone from possessing hollow-point bullets and other ammunition meant to cause extreme damage, and require sellers - including online stores - to automatically notify police when anyone in San Francisco purchases more than 500 rounds of ammunition at a time. Cohen said she is responding not just to the recent school shooting but to ongoing violence in her district.

"Ammunition designed especially for law enforcement and the military has no reason to be in our homes and on our streets," Lee said, adding that he supports Sen. Dianne Feinstein's move to ban assault rifles at the federal level and of state lawmakers' proposals to tighten background checks and other requirements.

Dr. Andre Campbell, a trauma surgeon at San Francisco General Hospital, said he has worked in emergency rooms for 24 years and watched injuries become more devastating as high-powered weapons and bullets have become more commonplace.

"When they strike a victim, it's like a bomb going off," said Campbell. "The reality is, there are people killed every day with these weapons."

Suhr, who was standing next to a table of artillery claimed by police in last week's gun buyback, said getting even one weapon off the streets makes a difference.

"I would say to the NRA and anyone else who says these guns are not a problem - then if it's not a problem, if it's not making a difference, it shouldn't make a difference banning it," he said.

- Marisa Lagos

SNIP

E-mail: cityinsider@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @SFCityInsider.

NRA - Largest gun control organization in America???

Source

Newtown: NRA calls for armed officer in every school

Associated Press Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:31 AM

The most powerful gun-rights lobby in the U.S. said Friday it wants to address gun violence by having an armed police officer in every school in the country. [What rubbish!!!! We need less cops, not more of them!!!!!]

The comments by the National Rifle Association came exactly a week after a gunman killed 26 people at a Connecticut school, including 20 children ages 6 and 7. The comments were the group’s first substantial ones since the shooting, while pressure has mounted in Washington and elsewhere for more measures against gun violence.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” said the NRA’s executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre.

At least two protesters broke up his announcement, despite tight security. One man held up a large red banner that said “NRA killing our kids.” The protesters were taken away by security, shouting that guns in schools are not the answer.

The 4.3 million-member National Rifle Association may be facing its toughest challenge in the wake of national horror over last week’s killing of children, many of them shot multiple times and at close range by high-powered rifle.

LaPierre brushed aside the idea that gun control legislation is needed, saying, “20,000 other laws have failed.” Instead, he blamed video games, movies and music videos for exposing children to a violent culture day in and day out.

He also blamed the media, saying it has “demonized lawful gun owners” and “rewards (mass shooters) with wall-to-wall attention.”

As “some have tried to exploit tragedy for political gain, we have remained respectfully silent,” he added.

He refused to take any questions from the audience.

Reaction to the NRA comments was sharp.

“Their press conference was a shameful evasion of the crisis facing our country,” New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who was outspoken for more gun control measures even before the shooting, said in a statement. “Instead of offering solutions to a problem they have helped create, they offered a paranoid, dystopian vision of a more dangerous and violent America where everyone is armed and no place is safe.” [The NRA's solution of a cop in every classroom isn't much different then Michael Bloomberg's. They both want to take guns away from the public and give them to the government!]

LaPierre announced that former Rep. Asa Hutchison will lead an NRA program that will develop a model security plan for schools that relies on armed volunteers.

Shortly after LaPierre spoke, four people were reported killed in a mass shooting along a rural road in Pennslvania.

The NRA largely disappeared from public debate after the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, choosing atypical silence as a strategy as the nation sought answers after the rampage. The NRA temporarily took down its Facebook page and kept quiet on Twitter.

Five more funerals or memorials were being held Friday in Newtown.

Since the shooting, President Barack Obama has demanded “real action, right now” against gun violence and called on the NRA to join the effort. His administration has been moving quickly after several congressional gun-rights supporters said they would consider new legislation to control firearms.

Obama has said he wants proposals on reducing gun violence that he can take to Congress by January, and he put Vice President Joe Biden, a gun control advocate with decades of experience in the Senate, in charge of the effort.

The president said in a video released early Friday that the White House has received an outpouring of support for stricter gun laws over the past week. “We hear you,” he said.

A “We the People” petition on the White House website allows the public to submit petitions. Nearly 200,000 people have urged Obama to address gun control in one petition, and petitions related to gun violence have amassed more than 400,000 signatures.

At the same time, however, gun shops across the country have reported higher sales, including of assault weapons. A spike in gun sales is not uncommon after mass shootings.

Obama has already asked Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and pass legislation that would end a provision that allows people to purchase firearms from private parties without a background check.

The president also has indicated that he wants Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity magazines, which the 20-year-old gunman used in last week’s shooting.

Obama wants to build on a rare national mood after years of hesitation by politicians across the country to take on the issue of gun violence — and the NRA.

“I’ve been doing this for 17 years, and I’ve never seen something like this in terms of response,” said Brian Malte, spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, based in Washington, D.C. “The whole dynamic depends on whether the American public and people in certain states have had enough.”

The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism released a report Thursday showing that the Newtown shooting has led to more discussion about gun policy on social media than previous rampages. The report says users advocating for gun control were more numerous than those defending current gun laws.

Legislators, mostly Democrats, in California and New York plan a push to tighten what are already some of the most stringent state gun-control laws.

Meanwhile, Republicans in Oklahoma, Tennessee, South Carolina and Florida have called for making it easier for teachers and other adults to have weapons in schools.

A Pew Research Center survey taken Dec. 17-19, after the shooting, registered an increase in the percentage of Americans who prioritize gun control (49 percent) over gun owner rights (42 percent).

Those figures were statistically even in July. The December telephone survey included 1,219 adults in all 50 states. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

———

Associated Press writer Philip Elliott contributed.

BioWatch - another huge waste of government money

And from the point of being a fantastic government welfare program that gives billions of dollars in corporate welfare to companies in the military industrial complex the BioWatch program is a huge success.

Source

Troubled BioWatch program at a crossroads

By David Willman, Los Angeles Times

December 21, 2012, 4:14 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Year after year, health officials meeting at invitation-only government conferences leveled with one another about Biowatch, the nation's system for detecting deadly pathogens that might be unleashed into the air by terrorists.

They shared stories of repeated false alarms — mistaken warnings of germ attacks from Los Angeles to New York City. Some questioned whether BioWatch worked at all.

They did not publicize their misgivings. Indeed, the sponsor of the conferences, the U.S. Homeland Security Department, insists that BioWatch's operations, in more than 30 cities, be kept mostly secret.

Now, congressional investigators want Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to open the books on the 9-year-old program and explain why $3.1 billion in additional spending is warranted.

The move by the House Energy and Commerce Committee — spurred by reports in the Los Angeles Times about BioWatch's deficiencies — puts the program at a crossroads.

On one side is mounting evidence that the technology does not work. On the other are companies eager to tap federal contracts, politicians fearful of voting against any program created to fight terrorism, and a top Homeland Security official who says the program is functioning properly.

Government records show that BioWatch signaled attacks more than 100 times when none had occurred. Nor is the system sensitive enough to reliably detect low yet infectious concentrations of such pathogens as anthrax, smallpox or plague, according to specialists familiar with test results and computer modeling. Another defect is BioWatch's inability to distinguish between particular pathogens that are genetically similar, but benign.

Lab and field tests found similar problems in the latest technology intended for BioWatch, "Generation 3." The congressional investigators are seeking internal documents illuminating BioWatch's performance, plus the private comments of Napolitano's top science and technology advisor, Dr. Tara O'Toole, who recommended killing Generation 3.

O'Toole's skepticism is shared by Dr. Donald A. Henderson, a renowned epidemiologist who led the global eradication of smallpox. Henderson, a federal anti-terrorism advisor when BioWatch was launched in 2003, says he has yet to see a "scientific justification" for it.

"It has never stood the test of rationality," Henderson said. "This whole concept is just preposterous."

Political ties

But as Napolitano weighs whether to deploy Generation 3 — at the cost of $3.1 billion over its first five years — the program will not be easy to scale back.

The company in line to install Generation 3, Northrop Grumman Corp., is a major donor to federal campaigns with a broad presence in Washington.

From 2004 to 2012, the company's political action committee gave more than $6 million to congressional candidates, campaign finance records show. Northrop Grumman, a top defense contractor, ranked No. 10 this year among all PAC donors to congressional campaigns.

Northrop Grumman also hired the former head of BioWatch, Dr. Jeffrey W. Runge, as an advisor to assist its pursuit of the Generation 3 contract.

On Sept. 27, Runge told invitees to the Harvard Faculty Club that a survey he designed for what he called "homeland security related professionals" had found support for deploying the new technology, regardless of potential shortcomings.

Rather than wait for more research to refine Generation 3, Runge told the gathering, "the respondents seem to be saying … 'Deploy the detectors, even if they can't pick up every intentional pathogen or genetic variation, and deal with the problems later.'"

Runge, who provided his prepared remarks to The Times, said Northrop Grumman solicited his advice a few months after he left the government in 2008 and paid him an hourly rate. The consulting arrangement ended in summer 2009, he said.

Runge said the company paid him to explain how the Homeland Security Department "is thinking, how Congress is thinking, about the future of biodetection." Among those he briefed, Runge said, was Northrop Grumman's project manager for Generation 3.

In 2010 and 2011, Northrop Grumman donated a total of $100,000 to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research group, which, beginning in July, circulated three commentaries supporting federal funding for BioWatch and Generation 3. The donations were disclosed in the group's annual reports.

Steven P. Bucci, a Heritage Foundation senior fellow, wrote on July 11, "BioWatch is far from an 'unnecessary expenditure.' Congress should thus continue to fund the program."

The third Heritage essay, issued Dec. 12 and also written by Bucci, said that although BioWatch was "only marginally effective," Napolitano and President Obama should stay the course. "Cutting funding to this project," he wrote, "leaves us vulnerable in a way that will cripple our future security." Bucci said his writings were his own.

Asked for comment, a spokesman for Northrop Grumman, Brandon R. Belote III, said the company "recognizes the importance of participating in the democratic process."

For politicians determined to appear resolute against terrorism, fully funding BioWatch might carry less risk than scaling it back.

"If somebody cancels the program, and a week later there's a release, they'll never, ever recover from making that decision," said George Mason University microbiologist Stephen Prior, who co-wrote a 2004 National Defense University study of BioWatch. "If they don't make that decision, they can't be wrong."

Meanwhile, the Homeland Security Department's chief medical officer, Dr. Alexander Garza, has assured Congress that BioWatch is performing effectively. In March, Garza told a House subcommittee that the Generation 3 system was "right where it needs to be," but he did not cite the deficiencies found by the tests of prototype sensors.

On Sept. 13, Garza told another congressional hearing that, in his view, none of the existing system's mistaken detections of benign organisms as lethal pathogens were false alarms. Though each of the laboratory-confirmed results signaled potential terrorist attacks, Garza asserted that they were not false alarms because authorities never ordered evacuations or other emergency measures.

The panel members voiced concerns about BioWatch. None, however, pressed Garza to explain his basis for defending BioWatch's misidentifications of the harmless organisms. Nor did they question Garza about the system's poor sensitivity.

Eroded confidence

When he announced the program in his 2003 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush said BioWatch would "protect our people and our homeland." He called it "the nation's first early-warning network of sensors to detect biological attack."

BioWatch units placed in public places suck air through composite filters all day and night. Once every 24 hours, the filters are delivered to public health laboratories, where technicians search for the DNA of the targeted pathogens. Under Generation 3, BioWatch would be converted to automated sensors, each a "lab in a box," designed to both capture and test samples of air.

The first false alarms occurred soon after BioWatch's deployment, demonstrating that it could not distinguish between the most commonly signaled pathogen, tularemia, and "near-neighbor" organisms that pose no life-threatening harm.

Previously unpublicized Homeland Security materials show that the Houston area alone racked up more than 30 false alarms as of mid-2008, nearly all for the germ that causes tularemia, also known as rabbit fever.

The many false alarms nationwide — including results that caused tense deliberations among health officials at the 2008 Democratic National Convention and at championship sporting events — have eroded confidence in the system.

Local, state and federal officials faced with a BioWatch alarm have not once evacuated an area or dispensed antibiotics or other emergency medicines. They have instead monitored hospitals for days or weeks in search of potential victims before deciding to disregard the alarms, a wait-and-see approach counter to the rationale for BioWatch.

The Homeland Security Department's emphasis on keeping the details quiet is reinforced at the annual BioWatch conferences, according to attendees and government documents. The 2008 conference included such workshops as "Loose Lips Sink Collectors! Managing Media Inquiries about BioWatch," and "Psychology of Press Releases."

Last month, leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said Homeland Security had withheld key documents that the panel had asked for in July. In a letter to Napolitano, the committee said the episode raised "serious questions about the department's willingness to cooperate."

The department has pledged cooperation, and Napolitano, a former governor of Arizona, has delegated the public defense of BioWatch to Garza, also a presidential appointee. Garza has said that scientists are working "to improve BioWatch to keep the nation safe from any potential biological threats."

In recent interviews, more than a dozen specialists who have worked with or examined BioWatch said it should be independently assessed, and scaled back or dismantled.

Dr. Arthur L. Kellermann, a physician and public health researcher at Rand Corp. who studied BioWatch from 2007 to 2009 as a member of a National Academy of Sciences committee, said it "has generated nothing but false alarms."

Kellermann and other specialists said the money spent on BioWatch could have paid for training and equipment to help medical professionals more quickly diagnose a patient exposed to an attack. The many false alarms, they said, invite complacency.

"After you hear a certain amount of car alarms in your neighborhood, you stop worrying about them," Kellermann said.

david.willman@latimes.com

Phoenix City Council member Sal DiCiccio - Phoney baloney Libertarian

In this article Phoenix City Councilman Sal DiCiccio defends his vote to give Phoenix City Manager David Cavazos a 33 percent raise of $78,000 bumping his salary from $237,000 to $315,000 a year.

Here are some articles about that $78,000 pay raise the members of the Phoenix City Council voted to give to Phoenix City Manager David Cavazos.

Source

Into the mind of ... Sal DiCiccio

Dec. 22, 2012 12:00 AM

The Republic | azcentral.com

The Phoenix City Council member [Sal DiCiccio] explains why City Manager David Cavazos deserved a large raise.

Your vote for City Manager David Cavazos' 33 percent raise was a surprise. How much flak are you getting?

Some. David has been an outstanding manager. The council knew this would be a tough decision, but it was correct. Citizens have every right to seek answers; it's their money.

Look what we accomplished last year, the plan for the future, and then decide if it was right. The pay increase was partially based on his accomplishments, but more importantly we created specific performance measures ensuring structural change and reforms.

It is no secret government reform is my No. 1 priority. For Phoenix to compete in a global economy, a new structure is required. We need the right quarterback who can move the ball. David is Phoenix's franchise player.

You made your mark looking for every possible cut. Why did you think the pay increase was justified?

Significant government waste has been cut, and we are going to do more. Here are specific reforms and savings passed this year alone: We created a best-in-the-country 24-hour model -- businesses big and small can get permits and begin operations within 24 hours. Other cities take 6 to 8 months. We had no property-tax or rate increase, no water/sewer increase, while other governments raised them.

Phoenix was the first government to adopt zero-based budgeting, guaranteeing transparency. We have the largest-ever "rainy-day fund" ($41 million) and cut $59 million per year, including significant red tape.

Those were great accomplishments, but the future demands more, and performance measures for David will ensure long-term structural changes:

1. Save: $100 million per year. 2. Job creation: Cut more red tape by expanding the 24-hour model. 3. Customer service: All departments move to 24/7 operations and be known for it nationally. 4. Personnel reform: Move from entitlement structure to pay for performance. 5. Continue increasing the rainy-day fund.

What do you say to people who note the median household income in Phoenix is barely more than half the additional pay Cavazos will receive?

With $41 million in the rainy-day fund, $59 million saved through innovations and efficiencies and $277 million deficit erased, we have seen a $377 million shift since David took over.

You've pushed to reduce red tape at City Hall. How is it going?

We're winning big! Big and small businesses can now start operations in Phoenix in 24 hours, in what took 6-8 months, making Phoenix the best place nationally for business.

This summer, we will move to electronic and instantaneous permitting.

What else is on your plate?

Council members Thelda Williams, Michael Nowakowski and I are working together to make domestic violence a top priority for Phoenix, as it was when I was on the council in the 1990s. We want to make Phoenix the best nationally.

Nowakowski and I have been working on a plan to improve trade with Mexico, our biggest and underexplored partner.

Cavazos, Councilman Jim Waring and I are working to change Phoenix's culture to be customer-focused and be the first nationally to adopt a 24/7 model for our departments.

I have been working hard with Valley cities promoting the 24-hour job-creation model. Imagine if our entire region was known for this.

Washington Post articles on guns & gun control

I am too lazy to cut and past all the text so here are some links to the articles:

Tiny URLs:

• http://tinyurl.com/c5yqlek
• http://tinyurl.com/bpcjcb9
• http://tinyurl.com/cvqku75

• History of gun control is cautionary tale for those seeking regulations after Conn. shooting
• A bunch of gun & gun control articles
• Five myths about gun control

Corrupt lab techs guarantee you won't get a fair trial

Review of FBI forensics does not extend to federally trained state, local examiners

It's not about a fair trial, it's about making cops look like heroes!!!!

Source

Review of FBI forensics does not extend to federally trained state, local examiners

By Spencer S. Hsu, Published: December 22

Thousands of criminal cases at the state and local level may have relied on exaggerated testimony or false forensic evidence to convict defendants of murder, rape and other felonies.

The forensic experts in these cases were trained by the same elite FBI team whose members gave misleading court testimony about hair matches and later taught the local examiners to follow the same suspect practices, according to interviews and documents.

In July, the Justice Department announced a nationwide review of all cases handled by the FBI Laboratory’s hair and fibers unit before 2000 — at least 21,000 cases — to determine whether improper lab reports or testimony might have contributed to wrongful convictions.

But about three dozen FBI agents trained 600 to 1,000 state and local examiners to apply the same standards that have proved problematic.

None of the local cases is included in the federal review. As a result, legal experts say, although the federal inquiry is laudable, the number of flawed cases at the state and local levels could be even higher, and those are going uncorrected.

The FBI review was prompted by a series of articles in The Washington Post about errors at the bureau’s renowned crime lab involving microscopic hair comparisons. The articles highlighted the cases of two District men who each spent more than 20 years in prison based on false hair matches by FBI experts. Since The Post’s articles, the men have been declared innocent by D.C. Superior Court judges.

Two high-profile local-level cases illustrate how far the FBI training problems spread.

In 2004, former Montana crime lab director Arnold Melnikoff was fired and more than 700 cases questioned because of what reviewers called egregious scientific errors involving the accuracy of hair matches dating to the 1970s. His defense was that he was taught by the FBI and that many FBI-trained colleagues testified in similar ways, according to previously undisclosed court records.

In 2001, Oklahoma City police crime lab supervisor Joyce Gilchrist lost her job and more than 1,400 of her cases were questioned after an FBI reviewer found that she made claims about her matches that were “beyond the acceptable limits of science.” Court filings show that Gilchrist received her only in-depth instruction in hair comparison from the FBI in 1981 and that she, like many practitioners, went largely unsupervised.

Federal officials, asked about state and local problems, said the FBI has committed significant resources to speed the federal review but that state and local police and prosecutors would have to decide whether to undertake comparable efforts.

FBI spokeswoman Ann Todd defended the training of local examiners as “continuing education” intended to supplement formal training provided by other labs. The FBI did not qualify examiners, a responsibility shared by individual labs and certification bodies, she said.

Michael Wright, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said local prosecutors cannot simply order labs to audit all or even a sample of cases handled by FBI-trained examiners, because such an undertaking might be time- and cost-prohibitive for smaller agencies.

-------------

Here are some more articles on how corrupt or incompetent forensic technicians help cops make themselves look like heroes by framing almost everybody the cops accuse of a crime.

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/local/forensic-analysis-methods

Previous articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.

More articles on the government schools or public schools as our government masters like to call them.