This question matters
Standardized testing is here across Colorado. Which raises the question: when it comes to your student’s education, whom do you trust?
I teach high school. I spend 90 minutes with each of my students every other day. That’s 9,000 minutes every school year or 150 hours of getting to know your son or daughter. That’s just classroom time.
Some students I teach across multiple years. Others I talk to outside of the classroom. Sometimes we talk about school work, sometimes about what’s going on in their lives. For those students, I spend 200 and more hours getting to know them. Would you trust me if I told you how your student is doing?
What about the people who create the standardized tests? In my time teaching, I have not once seen a standardized test creator in my building. I have not seen one of them teach a student, get to know a student, or just check in with a student about how they are doing. Do you trust the test creators with your student’s education?
This question matters. Recently, a Colorado state legislator asked me, “If we don’t have test scores, how will we know how our students are doing?” My response: Why not trust the teachers? We spend the time with students. We get to know them day-in and day-out. The standardized test creators have spent zero time with your child. So whom do you trust? And if it’s the teachers, why don’t our legislators do the same?
Grateful for the change
I would like to thank the leaders of our city for beginning the installation of red light cameras, long overdue. To those who complain that this invades their right to privacy, I say when you go through a red light and kill my family, that invades my privacy.
I prefer leaning toward a having few mechanical errors with the lights rather than allowing freewheelers to cause a devastating accident. There has been a certain arrogance arising over time that says people have a “right” to drive through red lights because they are smarter and know better than the rest of us. These are likely the same people who scream about law and order. Well, here it is. It is rare to look into my rear view mirror and see a car stop at a yellow or red light. Sometimes two or three drive on through it because they think they are invincible. We all make mistakes and on occasion drive through a red light but too many now feel it’s their right to do so. The previous mayor was wrong. I for one am grateful for the change. This will make our community and our families safer.
Countless lawsuits and challenges
I read through the text of the summary of HB18-1436 (aka, the Red Flag Law, or ERPO).
It’s my understanding that a family member of a Sandy Hook victim (among others) attended the bill signing by our governor; it’s also my understanding that the Sandy Hook perpetrator was an insane child who didn’t own any weapons, but had gained access to his mother’s gun safe combination to get the weapons and ammunition. I could be mistaken.
So, under this law/a Sandy Hook-type scenario, the legally owned and licensed weapons of an uninvolved person in a household would have their 2nd Amendment guarantees/protections violated (by having their weapons confiscated in execution of an ERPO on someone else in that household) on the word of another family member or “roommate”?
What could possibly go wrong with this well-thought out legislation?
It’s just my opinion, but the state might want to prepare for countless lawsuits and challenges on both the constitutionality and the “unintended consequences” of this law. Yeah, yeah: other states have a similar law. Whatever.
Bill wrong on several levels
Let’s just say that this Red Flag bill is just that. It’s a red flag for civility. It’s the tail waging the dog. It’s wrong on several levels. First, it presumes guilt when no crime has been committed — not unlike a Tom Cruise movie. Second, it short-circuits good background checks. Third, it ignores suspicious activities that would trigger a legitimate investigation. Fourth, it is a “tell on your neighbor” law in secret that can run amuck beyond guns and lacks accountability.
You tell on your neighbor when you see unlawful or suspicious activities and let the police investigate. You don’t humiliate your neighbors anonymously. It’s not unlike harassing you neighbors with a SWAT team prank-call.
How Jared Polis rationalized this one is a mystery... unless you know who’s whispering in his ear. This bill should be repealed or society will wither into a police state run by hypocrites.
Bene fi ts you can’t pay for
Our Democratic Party brethren don’t appear to want to do anything about the flood of asylum seekers and plain old illegal immigrants inundating our borders. Similarly, they don’t seem to favor strict voter identification laws and they are in favor of turning our republic into a pure democracy by eliminating the Electoral College.
Surely it isn’t because they want to portray themselves to these new immigrants as the party to vote for. Surely it isn’t because they can gain seats in the House of Representatives by increasing the number of people in districts that they tend to carry. Surely it isn’t that they know socialism is easier to implement if people can vote themselves benefits without bearing the burden of paying for those benefits; i.e. tax the rich, they can afford it!
Now a proposal has been floated to release the asylum seekers and illegal immigrants in cities promoting themselves as “Sanctuary Cities” where local law enforcement won’t help enforce federal immigration law. I think this is a great idea. This provides the Democratic Party (who control most of these “Sanctuary Cities”) an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to their ideals. Cut off all federal aid to those cities and deliver all the asylum seekers and illegal immigrants available.
These Democratic strongholds will gain population, they can portray themselves as saviors to their new residents, and they can show the rest of us how it works when you promise benefits that you can’t pay for.