Pepper Spray NOT the Answer!

I couldn't agree more with my colleague's commentary on the article about the excessive use of pepper spray in Juvenile Detention Center's across Texas.

While I can't begin to claim that I know what officers at these institution are up against on a daily basis, I have to say that the exponential increase in the use of pepper spray as a means of managing these youths is grossly unacceptable. The free, tax-paying public would love to believe that these detention centers are being used as a means of rehabilitation, but in reality, these facilities typically do little more than detain. Officers that work in these facilities are hardly trained behaviorists, and so it is hard to expect that they would be in a position to use modeling as a means of behavior modification. It's unfortunate, but true; these institution aren't equipped, or even designed to provide the kind of guidance and example that most of us would hope they do. That being said, the general tax-paying public, as well as the advocates in the field, have a right to expect that the officers who are interacting with these youths on an intimate and constant basis would deal with them in a fair and effective manner. I doubt that such is the case; 1200 incidences of pepper spraying in a single year is mind-boggling, offensive, and at best an indication of a developing trend towards excessive use of force.

Thank you so much for posting your comments on this disturbing issue. I agree that modeling is the most effective means of instilling positive behaviors, and particularly with youth, so much potential is at stake. I think that in highlighting this particular issue, it has uncovered an even greater deficiency; our inherently flawed juvenile justice system. Come on Texas, can we slow down on the tazers, pepper spray and overall brazen approach?!?!?!! Especially when dealing with youth, there is just too much potential at stake, and we really can't afford for our juvenile delinquents to be translated into a growing population of adult offenders, with our early approach in part to blame.

TxDOT Plate Censorship; Allegory for Texas Politics

If you've ever wondered exactly what happens when you put in a request through the Texas Department of Transportation's Vehicle Registration and Titles division to obtain a licence plate that reads "PUPPYLUVER," look now further because here lies the skinny on the inner workings of our beloved TxDOT.....

I couldn't help but find myself both amused and bewildered by the scenario described in a recent article published in the Houston Chronicle entitled, "TxDOT shifts gears, allows 'FORNO 1' license plate." Apparently when a Texas driver requests that their licence plate read something specific, it is then referred to as a "novelty" tag. "Novelty tags" make their way through this complex and ever so intricate bureaucracy; first undergoing an initial evaluation, soon to be followed by a recommendation for approval or denial, and the final stage lands the requested novelty lingo onto the program director's desk for a definitive verdict. That sounds like one complicated ritual if you ask me! If only Texas legislation was under such precise scrutiny.....oh, the possibilities.....

Under state law, "the director may refuse to issue a specialty license plate with a design or alphanumeric pattern that the director considers potentially objectionable to one or more members of the public." Good grief, that's a lil' vague, wouldn't you say? I personally find puppy lover's to be objectionable. Am I entitled to sue for some grievances? Seeing that tag last week nearly insighted me to violence, for Pete's sake! Damn that careless director! What are we paying these folks for anyway if they can't even keep puppy loving freaks off the road?!? So what amused me so, you ask?

TxDOT Director Amadeo Saenz and the head of the vehicle titles and registration division signed off on a decision last month not to issue Houston resident Armando Florido the novelty plate he requested; "FORNO 1." Florido is the owner of a chain of restaurants called "Forno's of Italy." The rationale for this decision was sighted by a TxDOT representative: "It was, in fact, rejected because we were concerned Texans might see it as referring to a sexual act." Well hallelujah for the misinterpretations of the clergymen over at TxDOT! When in doubt, CENSOR!

After Florido appealed the decision with TxDOT, the verdict was ultimately overturned, and he has been assured that his plate will be issued, after all. Last year thousands of novelty tags were turned down, a few of the ominous examples included: DA HOWS, KISS IT, OVRSXD, BUTNKD, MS LUST, KWIKEE, AMOR 69 and ASSMAN. Puppylover made it, but DA HOWS was ruled objectionable? I, for one, am offended....

The TxDOT representative sighted these vile attempts, and commented, "This is what we're up against." These folks are taking their responsibilities pretty darn seriously. Come on, are my tax dollars paying the wages of those who are employed to make these discretionary decisions? There is certainly a place for saying no to the "OVRSXD" tag seekers of the state, but the 4-stage evaluation process seems a little extraneous to me. If we can afford to spend our transportation dollars over censoring, we should be well on our way to solving the transportation crises facing our state highways.