Apparently, going to school in some communities has hit an all time low–and I don’t mean attendance wise. According to media reports, two Massachusetts fathers have come up with the Bulletproof Backpack. Yes, that is right folks, the bulletproof backpack, (and you thought your child had everything fashionable in school wear this year!)

The Reuters News Service which appears on my video page has a story on this issue. It is interesting viewing. The backpack, affectionately called “My Child’s Pack” costs $175 and contains a lightweight metal plate which is sewn into the back of the pack and is no heavier than a bottle of water. The “Child’s Pack” will also ward off knife attacks. Do the words home schooling sound good right about now?

The plate material meets National Institute of Justice safety standards, and during a three-year testing phase, stood up to bullets as well as machete, hatchet and Ka-bar knife attacks. REAL NICE!!! It is also comforting to know that the bulletproof backpack is resistant to 97 percent of all bullets used. I smell a new fashion trend coming on!!

The two men said they got the idea for these packs after the Columbine High School shootings in 1999 and from reports that over 500 weapons were seized in the Boston school system last year.

I have also read reports about “stab proof” uniforms in England. The uniforms garments are made of Kevlar, the same material in a bullet proof vest.

It makes you wonder what is going on in the world today. People need to be creative (like me) as a way to vent anger and frustration. But I know not everyone is as talented and gifted as myself. I pity them.

This Article is from the WTNH Blog

Disparity Of Value Assigned To Certain Lives?

Posted by Mark Davis on Aug 13th, 2007 at 02:06:43 pm

Community activists in Hartford say the Cheshire home invasion tragedy demonstrates something many in the minority community have been talking about privately for a long time….that the state and the media react differently to crimes against whites.

The activists say they are just as outraged and saddened by the Cheshire crime…but that it shows the “disparity of value assigned to certain lives.”

They also say that Governor Rell’s order calling for Global Tracking devices for more close monitoring of parolees proves their point. Many of these same activist have been asking for more close monitoring of parolees following crimes in minority neighborhoods.

The Rev. Cornell Lewis of Hartford says reaction to crimes against whites is different. “When they are struck it seems as if resources of the state are marshalled or they coalesce and then people are ready to access that resource,” said Lewis.

Do you think government and the media react differently to crimes against whites???

The People for Justice want to thank Ms. Kleist for allowing us to publicize the following message on her website.

Is the Cheshire Town Council finally getting the message? Are they starting to question all departments and discuss all issues in town? After Tuesday nights Town Council meeting it appears so. The Town Council asked the Cheshire Police Department about overtime costs regarding the home invasion. Apparently it is somewhere in the range of $20,000 to $40,000. The Police Department also asked for a bid waiver to replace two police cars damaged during that crime.

The Town Council is waking up and realizing thanks to Ms. Kleist and her behind the scene efforts, that if the Police Department in this town is questioned, the world is not going to come to an end. The people in this town have a right to know where their money is going. Not questioning and not discussing hoping that it will all go away did not work in the past and will not work now as they are finding out thanks to Ms. Kleists media connections

Some issues will never go away. Do they understand? The People for Justice is supporting Ms. Kleist and her efforts to keep the town open and honest. We know other people are trying to jump on the bandwagon now, but Ms. Kleist is the person who stepped out in the forefront several years ago, despite constant harassment by the town government to get her point across.  Now we see the efforts are paying off.

The People for Justice also support Ms. Esty and encourages her to keep her word regarding the expansion of powers of the Public Safety Commission and after office hours at the Cheshire Police Department where all people can go and discuss issues without fear. The People for Justice will be monitoring the Public Safety Commission because according to Ms. Kleist some of the people on that Commission need guidance and encouragement so they will do the right thing.

Ms. Kleist along with the People for Justice knows what will happen in November. We also know that certain information not flattering to this town may also come to light soon. Hopefully, Ms. Esty and the ordinance committee will have further discussions on this public safety issue and inform Ms. Kleist so that she can inform the public.

The People for Justice-The Underground Nation-The Underground Town Hall.

Unfortunately, I have been having some technical problems with my modem. Hopefully it will be resolved by Wednesday.

We did “try” the webcam broadcast. It works fine, but there is one problem. The Town Hall doesn’t have wireless internet so I guess it is back to the drawing board. I am in the process of re-loading some of my old shows I originally broadcast on Cox Public Access. I will try to upload again the end of the week. I had a problem probably because of this modem issue. So we will have to wait and see.

A local resident (whose name I will not disclose at this time) has written the Town Attorney Dwight Johnson asking that Mr. “Major Businessman” on the Inland Wetlands Commission (I also am not going to name this person until I at least speak to him), recuse himself from voting on the plans submitted by W/S Development’s “Lifestyle Center” which would be constructed near the I-691 Interchange.

In July, the Planning and Zoning voted to approve the zone change which includes mixed use. Apparently, Mr. M.B. back in July asked his attorney if it would be necessary to recuse himself from the “Cheshire Rt. 10 LLC Hearing. Mr. M.B.’s attorney said it was not necessary as he was not an owner, his brother was a minority owner and his brother did not live with him, according to information in “the letter.”

The local resident states that Mr. M.B. should recuse himself because of certain “actions” that Mr. M.B. supposedly engaged in i.e. taking down “No Mall” signs and wearing “Yes” buttons.

As of today, no response has been received from the Town Attorney. But, I know the town is busy with the Three Strikes Rally to take place Wednesday, Aug. 15 at 7 p.m. in Bartlem Park across from Cheshire High School on Route 10.

This is a good and noble undertaking by Ms. Bartoli not just for the Petit tragedy but for ALL victims of crime throughout our state and our nation.

I know our town leaders are preparing for the onslaught of people-but this issue needs to be addressed now. I did try to spread a little harmless “fun” on my website. I hope you will take time to laugh a little. Remember: I only tease people I like!!!

Now I have some info on just what a “conflict of interest” is.

Ways to mitigate conflicts of interests

Removal

The best way to handle conflicts of interest is to avoid them entirely. For example, someone elected to political office might sell all corporate stocks that he/she owns before taking office, and resign from all corporate boards. Or that person could move his/her corporate stocks to a special trust, which would be authorized to buy and sell without disclosure to the owner. (This is referred to as a “blind trust“.) With such a trust, since the politician does not know in which companies he/she has investments, there should be no temptation to act to their advantage.

Short of avoiding conflicts of interest, the best way to deal with them are one or more of the following (mitigation) measures:

Disclosure

Commonly, politicians and high-ranking government officials are required to disclose financial information - assets such as stock, debts such as loans, and/or corporate positions held, typically annually. To protect privacy (to some extent), financial figures are often disclosed in ranges such as “$100,000 to $500,000″ and “over $2,000,000″.

Certain professionals are required either by rules related to their professional organization, or by statute, to disclose an actual or potential conflict of interest. In some instances, the failure to provide full disclosure is a crime.

Recusal

Those with a conflict of interest are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisions where such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal varies depending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics, codified ethics, or by statute. For example, if the governing board of a government agency is considering hiring a consulting firm for some task, and one firm being considered has, as a partner, a close relative of one of the board’s members, then that board member should not vote on which firm is to be selected. In fact, to minimize any conflict, the board member should not participate in any way in the decision, including discussions.

Judges are supposed to recuse themselves from cases when personal conflicts of interest may arise. For example, if a judge has participated in a case previously as some other judicial role he/she is not allowed to try that case. Recusal is also expected when one of the lawyers in a case might be a close personal friend, or when the outcome of the case might affect the judge directly, such as whether a car maker is obliged to recall a model that a judge drives. This is required by law under Continental civil law systems and by the Rome Statute, organic law of the International Criminal Court.

Third-party evaluations

Consider a situation where the owner of a majority of a publicly held corporation decides to buy out the minority shareholders and take the corporation private. What is a fair price? Obviously it is improper (and, typically, illegal) for the majority owner to simply state a price and then have the (majority-controlled) board of directors approve that price. What is typically done is to hire an independent firm (a third party), well-qualified to evaluate such matters, to calculate a “fair price”, which is then voted on by the minority shareholders.

Third-party evaluations can also be used as proof that transactions were in-fact fair (”arms-length”). For example, a corporation that leases an office building that is owned by the CEO might get an independent evaluation showing what the market rate is for such leases in the locale, to address the conflict of interest that exists between the fiduciary duty of the CEO (to the stockholders) and the personal interest of that CEO (to maximize the income that the CEO gets from owning that office building).

Codes of ethics

Generally, codes of ethics forbid conflicts of interest. Often, however, the specifics can be controversial. Should therapists, such as psychiatrists, be allowed to have extraprofessional relations with patients? Ex-patients? Should a faculty member be allowed to have an extraprofessional relationship with a student, and should that depend on whether the student is in a class of, or being advised by, the faculty member?

Codes of ethics help to minimize problems with conflicts of interest because they can spell out the extent to which such conflicts should be avoided, and what the parties should do where such conflicts are permitted by a code of ethics (disclosure, recusal, etc.). Thus, professionals cannot claim that they were unaware that their improper behavior was unethical. As importantly, the threat of disciplinary action (for example, a lawyer being disbarred) helps to minimize unacceptable conflicts or improper acts when a conflict is unavoidable.

As codes of ethics cannot cover all situations, some governments, e.g., Canada, have established an office of the ethics commissioner. Ethics commissioner should be appointed by the legislature and should report to the legislature.

Courant.com

August 13, 2007

In light of the recent turmoil at Connecticut Innovations Inc., Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s appointment of one of her top campaign contributors, Edward M. Bowman Jr., to be chairman of the quasi-public agency’s board is troubling.

State lawmakers set up the agency in 1989 to disburse millions of dollars in venture capital for promising applications in high-tech industries such as energy, biotechnology, information technology and photonics.

According to the governor’s announcement, Mr. Bowman’s experience consists of having owned a successful family-run home heating oil business and sitting on the board of the Independent Connecticut Petroleum Association. He also served on the Cheshire town council between 1994 and 1997.

Mr. Bowman’s apparent lack of expertise in both venture capitalism and the industries that Connecticut Innovations fosters wouldn’t disqualify him from serving as non-paid chairman. But it comes at a time when Connecticut Innovations’ stability is in question due to the resignations of three presidents and a chairwoman in 16 months.

On April 12, members of the agency’s board hired one of their own, state budget official John Mengacci, to fill the $175,000-a-year post of interim president. Mr. Mengacci returned to his old job less than a week later after a story in The Courant suggested that the arrangement might be illegal. An opinion from the Office of State Ethics is still pending.
He was to replace Frank A. Dinucci, who stepped down after six months on the job. Mr. Dinucci, in turn, had taken over for Chandler J. Howard, who resigned after seven months.

Mr. Bowman is replacing Elaine A. Pullen, who quit as chairwoman at the end of July.

Since it began, Connecticut Innovations has helped over 100 emerging companies research, develop and market new products and services and boasts that it has attracted over $1 billion dollars in additional investments from private equity providers. Mr. Bowman could do well in this job. But what is there about his appointment that suggests that the administrative chaos at Connecticut Innovations will end any time soon? And does he have the resume?

Copyright 2007, The Hartford Courant