Train a child in the way that he should go...

Judge William Walsh of Onandaga County sentenced Anthony Stewart, to 2 to 6 years for first degree robbery. Stewart and a friend had BB guns that looked real.They knocked a 73-year old man to the ground, and  Stewart punched him in the face multiple times. They then took all his money, which amounted to 7 cents...I'm going to let that marinate for a minute. The victim had identified Stewart and his friend as the perpetrators. Walsh said he issued the harsh sentence because Stewart declined to plead guilty, choosing to fight the charges.His friend, and I'm using that term lightly,Skyler Ninham, 16, pleaded guilty in July and was sentenced to 1 to 4 years in prison.  Now I do understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty, but sometimes you have to take the loss and keep it moving. Stewart's lawyer, Laurin Haddad, had pleaded with Walsh to treat her client as a youthful offender, so that a felony conviction wouldn't remain on his permanent record.

 "For 7 cents, now you're making someone a felon for the rest of his life," she told the judge. I disagree,it was her client, who at 15 chose to run around with a BB gun that looked real, chose to act like felon and is now being treated like one. I have no sympathy at all. At 15 you know right from wrong. I can hear the comments now "What if that was your son?" If it was my son, the last thing he is gonna be worried about is a jail cell, his most pressing concern would be worrying about me, beating him down like he is a grown man. "What if he was poor or  hungry and was looking for food?" 7 cents is not going to buy you anything to eat anyway. Lock him up now while he has a fake gun, or lock him up for life later, for using a real one. I  take back what I said, I have some sympathy and do believe that everyone deserves a second chance. Hopefully this kid learns and doesn't let jail destroy him. I know plenty of people who went to prison and did not let it define them...this writer included.

In the words of Swizz Beats on to the next one! In Orlando Florida, Democratic State Senator Gary Siplin  has been pushing  six years for the so-called Pull Your Pants Up law. He finally got his wish last spring. The state legislature voted overwhelmingly to enact the ban at the start of the 2011-12 school year, making Florida one of only two states with a saggy pants ban for students. "We want our kids to believe they're going to college, and part of that is an attitude, and part of that is being dressed professionally," Siplin said. He originally wanted to make it a crime to wear saggy pants, but the current law subjects repeat violators to up to three days of in-school suspension and up to 30 days suspension from extracurricular activities. It also targets low-cut and midriff-exposing shirts on girls.Siplin handed out about a  dozen belts donated by a local church to students who showed up with droopy drawers at Oak Ridge High School . He left another 25 belts with school administrators to hand out as needed. Siplin said he also gave away about 100 belts at two other high schools as students arrived last week for their first week of school. I for one am ecstatic about somebody taking a stand against this horrible fashion trend. Now granted I used to wear tight Lee jean suits and tight adidas sweatsuits, but never had them hanging off my behind.

 Even when we started wearing baggy clothes, we still looked F.R.E.S.H!!!!The fashion trend has it's roots in the prison system.If some of these young men knew what it meant to let your pants "sag", they would pull them up in a hurry. Hip-Hop has a hand in this also, because kids are going to always follow a trend. If they see Lil Wayne wearing animal print dance skins at the VMA's, that is what they are going to want to wear. Siplin had to fight with the  American Civil Liberties Union and the NAACP, which contend the law violates personal freedom and unfairly targets minority students.I wouldn't say the targeting is unfair, but you call a spade a spade. If it's mainly minority kids wearing their clothes this way then so be it. If their parents aren't going to tell them to pull em up, somebody needs to. If your over 21 and your pants sag , you need to be smacked with a hardcover edition of The Autobiography of Malcolm X and made to watch the entire Roots DVD even part two with Halle Barry that was kind of wack. I'm out until next week so I leave you with this

This is a Man’s World…or is it?

This week I have treat for my followers, guest blogger Sharon Denny, an acclaimed author and good friend of mine. Sharon is an avid follower of Opinionated and wanted to share her opinion this week. So here we go...

In 1966, the Godfather of Soul, James Brown, musically proclaimed that men rule the world when he recorded the song It’s a Man’s Man’s Man’s World, a title that Rolling Stone magazine characterized as “almost biblically chauvinistic”. The song attributes all the productive work that goes on in the world to the male gender, but also states that it would all amount to “nothing without a woman or a girl.” This song became a staple of Brown’s live shows and went on to rank number 123 in 2004 in Rolling Stone magazine’s list of the 500 greatest songs of all time.

Let’s fast forward 45 years to 2011, a new time and a new generation of pop culture where things are looked at a little differently. Beyonce´ Knowles, famed pop singer/entertainer and wife of hip hop mogul Jay-Z, has seemed to ruffle some feathers, of roosters no doubt, when she recently came out with the hit song Who Run the World (Girls).

In the lyrics, the question is repeatedly asked: Who run the world? Who run this mother? And the answer every time is: Girls! Even more powerful than the lyrics is the music video where Beyonce´ is backed by a group of similarly attractive women clad in racy clothing, dancing and singing as they proclaim that girls run the world. The lyrics suggest that men love it how the female persuasion is “smart enough to make these millions, strong enough to bear the children, then get back to business.” These lyrics, although they might seem a bit feministic in nature, are powerful enough that they have mesmerized young girls and young women all over the world to the point where they believe that if Beyonce´ say’s girls run the world, then it must be true! Girls do run the world!

When asked what he thought of the song, a male friend clearly expressed that he felt the song is misleading young women and girls all over the world to believe something which is against the will of God and all of nature, and that the message, as small as it might seem to some, has the potential to evoke what could ultimately be a very damaging view by this generation against the design and strength of the traditional family unit.

I admire Beyonce´ as an artist, and I give her two thumbs up for the sound of the song and the dance moves performed in the music video. I’ll even go as far as to say that I do believe that what she’s saying is partly true. In recent years, women have begun playing more significant leading roles in their lives and households than ever before. Women have had to take the reins in many situations and “run” their worlds for whatever reason, so in nutshell, these lyrics do hold some truth. But, even with all that being the case, do the lyrics perpetuate or add to changes that are already taking place in the current generations that some of the world fears will be the fall of mankind?

Just how much weight does music carry and just how much influence do entertainers have on where we’re headed as a human race? As simple as lyrics to a pop song may seem, do you see the magnitude of the affect that they may have over time? How much does it matter to you? Is it a big enough issue that you would consider making such decisions as to not spend money to support certain artists, or to ban certain music from being played in your household, or do you just go with the flow and hope that what you’ve taught your children (if you have any) has taken root in their minds and will help steer them in the right direction when it comes to decision making?

I think that no matter what we teach our children, and no matter how they’re brought up in the home, they’re still strongly influenced by the outside world with generational changes in fashion, attitude, world views, etc. The question is, do we act upon the things that we see influencing our children each and every time, or do we gracefully allow time and evolution to have their way? What say you?

SD Denny

Award-Nominated Author

Titles: The Baker’s Dozen (2007) & HALF (2011)

www.sddenny.com

Dog Eat Dog world!!

After telling GQ magazine that he didn’t want to come to Philadelphia to be a third-string quarterback after his release from federal prison, Michael Vick clarified his remarks. Vick states he is glad he chose the Philadelphia Eagles, even if he had more attractive options. Vick resurrected his career with the Eagles. He had an amazing season last year, and started in the Pro Bowl. He said in the article that Commissioner Roger Goodell was among those who convinced him Philadelphia was the right destination. He initially said in the article “I think I can say this now, because it’s not going to hurt anybody’s feelings, and it’s the truth”. “I didn’t want to come to Philadelphia . Being the third-team quarterback is nothing to smile about. Cincinnati and Buffalo were better options.” Even though Philly ended up being a better situation for him, there are still times to keep your mouth shut and just not say anything. Stating the commissioner told him to play in Philly is basically collusion. That is neither here nor there right now anyway. That situation was not as bad as his next diarrhea of the mouth fiasco.

In the same GQ article when asked about the negative media perceptions of him Michael says

"They are writing as if everyone feels that way and have the same opinions they do. But when I go out in public, it's all positive, so that's obviously not true." The media, he implies, act as though he used to sneak into suburban yards, steal golden retrievers, and set them on fire. As if he were a lone actor, a single rampaging menace, a canine serial killer with no context, motivation, or back story. As if he is the only person in America associated with dogfighting.Now if there ever was a time to just shut up or keep your answer simple this was it.

On people not from his background understanding where he comes from

"Yeah, you got the family dog and the white picket fence, and you just think that's all there is. Some of us had to grow up in poverty-stricken urban neighborhoods, and we just had to adapt to our environment. I know that it's wrong. But people act like its some crazy thing they never heard of. They don't know.” see this is that ignorant ish that irks me. I was far from rich growing up so that is some nonsense. Honestly I have been to a few dogfights in my younger days, but I have never seen dogs electrocuted, drowned or strangled for losing. I understand that dog fighting is cultural, but we have to stop blaming everything on culture and upbringing. As long as the chains remain we are going to be shackled by our past and our inability to move beyond it.

Case in point, when the writer asked Vick if he felt people don't understand black culture, he stated "I think that's accurate.”I mean, I was just one of the ones who got exposed, and because of the position I was in, where I was in my life, it went mainstream. A lot of people got out of it after my situation, not because I went to prison but because it was sad for them to see me go through something that was so pointless, that could have been avoided.” I was one of those people that thought it was totally blown out of proportion. I did a blog a couple of years ago on the disparate sentences of NFL players. You have players who have killed people that did less time than Vick. I still feel because we are a dog loving country that he got a lot more time that he should have. I know he went to jail for running a criminal enterprise, but if you don't think killing those dogs had a major impact on his sentence, then you must believe the Tea Party is good for America and not racist. Michael Vick paid his dues and is now reaping the rewards of being an all star athlete. Now if he can learn to keep his mouth closed, the media and all his haters won't dog him out.

Privacy...I think not

The advent of computer-based telephone switches and the Internet has made it more difficult for the government to monitor the communications of criminals, spies and terrorists. Federal agencies want Internet companies to comply with the same wiretapping requirements that apply to telecommunications carriers. This proposal, though, may stifle Internet innovation. Furthermore, the new surveillance facilities might be misused by overzealous government officials or hijacked by terrorists or spies interested in monitoring U.S. communications.This was taken from a Scientific American article in 2008 .Now fast forward three years later. On July 27th 2011 The House Judiciary Committee approved a bipartisan bill called the “Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act”. It now has to pass the Senate. Congress is trying to pass legislation that would make it easier for law enforcement to access online information about the activities of all Americans, regardless if they are criminals or not.




While we were fretting over the debt ceiling, thinking it was Armageddon. Our government is on the verge of passing a bill that requires all commercial Internet service providers to retain information about all people who use their service. In the event they are ever asked to hand it over to the authorities. here is the essence of the bill (Retention of Certain Records- A commercial provider of an electronic communication service shall retain for a period of at least one year a log of the temporarily assigned network addresses the provider assigns to a subscriber or customer of such service that enables the identification of the corresponding customer or subscriber information under subsection (c) (2) of this section.) According to Rep Zoë Lofgren of California. “That last phrase, Subsection © (2), is a reference to 18 U.S. Code 2703(c) (2), which says, ‘A provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service shall disclose to a Government entity the name, address, local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations, lengths of service, telephone or instrument number, means and source of payment for such service, including any credit card or bank account number.’” An amendment to limit the data that ISPs could collect to IP addresses only was rejected by a 7-16 vote.




Rep John Conyers the top ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee believes the bill is a sneak attempt at making it easier for the government to monitor citizens. “The bill is mislabeled,” he said. “This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It’s creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.” The bills sponsor and the Judiciary Committee Chairman, Rep. Lamar Smith, admitted that the bill would be used more broadly than its title suggests. The data retention by ISPs would be used to “assist State and Federal law enforcement officials with child pornography and other Internet investigations.” I don't have to tell you that Rep. Lamar Smith is a Republican. They always say they want smaller government but then turn around and try to pass legislation for government intrusion into our privacy. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (Mandatory data retention would force your Internet Service Provider to create vast and expensive new databases of sensitive information about you. That information would then be available to the government, in secret and without any court oversight, based on weak and outdated electronic privacy laws. That same data could become available to civil litigants in private lawsuits—whether it’s the RIAA trying to identify downloader’s, a company trying to uncover and retaliate against an anonymous critic, or a divorce lawyer looking for dirty laundry. These databases would also be a new and valuable target for black hat hackers, be they criminals trying to steal identities or foreign governments trying to unmask anonymous dissidents.) So watch what websites you visit or emails you send the wrong click of a mouse and those black helicopters may be on the way. To protest ,voice your opposition or make your voice heard go to https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=497