Pondering security

Perhaps a month ago, on an evening I wasn't there, one of the youth at the Ruth Ellis Center became aggressive and could not be calmed by the staff. I think police were called, though I don't know the whole story. That youth was banned from the Center for a year. No weapons were involved.

The next time I volunteered there I was told about new security measures. The person at the main desk now has four security cameras visible from a laptop. I no longer buzz the kids in, a staff member does it, because they are better at identifying the youth. That means there is always a staff person in the kitchen with me now. I was also told what to do if an altercation erupted (remove things from the serving window so they can't be used as weapons, lock kitchen doors, etc.).

The attendance at the center was light today. I got the pots washed by 8:00 and there was no reason to stick around. But the banned youth was skulking around outside the Center. He probably considers it his home and he misses the place. That meant the staff guy in the kitchen with me also had a laptop open with the camera displays as he sat under the display of the original camera. And when I left they called to another staff person to be outside when I went to my car.

Even with all that I don't see a big threat to my security.

This morning I got up early to be at the district court for a foreclosure defense action. The woman was given a mortgage (before the bust) that was designed to fail -- her income was exaggerated, which meant her payment was bigger than what she could afford. Economic difficulties made the situation worse. She took the eviction case to court, and it got bumped to a higher court. While it was pending there the bank went back to the district court to try to force the eviction. Some significant mustache twirling going on here. Fortunately, the bank heard the defense team was going to pack the courtroom and backed out of the lower court case. Alas, I didn't check email before heading out this morning. So I went through security and sat in the courtroom for a while, until it was obvious there were no protesters there.

But going through security, and reading the long list of items banned from the courtroom (I took my baggie of crackers back to the car), got me thinking about what it meant. The judge wanted to make sure he could not be threatened by anyone who disagreed with the judge's decision. Quite appropriate. However, there was no armed guard (this judge handed civil cases) and I'm pretty sure the judge and three assistants were not packing heat. So one way to prevent violence, especially gun violence, is to make sure *nobody* has weapons.

Doonesbury, from ten days ago, compares the national reaction to the 9/11 attacks where 3,000 people died and the 270,000 killed by gun violence over nine years.

Today's Doonesbury Mudline has a quote from Jim Carey. I can't quote it exactly (because I don't have a way to stop it and copy it) but this is close, "Anyone who would run out to buy an assault rifle after the Newtown massacre has very little left of their body or soul worth protecting."