Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Fort Hood Massacre
Last week, a United States Army Officer of the Muslim faith entered an Army Readiness Center at Fort Hood, Texas, where he shot and killed 13 people, and wounded an additional 30 people.
Subsequent reports indicate that the shooter, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, had been in contact with Anwar al Awlaki, an American-born cleric now living in Yemen, where he operates a website advocating attacks against the United States.
The United States Army, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other law enforcement entities are still investigating the circumstances surrounding the massacre, and have not yet made any determination as to the specific charges that will be brought against Major Hasan.
I hope that he will be charged with treason against the United States. However, “political correctness” may prevent a charge of treason from being brought.
Regardless of the charge or charges eventually brought against Major Hasan, there are more important issues to be considered.
If an individual cannot set their country of origin, ethnic background, or religion second to their loyalty to the United States, should we permit that person to hold United States citizenship?
In a similar vein, should we permit a citizen of the United States to concurrently hold citizenship in another country?
Personally, I don’t feel that holding multiple citizenships is in the best interests of the United States, since its always leaves open the question of the national loyalty of the individual.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Motor Vehicle Policy
The Lancaster County Council adopted a resolution on Monday, November 2nd, 2009, which seek to hold County employees liable for negligent damage to County-owned vehicles.
Sounds good, right? Well, probably not.
As written, the employee would be liable to a maximum of $1,000 per occurrence, and the policy would appear to exclude any other avenue of recovery.
What happens if an employee is driving a County-owned vehicle, is speeding, loses control, and totals the vehicle? The employee is out a maximum of $1,000 and may lose his or her job, in which case, the County may not even receive the $1,000. Could the County sue the employee for the negligent loss of the vehicle? It does not appear so to me.
Even worse, as opposed to a County employee, a volunteer involved in any damage to or loss of a vehicle would have no liability whatsoever, except that the volunteer does not appear to have the same immunity from a lawsuit that appears to be implicit in the resolution in respect to County employees.
The distinction between County employees and volunteers is unlikely to engender good feelings between the two groups.
I suggest that the intent of the resolution is good, but that the implementation may well come back to haunt the Lancaster County Council. That conclusion seems all too appropriate in light of the fact that the resolution was adopted at the first meeting following Halloween.
