Solitary Confinement - The Apathy of the Concept

Gorilla Justice - Mass Incarceration - Revised 2017

Both books are now available at the book store Dare to Dream or Amazon books links below:

 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06WW9CRFB
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1520678924

Open Letter to Governor Doug Ducey

News Link  

Open Letter to Governor Doug Ducey

The facts are clearly reported by the Florence Fire Department – “Fire officials say eight [8] Florence students have been treated after being exposed to tear gas that blew into the air near their school late Wednesday morning.”

What isn’t clear is why did this happen? What would have happened if those kids had a respiratory illness e.g. asthma or other that are negatively affected by the exposure of chemical agents?  

This was no accident. Poor planning does not make it an accident. These things happen because someone didn't pay attention to the details required to do this safety. 

Fact is the Arizona Department of Corrections was very negligent in is training session used for controlling inmate compliance issues. Instead of the chemicals reaching the training grounds it went right over to the K-8 elementary school near the Pinal Parkway and Butte. A proximity that should have been calculated in the exercise as a possible misdirection of the chemical agent deployment. 

Instead of using or choosing open spaces, the ADC chose to use an area nearby the town or worst, a school. We are lucky for the sake of public safety, all that was reported was throat and eye irritation. It could have been much worse.
So while the ADC laughed at their own mishap, children suffered needlessly. Fire officials initially reported that more than three dozen children had been affected, but district administrators later said only six were being treated for watery eyes and nausea. 

The fact remains, somebody screwed up and nobody is held accountable as these ‘investigations’ are normally moot or germane in nature without any serious consequences for those who ill planned this exercise by taking the first rule of dispersing chemical agents, “wind direction”, for granted.

DOC authorities say they "are taking action" to avoid this happening in the future, and are continuing to investigate the incident. This is not a sufficient response. The governor should demand more. Where is the responsibility? Where is the accountability? Where is the ADC’s public safety message on this matter?

Exposing children to OC chemicals in no joke yet in their minds, they can’t stop laughing about it. 

We expect more from an agency that has a 1 billion plus budget. The governor should be asking more questions and somebody should be held accountable for this matter. The media covered it but as usual, the ADC had no comment.

If one child would have breathing complications, the whole thing would
not have been a laughing matter.

Reply to an Open Letter to the Chief, Fontana Police Department

 

Reply from Chief Ramsey, February 7, 2007

Greetings Carl,

I wanted to take a second to respond to your email from the other day.  As the Chief of the Fontana Police Department I am always open input from those within the community.  Let me start by saying I appreciate your many years of service and experience in public service and corrections; this is very noble work indeed.  I also applaud the fact that you are continuing your work and serving as a guard to protect assets within our communities.  

Upon reviewing your correspondence I was unable to locate a specific instance where an FPD officer mistreated you, or one of your partners.  There were many generalizations, but I would be interested in any specifics related to unprofessional conduct or inappropriate behavior, as that is unacceptable in our department.  With that said, I would like to note that many of our officers have prior experience in security, many of them have actually worked private security prior to being hired, attending the police academy, finishing the Field Training Program, then serving the citizens and stakeholders of our community.  I can also tell you that many of our officers have actually relied upon private security personnel to assist them in situations involving physical confrontation, where force was being administered, and backup was not readily available.  Such experiences in, and with, private security make them compassionate to the daily challenges in the field and less likely to be “arrogant, condescending, or rude” as you noted.

I would like you to know that all members of the Fontana Police Department are tasked with adhering to the vision of CARES. CARES stands for:

C – Community

A – Attention

R – Respect

E – Empathy / Enforcement

S – Service

Our employees are commissioned to treat all stakeholders in the community with complete respect when acting in their official capacity.  They must pay attention to the details of their job, as minute as they may be, to enforce the laws of the State and Federal government and the community.  This service to the community needs to be done with the mindset of helping and tending to all the needs of the community in an empathetic and caring manner.   I am not naive enough to believe that we are always perfect, but I am confident that the vast majority of our employees do an outstanding job on a daily basis in service to the stakeholders in the City of Fontana. 

Once again, I appreciate your perspective, and your dedication to service, and please let me know if there was a specific instance of inappropriate behavior by any of our employees so we can look into it more thoroughly.   

Respectfully,

Bob

Robert W. Ramsey, Chief of Police

Fontana Police Department

rramsey@fontana.org

February 8, 2017

Dear Chief Ramsey,

First of all, thank you for taking the time to respond to my open letter and your kind words and reassurances that the Fontana Police Department is above reproach and their professionalism is one of your highest expectations and demands of the job in the sense of carrying out their statutory duties and civic responsibilities to join other groups, including security officers to make our communities better. I believe you are sincere in your words and expectations.
My comments were generalized on purpose. Although it was a group action or conversation, we all agreed there were no specific statutory or unethical wrongdoings that needed to be addressed at this time.  It [letter]was meant to serve as an awareness measure, not an allegation of misconduct or wrongful ethical behaviors. It is good to know that there is a common link or bond between your officers and security officers with knowing the facts they too have “actually worked private security prior to being hired” as a police officer. Empathy is a powerful tool in communications. Therefore, I hope their attention is appropriately drawn and the respect is mutual as we greatly respect the police workforce as true professionals. 

As for the reliance factor – that’s our most important issue with any police department – knowing the call made will be taken seriously and that the response time is based on the urgency of the calls made or nature of the incident. Rest assured, there isn’t one security officer that I know or worked with who would not respond or assist any officer in danger or need of assistance when “backup” is not “readily available.” Your “CARES” acronym says it all and puts it into the proper perspective for all of us to understand clearly.
C – Community
A – Attention
R – Respect
E – Empathy / Enforcement
S – Service
I am confident that you took the open letter seriously and shared it with your workgroup and hopefully, all supervisors who oversee the field operations in practice and in performance. I thank you for your time and awareness of this matter and am glad you understood the letter to be a letter of concern so that security officers do not feel like they are a “nuisance or a burden” whenever they call for help or assistance with their execution of duties. 

Like you I am also not naïve “enough to believe that we [security] are always perfect. I have worked with individuals who did not meet the minimum requirement for the job and reported this to the appropriate supervisors. I take this job seriously and demand the same respect from our profession as you do yours. We are all, in fact, involved in doing a job and service to the stakeholders of our communities and respective cities including the city of Fontana. 

Once again, it is good to know your moral, legal and ethical expectations of your officers and your dedication to public service. This communique has been most enlightening for many who read it and to know, the Chief of Police in Fontana is responsive to community and public service (municipal, state, or private) inquiries and concerns as well as the performance and demeanor of all Fontana police officers on or off duty.

Respectfully submitted, 

Carl ToersBijns,