Texas evacuees subject to criminal checks
LinkThe idea, according to Jack Colley [the state's emergency management director], is to keep sex offenders and others who may be wanted by police off the same buses used by the most vulnerable during an evacuation: the elderly, disabled residents and children.
"This will allow us to help them evacuate," Colley said of sex offenders and others wanted for crimes. "We're not going to leave anyone."
Though the intent is to make sure vulnerable evacuees aren't victimized, Colley acknowledged that culling sex offenders and other criminals from a herd of evacuees during a potentially chaotic evacuation comes with plenty of challenges.
"We'll be able to do it," he said of the task, declining to be more specific about the process because of safety concerns.
Earlier this month, it was announced AT&T Inc. has contracted with the Texas Governor's Division of Emergency Management to provide electronic wristbands for those residents wanting them, before they board an evacuation bus.
The wristbands would be scanned by emergency management officials and the person's name would be added to a bus boarding log. That person's name and their bus information would be sent wirelessly to the University of Texas Center for Space Research data center.
the latest
latest episodes
Of course this is the stupidest idea ever.
Be much easier to tase, handcuff and then chain everyone to their seat.
Armed guard on each bus of course.
This is one of the greatest law hacks ever. They're turning the weather against undesirables!
In my experience, "declining to be more specific about the process" equals "knowing that the process is obviously deficient."
Though catching crooks is attractive, I can't believe this could be done quickly during an emergency. It takes forever just to walk through a metal detector at an airport; imagine the delays that database-checking will introduce!
It would really suck if disaster-evacuees died while waiting in line because it was taking too long for authorities to check their criminal background.
MATTYMATT, I was thinking pretty much exactly what you just wrote.
Maybe they'll have a separate bus that goes straight to a CIA prison in Matamoras. In the name of cross-agency cooperation of course!
Are they going to put all the criminals on the same bus? Isn't that how Con-Air started?
That could be posted in the thread "funny & dumb news"... If it is a disaster, who ensures that communication lines will be available? Who ensures that environment will allow the use of digital equipment? Who ensures that desperate people don't turn themselves a mob?
I am not in USA. To be true I am in Brazil and I had an astonishing experience today: I got a new job at a government agency and they require that I prove that I am not a convicted criminal (you see, government agencies don't talk that much...). I came to the place where they issue a declaration that I don't have any trouble with the legal system carrying a bunch of documents (ID card, Tax ID card, etc). I forgot a document of capital importance: my marriage certificate. So they couldn't tell that I am not a criminal because they don't know who my wife is...
So, presumably, as time passes, the evacuation center will fill up with those persons the background check judges "undesirable" leading to some combination of the following scenarios:
1. The facility is crowded and chaotic. People with health issues are unable to find the help they need quickly and some succumb to complications. The efficiency of the evacuation drops to zero.
2. Eventually the number of "undesirables" reaches critical mass and they riot, throwing the facility into complete chaos. Many of the "desirable" evacuees are attacked and injured. The authorities respond with force, making a bad situation worse.
Worse scenarios can be imagined, if the "undesirable" evacuees are turned away from the facility & turn their frustration to vandalism or banditry outside the facility.
The idea, according to Jack Colley [the state's emergency management director], is to keep sex offenders and others who may be wanted by police off the same buses used by the most vulnerable during an evacuation: the elderly, disabled residents and children.
Oh, so it's for the kids?
It's certainly a good way to make sure that illegal immigrants die in natural disasters.
Of course, if we got rid of the ridiculous mandatory minimums for non-violent offenders (and war on drugs), we could keep people who commit sexual crimes, who have a notoriously difficult time rehabilitating, in jail in the first place. Why worry about them all of a sudden when there's an emergency, and not before when they are just as likely to re-offend?
I live in Texas. Fearmongering is an art with the governor's office. The capitol building is a semi-fortress that can't be approached by vehicle, and they just announced they are beefing up security even more; conversly, on a recent trip to Olympia, Washington I drove up to the front of their state capitol, parked, walked around, took photos, etc. Also, a lady spent 20 minutes rummaging through her trunk during that time. In Texas I she would've been questioned.
There is also a new law here that all employees for all school districts have to be fingerprinted and felons can't be teachers. Busted for pot in 1970 but have been clean since? Sorry, you can't teach kids. Anymore.
Oh, and the "we can't say because of safety concerns" bit means either they have no idea what they are doing, or someone got a big fat contract out of this and they don't want to admit it.
I like Austin a lot, but I'm getting real tired of being a Texan.
Oh Please, re-read the quoted snippet from the original posting:
Picture two busses, one for elderly, disabled, and children (presumably with their parents), and another for convicted or others wanted for crimes.
As is clearly stated, no one would be left behind - it is about segregating the evacuees. The alternative would be the prospect of rabid news reports about a bus loaded with children and one or more convicted sex offender, and the potential for abuse on the long bus ride to their shelter...
Honestly, in an environment where everyone assumes the worst of government, and they are wrong no matter what they do.
The reality is, the busses will be broken down as follows, one will be for the Elderly, disabled, and children and adults that have documentation/identification papers that prove they have not been convicted of a crime or are not wanted for a crime, and the other will be for all adults without documentation/identity papers and those who do have papers and they are found to be convicted or suspected of a crime.
Also, instead of the evacuees being placed on busses willy-nilly, to be sorted out and families reunited once they are at the shelter.
I think it is quite telling that the reporter uses the term "herd of evacuees" we are nothing but cattle to the control freaks in the government and corporations. As the technology of track and control rapidly advance, that will become more and more apparent.
Oh yeah, this is going to work out just great.
Because, you know, law enforcement never fucks up. Certainly not during a massive disaster requiring the evacuation of thousands of people.
But, uh, it's all about The Children, so we can all stop asking questions, now.
@ Ken
Since when do U.S. citizens have to carry papers that prove anything other than driving eligibility on a day-to-day basis? Not being a convicted felon, I don't know if they have to carry around extra papers, but people who aren't in trouble with the law don't have to carry around any papers if they don't want to. So if I were in Texas during a disaster, I wouldn't have anything that might be considered papers except my drivers license. And what would that prove to the authorities since I'm out of state? Not much.
And while it might be possible for an offender to repeat offend on a bus ride out of an emergency area, it is also possible that a person could commit one of the crimes for the first time that kept others off the bus with the small children, elderly and disabled (Not that either case has to happen, or that they are the only 2 possibilities). Throw lots of people together in a small space during a stressful situation and it's hard to tell how they're gonna act. The numerous negative outcomes listed by lots of others on this thread demonstrate how this might not be the best thought out plan.
Wouldn't it be much simpler just to keep unaccompanied children under special protection during an emergency? Kids that are with their parents should be protected, by their parents.
The reasoning for this policy just doesn't make any sense, accept to grant even more power to authorities during an emergency. In practicality this would do nothing but cause delays.
That's because the reasoning for this is just a lie.
And I'm sorry but do the AT&T wristbands sound like the IBM concentration camp tattoo numbers from Nazi Germany?
There is a reason for this type of legislation. Refugee camps are the most dangerous places in the world, especially women and children. This legislation is about keeping people safe. Lets face it, American citizens are not prepared for HUGE emergencies. We go about our lives with all the stability we could ask for. So when a major emergency happens we will see the worst of people.
I do agree, however, with most threads especially Englishnerd (17) "This is might not be the best thought out plan".
This is based on good intentions but really if the Germans were invaiding Texas (or whatever the emergency is) are we really going be that organized? Probably not. So I think we can just file this one away with the rest of the "illusion of security" legisation we've seen over the years.
Wow, what a great way to ensure that people don't get evacuated -- got a family member who's got a criminal background? Not to mention all the illegals who are going to have to hunker down and die in place.
It's bad enough when there are natural disasters, but when the disaster is heightened by stupid government (see: Katrina, New Orleans) that's just criminal....
I think this is a response to what happened when we got all the evacuees from Katrina here in Houston. The murder rate doubled in many areas, as did pedophilia, rape and other crimes. No one seems to care about the quasi-victimless crimes, like drug use, but many people are annoyed at the violent crime. It's an interesting response, because I am willing to bet their next response is to require any state sending evacuees to do the same.
What a strange world we live in.
Why don't they just put little lights in people's hands: green for non-convicts and red for convicts. When a red person gets too close to a green person, their light turns black and they explode? That would work better. (insert sarcasm)
I'm a Texan, too, living on the Gulf Coast, and went through the horrific evacuation for Hurricane Rita. My co-worker's mother died in that.
This is a press release for propaganda purposes, and that's an end to it. It ain't gonna happen.
And I'm sorry but do the AT&T wristbands sound like the IBM concentration camp tattoo numbers from Nazi Germany?>/i>
Oh please. They'll contain the exact same information found on your driver's license or State-issed ID. And the article said that people can *choose* to get one. "For those residents wanting them."
Hey, i thought they already had cattle cars with shackles ready for this kind of event?
What a load of horribly badly planned bullshit.
The comparisons to airline metal detectors are apt. And truly. Who carries these papers around with them everywhere? This is absurdly stupid.
When a fire is behind you, do you want to shove everyone you can onto a bus without thinking, or makes sure that nobody on the bus is a sicko first?
How about we just have security people on the bus, ready to arrest someone who is caught doing bad things on the bus if and when that happens, instead of screening them beforehand in a logisitical nightmare? (And they can just have batons and law enforcement skills. No tasers or guns, please.)
And I really do not like the whole sectioning off society into "desirables" and "undesirables" idea. People can change for the better. People who did bad things in the past can do better things in the future and shouldn't be treated like lesser beings for the rest of their lives. Now I wouldn't neccesarily be friends with a former criminal, but the gov shouldn't obsessively keep track of them at the cost of inconvenience, paranoia and in this situation possible death for everyone else around them...
Yet again, this fucking place makes me sick. Will the US have sane government again in my lifetime? Let's take bets.