“THE NEW MINOR(ITY)... ANOTHER RIDICULOUS PROPOSAL... OR NOT?” - Another Article From My Old GeoCities Blog

(Originally written as a letter to the editor in the 1990's and then re-written for my GeoCities blog in 2003 and now here... as it's still applicable today!!!)

If so many "other adults" want to discriminate against 18, 19 and 20 year old adults, then those "other adults" should VOTE to raise the "age of majority" (adulthood) back up to 21 years of age.

Several things that will change or should be changed for "The New Minor(ity)":

1. The new "minor’s" will no longer be able to VOTE, join the military, sign the selective service card, get married, sign contracts or perform any other legal matter reserved for adults. Further, the new "minor’s" should not be allowed to become a legal guardian (parent) to a baby. If a new "minor" has, or fathers a baby, then one of each of the "minor’s" parents or guardians has to sign legal guardianship papers and agree to raise and support the "minor’s" and their baby until the "minor’s" reach the age of 21. One adult parent of the "minor mom" and "minor dad" must sign as legal guardians, making sure the rest of the taxpayers are not forced to pay for the acts of these new "minor’s". (Actually, this concept should be instituted today, even if the age of majority is not raised back up to 21.)

2. The new "minor’s" will be treated as juveniles for all criminal acts as long as they are "minor’s" (i.e.- Slapped on the wrist for most crimes.) Except, I propose creating a "three strikes and you’re out" and "nine innings" program where a new "minor" offender convicted "three times" or arrested "nine times" would be treated as an adult on all subsequent arrests and convictions. (This too would make sense today, even if the age of majority were not raised.)

3. The new "minor’s" should not be taxed in any way, shape or form, since our country was founded to prevent "taxation without representation". Since I don't see where any of the politicians represent the new "minor’s" and the new "minor’s" would not be allowed to VOTE, they should be tax exempt for all income earned and purchases made. (This should be made part of the tax code today.) (But we know that our "tax and spend" politicians are not going to exempt this large group of "minor" taxpayers, even though these same politicians have no problem passing age specific laws and prohibitions against this same group of "minor" taxpayers.)

4. The new "minor’s" will be tax deductible to parents for a few more years. Since the new "minor’s" will not be legally responsible for their actions until they reach the age of 21, their parents will be held responsible for any accidents, civil and criminal actions, debts, education, auto and health insurance, etc. Further, their parents will not be able to treat their new "minor" (18, 19 and 20 year old) children as adults either.

5. The new "minor’s" will not be able to control their own bank accounts or credit cards and would therefore require their parents to co-sign for everything the "minor’s" do. Further, the parents would have to accompany them on trips to the mall, stores, etc. to sign checks and credit card vouchers. This would affect all retail sales, car sales, etc. and would put additional strains on the leisure time of the American family.

6. Of course, the new "minor’s" will not be able to smoke, drink, gamble or buy a handgun, BUT HECK; they can’t do those things now. (Or at least not in the very near future with the way things are going.)

Obvious the above proposals are ridiculous. I think that all "18, 19 and 20-year-old adults" should have the same rights and privileges as any "other adult". Because of spineless politicians, special interest groups and the "other adults" (who sit quietly by and watch as this age discrimination takes place), many of the rights and privileges are being stripped, or have been stripped, from the new "minor(ity)".

I propose reversing this trend and giving back all of the adult rights and privileges to 18, 19 and 20 year olds and getting rid of this new "minor(ity)". Or we should VOTE to change the age of majority back to 21 years of age and strip anyone under 21 of all rights and privileges, granted to adults, and the responsibility that comes with those rights and privileges.

NOTICE:

ALL OF YOU SPINELESS POLITICIANS AND SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS (i.e.-M. A. D. D., etc.) CAN NOW TELL ALL THE "OTHER ADULTS" TO STAND UP, FOR A FEW MORE YEARS, AND RAISE THEIR NEW "MINOR" CHILDREN AND THE BABIES THAT COME WITH THEM. FURTHER, YOU CAN TELL THE "OTHER ADULTS" TO PAY THE INCREASES ON THE FAMILY AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICY THAT WILL INEVITABLY HAPPEN WHEN ALL OF THESE NEW "MINOR’S" ARE ADDED BACK TO THE FAMILY POLICY. THE "OTHER ADULTS" WILL HAVE TO HELP WITH THE SHOPPING AND GO TO TRAFFIC COURT AND JUVENILE COURT WITH THEIR NEW "MINOR" CHILDREN. THE "OTHER ADULTS" WILL ALSO BE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR NEW "MINOR" CHILDREN UNTIL THEY REACH THE AGE OF 21, INSTEAD OF THE CURRENT AGE OF 18.

ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO RAISE THE AGE OF MAJORITY BACK TO 21?

Sarcastically yours... or not?

Lenny Vasbinder

Here's the original post on GeoCities, now archived on the Wayback Machine Internet Archive...

http://web.archive.org/web/20050214191609/www.geocities.com/LennyVasbinderPI/Politics_TheNewMinority

My Even More Ridiculous Proposal...Or Not? - Another Article From My Old GeoCities Blog

Here is another archived article I did on my GeoCities website years ago but with all of the "State's Rights" issues happening right now due to the illegal ObamaCare legislation that infringes on State's rights and citizen's rights, I thought I would re-post this old article here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20050329022622/www.geocities.com/LennyVasbinderPI/Politics_Ridiculous

I originally wrote this Letter-To-The-Editor to several papers back when former President Clinton was proposing a Federalized DWI Law, which I thought was ridiculous, so I called this...

MY EVEN MORE RIDICULOUS PROPOSAL.. OR NOT?

Since everyone associated with Washington, D.C. (i.e.-FEDERAL POLITICIANS, NON-ELECTED FEDERAL JUDGES, WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS, ETC.) want to tell the States, Parishes, Counties, Cities and the People how to regulate themselves, or face CUT-OFF or CUT-BACK of Federal Funds, why not just DISSOLVE ALL CITY, PARISH, COUNTY AND STATE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT? Then we can make all of the existing state and local laws, rules and regulations into federal laws, rules and regulations. Then we can just let everything and everyone be run by the Federal Government in Washington, D.C., since there is already the President, Congress and all the various Federal Agencies run by bureaucrats already.

NOTICE TO ALL CITY, PARISH, COUNTY AND STATE POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS AND EMPLOYEES:

If you do not want MY EVEN MORE RIDICULOUS PROPOSAL to eventually come true, then you better start showing some autonomy and follow the ideas and dictates of our Founding Fathers. Begin by immediately protesting any federalized proposal that contradicts or usurps our State, Parish, County and City laws, rules and regulations, and the beliefs of the majority of the people. For example, Louisiana politicians eventually raised the drinking age from 18 to 21, not by a vote or proposal by our people, but ONLY after federal threats of cutbacks in federal highway funds, and lobbying by special interest groups.

An 18, 19 and 20 year old is either a MINOR FOR ALL PURPOSES or an ADULT FOR ALL PURPOSES, which includes buying a beer. This has nothing to do with promoting drinking and driving or relaxing the existing DWI laws, as I am against that, but it is RIDICULOUS that the liberals in Washington, D. C. want to stop an 18 year old ADULT from buying a beer, even though these same 18 year old ADULT men are required under federal law to register for the selective service, be eligible for the draft and even go to WAR for our country. These same 18-year-old ADULTS have the right to vote which many politicians seem to forget!

NO POLITICIAN IN WASHINGTON, D.C. OR ANY STATE that I know of has ever proposed a criminal law against two minor teenagers that have sex and make an illegitimate baby! Which is more detrimental to society? The 18 year old ADULT who buys a beer or the unmarried teenage moms with illegitimate babies. Once again, I am not saying it is O. K. to drink and drive, only that a LEGAL ADULT should have all the other rights and privileges as any other LEGAL ADULT, since two minors can legally make illegitimate babies without any legal repercussions. IN FACT, WE END UP PAYING THEM TO DO IT, VIA WELFARE AND OTHER SOCIAL PROGRAMS.

The latest reported statistics claim that there were 40,000 traffic fatalities and the overwhelming majority WERE NOT caused by drunk drivers, and of the ones that were caused by drunk drivers, the average blood alcohol content was 0.17%. In that same year, there were an estimated 1,000,000 abortions, and more than 20,000,000 abortions since Roe v. Wade, yet when our State tried to curb these irresponsible people, the Courts said NO!

Irresponsible people having un-protected sex and using abortion as a means of birth control are far more detrimental to society than an 18 year old ADULT buying a beer.

DISCUSSION POINTS:

THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS, who were, and still are much wiser than most of the current politicians, was that each State should have autonomy without an overpowering and encumbering Federal Government telling them or their people how to run THEIR STATE. This was intended so that States would be different as far as laws, rules and regulations are concerned, so that each State would have to compete for business, industry and even to attract and retain its tax paying citizen base. For example, if one State started taxing and regulating people too much more than another neighboring State, those people, businesses and industry could move to the less burdensome State. These types of market forces would have caused States to compete with lower taxes, better schools, better police and fire protection, better roads, etc., in order to attract and retain more people and businesses. This same analogy applies to Cities, Parishes and Counties within any given State.

I think that the way the Federal Government is now collecting the money (i.e.-our tax dollars) and only giving it back to us if we "stay in line" with Washington, D. C. is RIDICULOUS, and against the original intent of our Founding Fathers and the Constitution of The United States.

IF THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN ANY GIVEN STATE WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TELL THEM HOW TO LIVE, WORK AND RAISE THEIR CHILDREN, THEN THOSE PEOPLE SHOULD VOTE TO DISSOLVE THEIR CITY, PARISH, COUNTY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS AND GO UNDER FEDERAL CONTROL. THE PEOPLE IN THAT STATE, THAT DO NOT AGREE WITH FEDERAL CONTROL OF THEIR STATE ARE FREE TO MOVE TO ANOTHER MORE FAVORABLE STATE.

NOTICE TO CITIZENS:

IF YOU DO NOT WANT THE ABOVE TO HAPPEN, START TELLING YOUR CITY, PARISH, COUNTY AND STATE LAWMAKERS AND BUREAUCRATS TO STAND UP TO WASHINGTON, D. C. (many cannot, due to being so spineless) AND DO WHAT OUR CITIZENS WANT, NOT WHAT SOME FEDERAL JUDGE, POLITICIAN OR BUREAUCRAT WANTS US TO DO!

For example, tell our ELECTED Sheriffs and Judges to stop releasing prisoners due to some liberal Federal judges ruling and just pack the convicted criminals into the jails until the seams are bulging. WATCH THE CRIME RATE GO DOWN THEN! It should not cost the taxpayers $25.00 to $40.00 per day to house convicted criminals while they serve out their punishments. Until our elected Sheriffs and Judges start standing up for STATES RIGHTS, we will continue to pay huge amounts of money to give these convicts free living space, free meals, free medical treatment, free recreation, etc., etc.

I KNOW THAT SOME OF THIS SOUNDS RIDICULOUS AT FIRST BUT RE-READ THIS LETTER AND START THINKING ABOUT THE OVERALL MESSAGE. IT ACTUALLY STARTS TO MAKE SENSE!

Lenny Vasbinder

P.S.-This writer has no financial interest in any alcohol beverage outlet, but is very interested in RIDICULOUS government policies and against the ever-growing size of the Federal Government.

Here is the Preamble of The Constitution and The Brittanica Concise Reference excerpt from Yahoo!

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The Brittanica Concise Reference from Yahoo! Reference site explains the Constitution as follows:

(Pay particular attention to the 2nd Paragraph)

Fundamental law of the U.S. federal system of government and a landmark document of the Western world. It is the oldest written national constitution in operation, completed in 1787 at a convention of 55 delegates who met in Philadelphia, ostensibly to amend the Articles of Confederation. Because ratification in many states hinged on the promised addition of a Bill of Rights, the Constitution was not fully certified until 1791.

The framers were especially concerned with limiting the power of the government and securing the liberty of citizens. The Constitution's separation of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, the checks and balances of each branch against the other, and the explicit guarantees of individual liberty were all designed to strike a balance between authority and liberty.

Article I vests all legislative powers in the Congress--the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article II vests executive power in the president. Article III places judicial power in the hands of the courts. Article IV deals, in part, with relations among the states and with the privileges of the citizens, Article V with amendment procedure, and Article VI with public debts and the supremacy of the Constitution. Article VII gives ratification terms. The 10th Amendment restricted the national government's powers to those expressly listed in the Constitution; the states, unless otherwise restricted, possess all the remaining (or "residual") powers of government. Amendments to the Constitution may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a convention called by Congress on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states. (All subsequent amendments have been initiated by Congress.) Amendments proposed by Congress must be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures or by conventions in as many states. Twenty-seven amendments have been added to the Constitution since 1789. In addition to the Bill of Rights, these include the 13th (1865), abolishing slavery; the 14th (1868), requiring due process and equal protection under the law; the 15th (1870), guaranteeing the right to vote regardless of race; the 17th (1913), providing for the direct election of U.S. senators; the 19th (1920), instituting women's suffrage, and the 22nd (1951), limiting the presidency to two terms. See also civil liberty, commerce clause, Equal Rights Amendment, establishment clause, freedom of speech, judiciary, states' rights.

Sincerely,

Lenny Vasbinder

"NUKE First, Ask Questions Later" - My 9/11 Memorial Song Written In 2001 On My GeoCities Site

In the hours and days following 9/11/2001, I was very serious about NUKING them damn Terrorists. I started writing a Song based on the last words of an e-mail I sent out on 9/11/2001. When I wrote this I was serious but I am glad we were able to kick their butts without the need for Nukes and with minimum American casualties.

Here is a re-print of the actual e-mail:

-----Original Message-----

From: Leonard Vasbinder

Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:54 AM

Subject: NUKE FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

I, Lenny Vasbinder, am sick and tired of all these little piss-ante third world countries or their wannabe leaders kicking USAround. I hereby call for complete and total annihilation of the capital cities of each and every country that harbors or fosters terrorism. I don't remember US talking to other world leaders before we NUKED Japan after they attacked US. I won't stop this battle cry until the USA stands up and starts kicking some towelhead ass.

NUKE FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

Based on those words I started writing some of the original lyrics which ultimately led to the following song.

NUKE FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

(Written by Lenny Vasbinder 09-12-2001 thru the end of 2001)

YOU MAY HAVE GOTTEN OUR WORLD TRADE CENTER,

BUT AMERICA WILL SURVIVE_______.

OSAMA BIN LADEN, YOU BETTER START PRAYING,

CAUSE WERE COMING FOR YOU DEAD OR ALIVE__.


YOU GOT FOUR PLANES_, THE PENTAGON_,

AND THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS___.

BUT NOW YOU’RE HIDING OUT IN CAVES

WITH THE HELP OF THE TALIBAN___.


(chorus one)

IF YOU ARE A TERRORIST NATION,

YOU’RE GONNA FACE ANNIHILATION,

IF YOU ARE AN AMERICAN HATER, WE’LL

NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

(b/g-NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER! repeat twice)


ALL YOU LITTLE TERRORIST PUNKS,

WE’VE BEEN TAKING YOUR CRAP FOR YEARS__,

BUT NOW YOU’VE PISSED AMERICA OFF

AND YOU’VE GOT SOMETHING TO FEAR___.


WE’LL SEIZE YOUR ASSETS, FREEZE ACCOUNTS,

CUT THE CASH FLOW TO YOUR CELLS__.

WE’LL LOCK THEM UP, THROW AWAY THE KEY,

WATCH ‘EM DIE AND GO TO HELL!___


(chorus two)

IF YOU ARE A TERRORIST LOVER,

YOU BETTER HIDE AND RUN FOR COVER.

IF YOU ARE AN AMERICAN HATER, WE’LL,

NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

(b/g-NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!...repeat twice)


WE MAY JUST KILL A MILLION AFGHANIS

AND THAT MIGHT BE A SIN___.

BUT AFTER WE LAUNCH A COUPLE OF NUKES,

THE TALIBAN WILL TURN YOU IN___.


(chorus one)

IF YOU ARE A TERRORIST NATION,

YOU’RE GONNA FACE ANNIHILATION,

IF YOU ARE AN AMERICAN HATER, WE’LL

NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

(b/g-NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!...repeat twice)


WELL, WE KICKED YOUR ASS WITHOUT OUR NUKES,

NOW AFGHANISTAN IS FREE___.

OSAMA, YOU NEVER CAME OUT YOUR CAVE,

BUT WE’LL HUNT YOU DOWN, YOU’LL SEE___.


(chorus two)

IF YOU ARE A TERRORIST LOVER,

YOU BETTER HIDE AND RUN FOR COVER.

IF YOU ARE AN AMERICAN HATER, WE’LL,

NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

(b/g-NUKE FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER!...repeat)


Dedicated to the victims of 9-11-2001 and all victims of Terrorism.

Copyright-2001-Lenny Vasbinder

I hope that before we ever risk large numbers of American Military Men & Women, we will use strategic and tactical NUKES. Look at the number of American lives we saved when we NUKED Japan during WWII. That is why we did it then... and I'm all for using the same reasoning today!

If any band would like to hear this song for possible recording purposes, please feel free to e-mail me. The song as written has a rock or country rock sound to it.

Sincerely,

Lenny Vasbinder

Originally published online on my GeoCities website which is archived here...

http://web.archive.org/web/20060504223805/www.geocities.com/LennyVasbinderPI/Politics_Start

Lenny Vasbinder For President (My First Nomination Back In 2002, Thanks To Dennis Hirstius)

NOTE - This is a re-post from an old GeoCities website since Yahoo shut down GeoCities and for some reason, this page did not get archived by the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. The original URL was http://www.GeoCities.com/LennyVasbinderForPresident.

Lenny Vasbinder for President!!!!

Congratulations Lenny! You beat me to the punch. When I read the insulting post that Mr. Brown wrote I was livid. He must think we all just fell off the turnip truck.

After I read the post I saved it because I didn't want to respond in the heated mood I was in. I'm sick and tired of being thought of as "stupid" (quoting Charlene Mora when referring to licensees) by this group.

My message to the board is.... You can screw us but we don't have to like it! It's my estimation that the ones that are lacking in intelligence are the ones that take themselves seriously enough to believe that they are necessary and doing the public a service. Give me a break!

Mr. Brown's letter was quite eloquent. It was one of the finest examples of rhetorical nepotism I've ever read!

Jim....can I call you Jim? I aint buying.

Dennis Hirstius

From the Co-Moderator [of P-I Talk Yahoo Group]: And Steve Divine as Vice President!

On that political ticket we would begin to see the end to the [LA P.I.] Board's misteatment of us, their walking ATM's....... thanks for your post!

--------------

HERE IS HOW IT ALL STARTED:

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:20:00 -0600
From: "Jim Brown"
Subject: Response from JIM BROWN

I put forth a concerted effort to read every posting that goes on the PI-Talk site. Some postings are informative; some are thought-provoking and some are so very unprofessional. I suppose it gives the authors a chance to vent their frustrations and to be heard by their peers.

I take personal exception to a recent posting whereas the author stated emphatically that the Board office was simply another bureaucratic governmental entity that was poorly run. I challenge any reader to find another governmental office that has gone through 3 consecutive audits conducted or sanctioned by the Louisiana Legislative Auditors and that has had absolutely NO exceptions reported. That is 6 years of conducting and doing business as it should be done. I could go on and on and give many positive examples as to how the Board office conducts business. I have an idea that most private investigators already know this, so, I will not bore the readers with any further information in this regard.

I was not here when the Private Investigator Statute was enacted by the Legislature and signed into law by Governor Edwards. I cannot speak with any intelligence or facts as to why the statute was created. BUT!!!! The law is on the books and I am convinced that the law was created so that the citizens of Louisiana could/would be protected from unscrupulous and unethical men and women working as private investigators.

The industry, in my opinion, needs oversight by someone so that action can be taken against those that choose to fleece and bilk the public out of their hard-earned money. Does this mean that ALL private investigators are dishonest, unscrupulous, unethical or otherwise bad people? NO, indeed.........absolutely not....BUT!!! there are those among you that are and they give people in YOUR industry a bad name. This is where the Board and Board office plays a vital role in making certain that those "bad" people in the industry are made to play by the rules and conduct themselves as professionals.

There are, as I write this, a total of 44 states, including the District of Columbia, that regulates the private investigator industry. That means that only 7 states do not regulate private investigators, statewide. I believe some are regulated in cities and counties rather than by the state.

In those 44 states, the regulating authority, by statute, charges fees to become licensed and a fees to renew that license. Please be assured that some states charge higher fees and some charge lower fees. It is my belief that Louisiana falls somewhere in the middle.

Those fees that are charged by the various and sundry states are used by the regulating authority to conduct their business. All private investigators, regardless of the state in which they reside and work, pay those fees so that they have the right, authority and privilege of working as a private investigator. You pay a fee for a drivers license, a marriage license, a concealed weapons permit, a hunting license and various and sundry other licensing fees so that you may participate. YOU have the choice and the right NOT to participate.

Much to the surprise of some of you, those fees become a part of the regulating authority and no longer belong to you. I know that some of you become disgruntled has to how those fees are spent. Understood!!! Please be advised that the Board was not created for YOU, the private investigator and is not here to assist you, help you or otherwise support you. Brutal but honest!!!!

Some of you have been going on and on about the situation in New Orleans and the fact that if you reside and work in Orleans Parish, you are required to be licensed there, TOO. I may be wrong, but it is my belief that if you reside and work as a private investigator in Orleans Parish, it is a requirement that you must get a Parish Occupational License, NOT a private investigators license. Please keep in mind that New Orleans is under a Home Rule Charter and has the right and authority to do what they do in this regard. NOW!!! It is not a Board responsibility or duty to get into a long, drawn-out legal fight with New Orleans on the behalf of private investigators. Can you just imagine what that would cost???. Perhaps the three or four professional private investigator organizations operating within the state could address this issue with the authorities in Orleans Parish. Regardless of your opinions or thoughts in this matter, it is simply not a function of the Board.

It is also NOT a function of the Board to order or tell a police agency how they should conduct their business. If the police authority or agency has a reporting policy for private investigators when working within that jurisdiction, it seems to me that you will just have to comply or take the necessary steps to change that UNWRITTEN policy. NOT a Board function simply because you think it is.

There is an ample supply of postings about the amount of money that the Board has on deposit. Perhaps I can address some of your questions, concerns and consternation. The Board, to my understanding, at one time was conducting business with an extreme low fund balance. When I reported to work in September 1997, the Board had about $85,000.00 in a checking account. Fairly soon after that, the fund balance began to creep up and up. On demand and authority of the Louisiana Legislative Auditor, the Board was under an obligation to place some funds in an interest-bearing account, which we did. There are many reasons why the fund balance reached the amounts that it did. Those can be explained BUT not in this format.

If you are one of those people that is paying attention to the Board's budget, you will surely take notice that the fund is slowly going down. There are many reasons for this BUT will not be explained in this format. If you will simply have patience, your wish will certainly come true and the Board's funds will quickly go down. A slush fund......????? Give me a break...No Board money can be spent, ILLEGALLY. A. Edward Hardin, Board Chairman and Financial Officer for the Board, pays extreme close attention, as I do, as to how the funds are expended. Needless to say, someone is watching and the Louisiana Legislative Auditor also watches. I wonder where all the complainers were when the Board had NO money and I wonder if they will complain when the money is all gone???. What is a happy medium??? What will make the complainers happy??? Please don't get me wrong..I know where you are coming from when you see funds expended for reasons that seems ludicrous. Bottom Line.....a concerted effort is made to make certain that this business is operated in a professional and ethical manner.

You may be interested to know that NOT one complainer and griper has made an effort to walk into the Board office and to sit down, one-on one and discuss the issues that seem so irritating to many people. I tend to believe that I could make a difference in some negative attitudes. Give it a try. Perhaps some want to continue "raising cane" and using this format to instigate those that are easily instigated.

You may be interested in knowing that the Board office receives very very few complaints concerning UNLICENSED activity. I tend to believe that we have made an impact in this regard. NO, I do not believe it is nonexistent. I believe is less prevalent that it was. You may also be interested in knowing that the Board office aggressively investigates all complaints received from citizens concerning activity by licensed and unlicensed investigators.

There is posting after posting complaining about the Board's travel habits. The Board considers and approves all Board travel, including mine. A majority of my official travel is attending the conference held twice a year by the International Association of Security and Investigative Regulators. Starting in 2003 only one confernce will be held. Through the Board's membership in IASIR, we have signed eight LIMITED reciprocity agreements and two FULL reciprocity agreements. Other good things have come as a result of the Board's membership in IASIR. Please keep in mind, ALL Board travel is closely scrutinized by the State Auditors.

I am SO aware that this posting will not stop the complainers. I am simply making an attempt to educate some of the readers and to invite those people who have questions to make an effort to find the answers.

I will say this: Be extremely careful what you ask for and make absolutely certain that you actually want what you are seeking. Asking to abolish the Board and the PI Statute has extreme ramifications. There is a professional way to proceed and there is an unprofessional and unethical way to get things done.

A large majority of the 1468 licensed private investigators in Louisiana are very nice, professional and ethical people. At least, the ones I personally know are in that category.

I personally wish you and yours a very merry Christmas and a wonderful and prosperous 2003. Working and pulling together, in the same direction, makes the task so much easier to attain. Take a close look at and around you and see if you "own" some of the things that are wrong within your industry. Kind words tend to go a long way. Vicious attacks are supported by very very few of your comrades.

Jim Brown
Executive Director
Louisiana State Board of Private Investigator Examiners


AND NOW... LENNY VASBINDER'S PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH REPLY TO JIM BROWN.

Dear Jim Brown and PI-Talk,

I am sure most of you, just like me are glad to hear that Jim Brown does indeed read and consider our complaints and concerns about the Board. I don't think that most of us ever actually complained about Jim or his staff. In fact, when it came to "our" attention that some Board Members were trying to oust him, we wrote vigilantly in his favor. It is a shame that he had to throw himself on the sword on behalf of the spineless Board Members. It is the Board Members who ignore our complaints and concerns and waste so much of our money. I am not sure if the actual Board Office is cost effective and efficient, but I do know that for hundreds of years prior to 1993, we did not have to fund another Government office that does not care what the people that fund it think. Jim made it clear several times that his office is there to serve the public, not the P.I.'s, yet it is the P.I.'s that pay the bills! Just another of the typical things that Government does WRONG compared to the private sector.

AFTER ANALYZING HIS COMMENTS AND ATTITUDE, I BECAME MORE AND MORE CONCERNED ABOUT HIM. I will discuss his comments paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraph One - His comment about giving us a chance to "vent" is typical. If the Board had let P.I.'s "vent" in what were supposed to be open meetings, we would not have had to resort to forming forums like this. Our being able to "vent" is one of the big reasons that PI-Talk was formed. Government offices just don't get it!

Paragraph Two - Just because a Government office makes it through an audit is not something to be congratulated.. it is expected! When a Government office does things to lower its costs and reduce the fees/taxes that it charges.. that is to be congratulated! That has not happened in the ten years that the P.I. Board has been around. Suzanne Haik Terrell is one of the few "Politicians" or Government Offices that has actually done this task.

Paragraph Three - He talks of the "unscrupulous and unethical men and women working as private investigators." yet never mentions the "unscrupulous and unethical Board members". There are only seven Board Members and several of them have been indicted and/or sued for their behavior. There are thousands of P.I.'s and I bet as a percentage, our indictment/lawsuit rate is far lower! The reason the Board was formed is the same as so many other "Public Safety Laws"... painted as a picture to protect the Public but then merely used for Revenue Enhancement and Political Appointments in the years and decades following.

Paragraph Four - Of course he feels the industry needs oversight. He would not have his job if he did not feel that way. There were and still are hundreds of laws on the books in every City and Parish that already protected the citizens from someone who tried to "bilk" them out of their "hard earned money". Too bad he does not care about OUR "hard earned money" and how we have been "bilked" also. He complains about the "few" in our industry that give "us" a bad name. I wonder if he ever looks in the mirror of his "industry" (Government) to see how many in his "industry" give them a far worse name! I WILL PUT "OUR" INDUSTRY'S RECORD AGAINST HIS ANY DAY!

Paragraph Five - Unfortunately, State Governments around this great country saw "our" industry as a way of "Revenue Enhancement" which led 44 of them to dipping into our pockets. Fortunately, there are still 7 states that have let their P.I.'s keep "their" money!

Paragraph Six - That is another typical Government attitude. Instead of trying to have the lowest fees/taxes, they are happy with themselves to ride somewhere "in the middle".

Paragraph Seven - All of those "Licenses" that he seems to hold in high regard are just some more of the "Revenue Enhancements" that Government started under the guise of "Public Safety". He did not mention the "Brake Tag/Inspection Sticker" which is one of the worse. I pay my $10.00 a year and haven't had an actual "Inspection" in so long, I don't know what one would actually look like. Same as "Mandatory Insurance" which he does not mention.. started under our MANY CONVICTED INSURANCE COMMISSIONERS.. the latest being Jim Brown (no relation to "our" Jim Brown, of course!). Our Insurance rates are still higher than any other Southern State of similar socio-economic conditions and much higher than the States without "Mandatory Insurance", yet the States without "Mandatory Insurance" actually have a higher percentage of their drivers insured because their rates are almost half of Louisiana's rates. Thank God, "our" Jim Brown says we have the "choice" to keep our jobs as long as we pay the extorted fees/taxes to the Board. I guess he forgot about the two hundred years that we were able to have our jobs without having to pay these extorted fees/taxes. Typical Government attitude. They think it is their good graces that allow us to live, rather than recognizing that they are actually inhibiting our rights to live. Just like with taxes.. it is OUR money, NOT YOURS!

Paragraph Eight - Just another typical Government attitude! HE THINKS IT IS NOT OUR MONEY. IT IS NOW THEIR'S AND THERE ISN'T ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. "BRUTAL BUT HONEST!!!"

Paragraph Nine - Not only is he completely unaware of the "situation in New Orleans", he has the gall to say "Can you just imagine what that would cost???" as if that would be a waste of "our" money. At least that would be using "our" money to make things better for us, rather than worse! New Orleans is so messed up as far as P.I.'s are concerned that it is actually illegal, in some opinions, for a Metairie P.I. to work in New Orleans without a Occupational License and P.I. License from New Orleans. The problem with that is you cannot get an Occupational License without having an office there. I had to "beat" that system for years until the City finally gave up trying to get my money. I did end up establishing an "shell office" in New Orleans and got an Occupational License for $50.00 just so certain Police Agencies would not give me grief. I just got an Occupational License in my business name for "Court Run Service" and whoever decided to check my occupational license could not tell what it was actually for. LOL! The last time I checked with City Hall, P.I.'s were required to get a separate license, undergo a background check and get bonded. Another $500.00 plus in costs that the City is trying to extort from us, of course, in the guise of "Public Safety".

Paragraph Ten - Another typical Government attitude. "That's not my job!"

Paragraph Eleven - He talks about only having "$85,000.00" of "our" money in excess funds, yet Eddie and Steve have regularly stated that they have around $250,000.00 in excess funds. I tend to believe Eddie and Steve in this conflict. Of course, he says the "$85,000.00" was in 1997, which means that he could be agreeing and acknowledging that "we" have been overcharged another $165,000.00 in the past five years. Over $25,000.00 a year, yet when they wanted to cut something back, they cut back the "free" (not really since we already paid for it) Continuing Education Classes which cost "us" $10,000.00 a year (only $25.00 per investigator that utilized that service).

Paragraph Twelve - When did the Board have "NO money". I remember paying my $300.00 or more in 1992 to get my Agency License. Except for Board Actions which may have wasted "our" money in the beginning even worse than today, I don't remember the Board having "No money". Throughout the previous paragraphs and again here he says "...BUT will not be explained in this format." WHY NOT???? And if not here, WHERE???? He then alludes "... that this business is operated in a professional and ethical manner." but a real business does not take money from one person and then tell them it is going to be used for someone else and there is nothing you can do about it. That is a Government attitude!

Paragraph Thirteen - You are right that I am not going to drive to Baton Rouge to complain. My attitude about the worth of this Board, and so many other useless Government Offices, has been made abundantly clear in my postings. I don't think wasting your or my time would really change anything. We are obviously diametrically opposite in our beliefs about what this Government Office actually does.

Paragraph Fourteen - You are right about not receiving very many complaints about unlicensed investigators. I would never tell on the ones I know of and belive me... there are many out there. And the majority of the rest of the public does not even know that P.I.'s are licensed. In the nine years that I carried my "$200.00 plastic coated Dick" as I jokingly referred to my license, I never once had anyone ask me for it. Not in all of my depositions or Court Appearances either. As long as you do a good job, the overwhelming majority of the people do not bother to ask.

Paragraph Fifteen - Of course the Board considers and approves all Board travel... talk about the Fox guarding the Henhouse. Most of the Board Members are too spineless to challenge each other. We were fortunate for Charlene Mora's inadvertent post to PI-Talk where she and other Board Members were pre-determining how money would be spent. Do you really think they would not do the same for Board Travel???? And are you actually proud that in TEN YEARS, the Board has only been able to get into 10 of the 44 States that are Licensed??? If Mississippi had P.I. Laws, the Board would only have a 33% success rate with our bordering states, and then only with Arkansas which is good for the northernmost P.I.'s in the State, but what about all along the Western edge.. Ten years later and still no limited or full reciprocity agreement with Texas. How many tens, or hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on this 33% success rate with neighboring States and 23% success rate with the rest of the country??? And I still say that prior to all of your beloved Boards all over the country, P.I.'s were able to go into all 50 states. 100% reciprocity without Boards... 23-33% with Boards... HMMMMMMMMM.

Paragraph Sixteen - You are right! You merely gave us additional information which legitimizes our complaints. I know you mean well, but you are fighting for the wrong side.

Paragraph Seventeen - I would much rather go back to where all 50 States were open for us to do business, rather than 23-33% of them.

Paragraph Eighteen - So now the majority are very nice, professional and ethical. It took you Eighteen paragraphs to finally say what should have been the focus of your post. Well, I'm sure I don't fall into that category... in your opinion. And I won't lose a bit of sleep because of it!

Paragraph Nineteen - MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO YOU AND ALL THE OTHER POSTERS AND READERS OF PI-TALK. THERE ARE MY KIND WORDS. LET'S SEE HOW FAR THEY GO WITH THE BOARD. BUT REMEMBER, FOR EVERY COMPLAINT YOU READ ABOUT HERE, THERE ARE TEN TIMES AS MANY THAT DO NOT VOICE THEIR COMPLAINTS. I KNOW THAT FROM THE MANY PRIVATE E-MAIL "DITTO'S" THAT I GET.

Once again, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all.

Lenny Vasbinder, P.I.
LNVPI@hotmail.com
http://www.GeoCities.com/LennyVasbinderPI

P.S. - Jim Brown's post and my reply were sent via e-mail to Governor Foster through his e-mail service on his website. I know PI-Talk cannot be programmed to do this but maybe Eddie or Steve can do this manually so that the Governor will continually get our complaints. Here is the URL for his e-mail service. Unfortunately, he does not have a regular e-mail address that I've been able to find so you have to cut and paste baby! http://www.gov.state.la.us/gov_email.html