MARKET OF DEATH, MARKET OF FUN: ANATOMY AND ANALYSIS OF A GUN SHOW

Market of Death, Market of Fun: Anatomy and Analysis of a Gun Show

Keith Haley and Tammy Kimball

Book chapter in M. Stallo and K. Haley, Crime and Punishment in the Lone Star State, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1997. (Copyright)



TEXAS AND THE GUN PHENOMENON

Texas has made a reputation out of "big." The expanse of unoccupied land in some parts of the state seems as vast as the ocean itself. Road signs identify cities ahead that are farther away than crossing several states. Restaurant orders often exceed the size of the average helping in other parts of the country. The extended cab pick-up truck is at home in Texas. Texas is the largest truck sales market in the nation. Then there is Billy Bob's. We guess you know about it.
Texas is also "big" on guns, going far back in its history. Sixty percent of Texas homes have guns, 12 percent higher than the national average for the number of firearms in residences (Wilson, 1993). Fifty percent of Texas homes contain more than one gun. It is not surprising that deaths from firearms in the state and assaults on the police also rank high.

Crime and Death in American Society

The current discussion about violence and firearms deaths has reached a crescendo. The rhetoric from new and strange allies pervades all of our media sources and political chambers of the nation. We have apparently concluded that “enough is enough" and the nation is poised for dramatic action. Today seems to be the time to begin chipping away at a national homicide rate which approaches 25,000 deaths annually. Approximately 15,000 of those deaths are by firearm, a percentage that has varied between 55% and 67% for nearly the last three decades (Maguire, Pastore, and Flanagan, 1992). About 19,000 people commit suicide each year using a firearm. Another 1,400 die unintentionally by firearm over the course of a year.
In Texas the shootings are as senseless as anywhere. Wielders of guns kill every day in the big cities of the state. Short tempers, mean spirits, and readily available guns, we suppose, are at the base of virtually all of these killings. Some Texans have pushed to allow all citizens to carry concealed weapons. Such a bill was narrowly defeated this past year and will probably be reintroduced in the legislature. Gun control legislation of one kind or another is up for discussion in nearly all states that have ineffective laws or no laws at all. Finally, the Brady Bill at last conquered the Congress. But with this belated backdrop of concern, do people really understand how “big” and lucrative the firearms business is in America? Do they know how easily and inexpensively they can attend a gun show and obtain one or more of a near infinite variety of firearms and other weapons which have the potential for mass destruction in the wrong hands.

The gun show is a "market of death” or a “market of fun” depending on your perspective. The first-time visitor to a gun show will be astounded at the tens of thousands firearms available, at the low purchase prices for high caliber handguns and assault rifles, and the size and variety of the crowd which will pass through the turnstiles on any given weekend. The discussion which follows will attempt to present an accurate description of the gun show phenomenon.

The Gun in American Culture

We should not be surprised that America is infatuated with guns. They have served us well in so many respects. Without question, the gun has served as a means of protection for people, their homes, and their property throughout our history. Each year tens of thousands of felons are warded-off, arrested, and even killed by people who have firearms for protection. Unfortunately, many of those who own guns for protection have inadvertently become victims of these same weapons in the hands of family members or others who gain possession of them. This was a conclusion of a study of 388 homicides funded by the National Centers for Disease Control (Wilson, 1993). Seventy-six percent of the victims studied were murdered by a friend or family member and not by home intruders or strangers carrying guns.
Guns have also been both a symbol and means of power. It isn't only the revolutionaries of the world who see power emanating from the barrel of a gun as Mao Tse-Tung was fond of saying (Schram, 1967). Criminals know that the gun can fix many of their perceived problems almost instantly, particularly the elimination of their competitors and those who double-cross them. Supported by the music genre of "gangsta" rap, children now see the gun as a major source of power in seemingly solving their problems with others who disrespect or offend them (Haley, 1993). Guns are also being used by juveniles to commit an increasing larger share of major crime. Juvenile arrests for murder, robbery, and assault increased 50% between 1988 and 1992 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1992).

Guns in the hands of our leading men and ladies in entertainment have been symbols of sexual prowess. Armed men and women in provocative poses have been standard fare in the entertainment media. The gun is used as a metaphor and symbol of sexual themes is prolific in Hollywood films. In the October issue of Texas Monthly, pictures included, an article by Anne Dingus (1993) discusses the decorative and deadly heroines of Hollywood's past and present western movies. All were pictured with guns.

From the sophistication and rigor of Olympic competition to the simple enjoyment of family target shooting, millions of Americans own firearms for sport. Hundreds of organizations exist nationwide, which promote the sporting side of firearms ownership. The National Rifle Association, Ducks Unlimited, and the National Varmint Hunters' Association are examples of these organizations. While it would be foolish to contend that some of the firearms belonging to the sportsmen and sportswomen of the nation don't result in a number of deaths each year, these gun owners are not the source of the nation's problem with firearms violence.
But perhaps as convincing as anything else in seeing the extent of our cultural ties to firearms is our language. It is "loaded" with such gun metaphors as "square shooter," "shot down," "shoots from the hip," "on target," "quick-draw," "loaded for bear," "gun shy," and "shot his wad." Guns are as American as apple pie.


DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Objectives

By means of the participant-observer method the authors intended to accomplish the following objectives in this study:

1. Describe the gun show phenomenon in North Central Texas.

2. Discuss the organization, administration, and operations of a gun show.

3. Identify the range of legal and illegal weapons available at a gun show.

4. Discuss the implications of the gun show in relation to the nation's struggle to prevent firearms deaths.

Method

The authors attended seven gun shows in the Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan area beginning September 26, 1993 and ending on January 8, 1994. At each gun show the authors participated as interested shoppers, stopping at many of the several hundred tables at each show and talking with the vendors of all kinds of merchandise. On several occasions purchases were made. Other times the vendors were presented with opportunities to bend the rules and procedures of the show. The authors took field notes during their rounds at the show and expanded and edited their notes after they left the gun show sites.


Specifically, the following gun shows were attended and studied:

1. Dallas Market Hall Arena, Dallas, Texas, September 26, 1993

2. Dallas Convention Center, Dallas, Texas, October 31, 1993

3. Big Town Exhibition Hall, Mesquite, Texas, November 13, 1993

4. State Fairgrounds, Modern Living Building, Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma, November 27, 1993

5. Big Town Exhibition Hall, Mesquite, Texas, December 4, 1993

6. Richardson Civic Center, Richardson, Texas, December 11, 1993

7. Dallas Convention Center, Dallas, Texas, January 8, 1994.

Our account of the gun show phenomenon which follows is a composite of our findings at each of the seven gun shows observed. No one show had all of the characteristics we describe in the paper, but all of the gun shows in the study had a large majority of them. Unique features of particular shows are identified.

PRELUDE TO A GUN SHOW

It's like anything else; most of us know little about what really is going on around us until we focus our attention on the specifics. As first author of this paper, I had been away from guns since being a police officer 25 years ago. I did my four-year stint in the Marines and grew up in a family that did lots of hunting and target shooting of one kind or another. By the time I was 14, I was weary of sport shooting, preferring to spend my recreational time playing basketball and running track. My father understood.

My most recent encounter with firearms issues was as the Executive Director of Ohio's peace officer standards and training commission from 1986-1992 where I assisted in drafting firearms legislation concerning the training of police officers and private security personnel. With access to elaborate indoor and outdoor firing ranges at the beautiful Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy, I never took the time to crank off even a single round.

I owned one firearm in the last 20 years, a palmable 22 caliber, five shot pistol which I believed would be useful in home protection. That was before Tech 9's and Mac 10's. What I am saying is that I, like many Americans, was outside of the firearms scene.

In the several weeks before attending the first gun show of my life I began to notice, naturally, the presence of guns and the gun culture much more often than I had before. The heated debate in Congress over the Crime Bill and the Brady Bill, the talk show barrage on violence issues, and President Bill Clinton's and Attorney General Janet Reno's focus on youth violence and the media's depiction of crime and death all began to help me "set my sights"(another gun metaphor) on the issues to be addressed in this paper. One day in the midst of all this backdrop to my first gun show visit, I saw a bumper sticker on the back of a Nissan which read, "Happiness is a warm machine gun." If that's bad, later I learned that you could buy a videotape entitled, "Rock and Roll Machine Gun, " featuring all of the popular assault weapons in action. The person driving this Nissan was a diminutive young woman with her child in a restraining seat. No sign was on the back window which read, "Child on Board." Whatever happened to those things I wondered and is the machine gun to become the latest fad?

I began to anticipate my first show both cautiously and enthusiastically. Questions surged in my mind. Who goes to these things? Would "gang-bangers" be there? Would it be safe with all of those guns, ammunition, and people in one place? How many cops would it take to provide security? What would be for sale and how cheap are the prices? Would I be able to get the information I need to write an interesting descriptive paper? To put it simply, what the authors found at gun shows was absolutely astounding! Now, the story of our findings.


ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF GUN SHOWS

The Gun Show Loophole

Somewhere near the end of the clamor over the Brady Bill in Congress, some of the media discovered the loopholes in the legislation that was supposed to require a background check and a cooling-off or waiting period before obtaining possession of the purchase. Private gun owners can sell their weapons legally to anybody, no questions asked, no waiting period, no background check, and no forms to fill out. This can be done through classified advertisements or much more efficiently for seller and buyer is to do business at a gun show. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms spokesman Jack Killorin says: "Easily millions of gun sales can be transacted at gun shows"(Big Loophole in Gun Control Law, 1993). No law prevents a private citizen
from selling a gun(s) to a person who walks into a gun show. Frankly, there is no accurate means available to tally how many firearms are sold each year at gun shows. Licensed gun shops sold 7.5 million guns last year, but even that figure depends on the integrity of the dealer in making every sale "official." Strong incentives exist not to do so.

One more problem in relation to the gun show is the fact that no clear-cut definition exists which separates private sellers from licensed dealers, such as the number of guns sold or amount of earnings. At a gun show a private seller can buy a table for approximately $40, setting up right next to a licensed dealer, or merely walk around the show carrying a gun(s) with a "for sale" sign attached. The ATF's Jack Killorin says Texas and Florida are particularly worrisome states because of the frequency of the shows, lax laws, and ease of transit for out-of-state buyers. How did Congress miss the boat on regulation of private sales from classifieds or at gun shows? Or was their intense, but restrained, interest in regulating gun sales a calculated
charade?

Structure and Layout

From your first visit to a gun show you will be able to see that they are moneymaking ventures, commerce in its purest form. Thousands of firearms, new and used, change hands at just one gun show. Any activity with that much commercial power is bound to have some organization and rules governing participation and attendance.

First of all, gun shows have to take place in large arenas with access to lots of parking because tens of thousands of people attend them on just one weekend in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and, we would suppose, in other parts of the nation also. Only one of the shows, the Dallas Convention Center, charged for parking. It is interesting that the only other event at the Dallas Convention Center the weekend of October 31, 1993, was the International Beauty Show and it also drew a big crowd. Cosmetics and firearms are both big business in Texas. The combination of these two events resulted in some unlikely companions as each group of attendees walked from the parking lots to the arena. Admission to the arena itself is usually $5.00 at a big show with more than 700 sellers' tables. One of the shows, at the Richardson Civic Center, charged only $4.00 admission, but probably had less than the 400 tables on display, a fact which the show had advertised on a brochure. The admission price, by the way, does not include the right to go in and out of the show. Too many people attend these events on a weekend to permit such liberal passage. The number of tables in a show was determined from advertising brochures and from a reasonably accurate count by the authors. The big weekend shows are likely to have 1,000 display tables or more, most of which are tables of gun sellers.

Since all of the shows occur at large arenas the amenities of crowds need to be attended to. Consequently, food services serving breakfasts and lunches are available at all shows and rest room facilities are, of course, open. All of the shows had tables and chairs available at the concessions and these places seemed to serve as the locus for various groups to sit and discuss firearms issues and other subjects. Surprisingly, the menus contained a variety of times a full meal was available for breakfast and lunch.

Once inside the show arenas, a person's itinerary is solely up to them so long as they shop or sell within the prescribed hours of the show, usually from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Some people systematically would cover each row of tables, one-by-one while others randomly selected displays with items they were particularly interested in. Still others sought out a particular dealer they were familiar with. We saw and spoke to numerous people who came to find a particular gun, accessory, or type of ammunition and they often went directly to the sellers who had those items first since there is always the chance that a good deal will be lost if they delay. The prices are very competitive and good deals abound resulting in some vendors selling out of their stock of many popular items.

Rules and Procedures

A number of rules have been established which govern the displays, the items for sale, the sellers, and the customers. Most of these rules were evident at all of the shows observed in this study, including the gun show in Oklahoma City. Sponsors of the shows included the North Texas Gun Club, the Dallas Gun Collectors, and the Oklahoma Gun and Knife Collector’s Association.

Displays

All of the rules, which govern sellers’ displays, can be found on the advertising flyers/brochures, which announce each show. The flyers announcing future shows are readily available at the entrance to any current one. Six or eight foot display tables can be purchased in advance of the show for $40-$45. You can get a discount of $5 if you apply early. Since all of the shows begin on Saturday and end on Sunday, all of the show managers require that set-up of displays be completed on Fridays from 3-9 P.M. In that some of the vendors are bringing in literally tons of firearms for sale, it would be virtually impossible to do unloading and set-up the displays is indeed hard work. Some vendors need electricity for the show in order to show videotapes of their waves in action or to operate other equipment. Once the displays are set-up they are protected by 24-hour security services. Finally, typical of a statement the vendors are required to sign reads as follows:

If it is judged that I have misrepresented the category of items on my table, I hereby agree to forfeit my tables to the sponsor. I also agree to abide by the show rules. I understand that I am responsible for all of the tables in my name and I do not hold the sponsor responsible for my property.

Items for Sale

Gun show rules insure that customers will come to a show and find that firearms and related accessories are indeed the majority of items for sale. Advertising brochures state that “all tables must contain 100% guns, knives, or gun related items.” Specific restrictions prohibit martial arts items such as throwing stars and flea market wares which obviously leaves the door open to exclude a variety of things if so desired. All of shows we attended included displays of militaria weapons, uniforms, tools, vehicles, medals and flags. A Nazi flag can be found if you look. The shows at the Dallas Convention Center do not permit the sale of ammunition as a result of city ordinance, but other shows permitted ammo in the arena as long as it was sealed. “Sealed” could be as simple as being in a box. As discussed below, we will see that very loose interpretations were made as to what sale items were permitted at gun shows.
Those who reserve and pay for a display table(s) in advance are required to quantify the percentage of merchandise they will have the show according to several categories: guns; gun parts; sporting supplies; hunting equipment; ammo; knives; Civil War items; Indian artifacts; old Western items and others.

Customers

Customers also had certain restrictions placed on them. They were not allowed to go in and out of the show for one admission price. They were permitted to bring firearms to the show for sale, but they had to be checked at the door by security personnel, usually off-duty police officers in uniform, and the guns had to be tied, meaning a plastic ribbon was attached in such a way that the gun could not be fired. Children under 12 years of age were admitted free and all of the shows had substantial amounts of male children present accompanied by their parents or other adults. Customers were free to go up to vendors and offer their firearms for sale or for trade. Additional rules restricted the carrying of cameras into the arena. Finally, customers and vendors alike are warned that all laws must be observed which undoubtedly covers a multitude of sins.


SELLERS AND THEIR WARES


Firearms and Vendors

Unless you have been to a gun show, you cannot begin to imagine the volume and variety of firearms available for sale. Literally, a gun is on display to match every conceivable motive of a shopper whether he is the competitive shooter (trap shooter, skeet shooter, varmint shooter, or tin-can shooter), the collector of old police weapons, war weapons, limited-issue weapons, hunters of virtually anything that moves, and street thugs who are interested in expanding their arsenals.

From conversations with dealers and frequent customers and from an actual estimate based on counting tables we believe that at least 100,000 guns were on hand at the large shows held at the Dallas Convention Center and the Dallas Market Hall Arena. That estimate does not include, by the way, the number of firearms brought to the shows by shoppers who are wanting to sell or trade, a legitimate activity at the shows. Some vendors had as many as 300 pistols displayed on just two tables. Rifles and shotguns were often available from the same vendors. Beneath the display tables were often hundreds of additional weapons in boxes or metal cases. As firearms were sold off of the tables, the display was replenished from the cache under the tables or from trucks and trailers parked outside the arena.

It would be impossible to enumerate the near infinite variety of firearms available at the gun shows Books such as the Shooter's Bible and Gun Digest are good sources to see the entire list. If it exists, more than likely it was available for sale at a gun show. In general, however, the weapons should fall into the categories you would imagine: rifles, pistols, and shotguns. But it isn't that simple. There are hunting rifles and assault rifles, pistols which fire shotgun shells and high caliber cartridges, sophisticated rifles and pistols for competitive shooting, and hunting weapons designed for very specific purposes such as firing from pistols for competitive bench rests, tripods, boats, and other vehicles, or for killing a particular animal or bird. We even saw crank-operated automatic weapons which are legal as a result of a clever design. We also saw machine guns.

To the untrained eye, the first experience at looking at gun show displays is a visual blur. There is simply too much to see. After getting a show or two under your belt, however, you begin to get a feel for the types of vendors and their specialties, the categories of weapons which are sold, and the hot items in the market place to include the firearms whose prices are rising rapidly largely as a result of the spector of the U.S Congress banning additional weapons. Some of these weapons, many of them imports, are going as fast as the vendors can put them up on the display tables.

We began to think of dealers according to several categories. First, there are the "conventionals" who most often operate real gun shops outside of their homes and have a federal firearms license to do so. Their motive is essentially to make a living. They are extremely knowledgeable concerning their wares and are often armorers. They sell rifles, shotguns, and handguns of the reputable manufacturers such as Remington, Winchester, Browning, Mossberg, Colt, Smith and Wesson, and Glock. None of their items are cheap, but you will be able to find them next week if something goes wrong with your purchase.

A second type of dealer we called the "specialist." They dealt only in a particular kind of weapon or sport. Some sold hunting rifles and shotguns, for example. Some specialized in assault rifles and survivalist gear ,a type that was not present in large numbers at the shows, contrary to what you might think. The volume of sales for the "specialist" was smaller than several of the other type of vendors, but many of their items were expensive and appealed only to the select shopper.

"Collectors" were another category of vendor. They bought and sold antique weapons of one type or another. Their interests were black powder guns, war weapons, old West guns, women's or other specialty firearms.

We also saw many of what we referred to as "citizens." These people were similar to the flea market sellers who make a few extra dollars on the weekends. They rented a table or two and displayed an often scanty and disorganized array of used weapons, no doubt acquired cheaply at previous shows.

The last group in our taxonomy of at previous shows, sellers we called "wheeler-dealers." They sold anything that was "hot." They were not interested in much conversation about their wares and one we met was downright discourteous when asked for information about firearms for sale. They were interested in moving stock and in most cases they were doing precisely that.
"Wheeler-dealers " were selling lots of assault rifles. The most popular ones are the Chinese Norinco AK-47, the Chinese Norinco SKS, and various versions of the M-I4 and the M-I6. Any semi-automatic rifle, however, with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds is selling rapidly. The Chinese SKS rifle (7.62mm) can be purchased as inexpensively as $60 used and $120 new. The Chinese AK-47 rifle (7.62mm) can be bought for as little as $150 new. Both of these assault rifles come in either a standard issue length or in a paratrooper’s shorter version. The weapons were standard issue to the soldiers of the People’s Republic of China and were often encountered by American troops during the Vietnam War.

Similarly, the "wheeler-dealers" had attractive prices on high caliber pistols and were selling big as personal protection weapons. These pistols were the Chinese Norinco, 7.26 m or 9 mm; the MAC 11, 9 mm; the Tech 9, 9mm, and the Tech 22, 22 caliber. The Norinco 9mm can be purchased for less than $100 and is comparable in many ways to the Colt and Glock weapons costing four or five times as much.

Various dealers also sold what might be termed “fad weapons,” the cool thing to own at the present. All of these weapons, new or used, are expensive, often costing more than $300. Business remains brisk for “fad guns” such as: the Glock 9 mm; the Colt 45 M1911A1; the Beretta M-9; the Taurus PT-99; and the Browning Hi Power.

Finally, the "wheeler dealers" and the "citizens" were not against making a profit from “Saturday Night specials." From $25 to $60 these 25 or22 caliber pistols were being bought up as personal protection items. The popular models were: Raven; Davis; Llama, Star; Rossi; Harrington and Richardson; and Iver Johnson. One of the "wheeler-dealers" actually had a grab box crammed full of pistols that a customer could sort through and have his choice for $25 or three for $60.

Firearms and Other Accessories for Sale

Published restrictions of the gun show sponsors notwithstanding, a myriad of other items are for sale at gun shows. Some are related to firearms, such as holsters and storage cases, some are not, such as blowguns and beef jerky. All of the shows we attended had large knife displays, many of the knives were hand crafted by the exhibitors themselves and were quite attractive and ornate.

**Technical assistance for the section of the paper describing specific firearms was provided by Nicholas Valcik. The authors are indeed grateful.

Table 1 below contains a short list of other items for sale at the gun shows in this study.

________________________________________________________________________
- ITEMS -

Blow guns of various sizes
Holsters, carrying cases, and gun safes
Magazines and clips
Stocks, barrels and pistol grips
Pistol purses for women
Ammunition of every variety
Hunting and military clothing
Pistol and rifle style crossbows
Firearms manuals
Intricate firearms parts ,
Bayonets and other military tools
Hairbrushes which double as knives
Hair dryers shaped as pistols
Guitar cases for carrying assault rifles and machine guns
T -shirts, sweat shirts, propaganda books and bumper stickers
German SS and Luftwaffe music tapes
Nazi flags and portraits of General Rommel
Mace and stun guns
Jeeps and other military vehicles
Reloading equipment
BB gun pistols and rifles
Toy models of real weapons such as the Uzi or Thompson submachine gun


Table 1 MERCHANDISE FOR SALE AT GUN SHOWS
____________________________________________________________________

In short, if the vendor cleared the initial screening via his application for a table(s), he could sell just about anything he wanted to, although the restrictions against martial arts items were generally upheld. If items had anything to do with hunting, sport shooting, personal protection, or propaganda related to the same, they could be sold.

Illegal and Quasi-Legal Sales

A number of items for sale at the shows were illegal to possess under the Texas Penal Code and were specifically supposed to be restricted according to the sponsors. These items were available at all of the shows except the one in Oklahoma City . Switch blade knives, butterfly knives, brass knuckles, and martial throwing stars were available at a couple of the shows although not conspicuous. One large knife we saw had a 12" blade and a "brass knuckles" handle giving the wielder, we suppose, the option of either stabbing opponent or breaking his jaw. We were told that the sale of such items at the shows was ignored since they passed as collectibles and not the weapons they really are.

Novel Accommodations to the Federal Firearms Laws

The fact that the federal firearms laws are loaded with loopholes will probably be no surprise to most people. The Federal Firearms Act of1934 forbids the purchase of an automatic weapon such as a machine gun without a special license reserved for collectors. Weapons experts will tell you there are several ways to circumvent this law if you want a weapon which fires automatically. Apparently there are a number of ways to modify the sear of a firearm and cause it to fire automatically. One inexpensive and legal adaptation, however, is the Hellfire Switch available for the low price of$24.95.

While carrying out our participant observer roles at the Dallas Market Hall Arena, we noticed a video playing at one of the display tables depicting a man firing what appeared to be a machine gun or other automatic weapon. It turns out that he was demonstrating the Hellfire Switch. This device can be installed on the trigger guard of a semi-automatic rifle, assault type or other model, and it converts the weapon to fully automatic, meaning that once you pull the trigger to the rear and hold it there, the weapon will keep firing until it runs out of ammunition. This weapon, of course, is now the equivalent of a machine gun.

How can guns be legally converted to fully automatic weapons by the Hellfire Switch? It is simple and you receive a card that explains the legality of the conversion when you purchase a Hellfire Switch. Federal law requires that a semi-automatic weapon fire only once for each time you pull the trigger. The Hellfire Switch makes your trigger finger vibrate back and forth several hundred times a minute from the weapon's recoil as the rifle fires at precisely the speed of your vibrating finger. Since your finger is "pulling the trigger," (although the trigger is really pulling your finger) the conversion to fully automatic is and extremely deadly.

Another interesting circumvention of the law has to do with the length of the barrel of a shotgun. The National Firearms Act of 1934 prevents the ownership of a shotgun with a barrel shorter than 18 inches. Obviously a short barreled shotgun would be handy in the commission of a robbery or in conducting gang activity. But why worry about being caught with a "sawed-off shotgun " when you can buy a perfectly legal pistol which fires both shotgun ammunition and powerful pistol loads. The rifling in the barrel makes this weapon legal, unlike the shotgun, which has a smooth bore.

The gun shows even provide you with a choice of a pistol which fires one shotgun shell or the "grand daddy" of them all which fires five shotgun shells from a rotating cylinder. This unusual and deadly “pocket cannon" is the Thunder 5.410/.45 Revolver(1993) manufactured by MIL, Inc., Piney Flats, Tennessee. The price of a new Thunder 5 is $599.00.
Another example of getting around the intent of the law has to do with the restriction on selling a bayonet. Apparently it is illegal to sell a bayonet attached to a military rifle. If the bayonet is sold, however as a "tent stake" and is not attached to the rifle, it is legal. One of the authors purchased a new Chinese SKS assault rifle for $79.00 along with a $9.95 "tent stake" bought separately from the same vendor.

Other Rule-Bending and Breaking

While it was not the intent of our study to discredit show sponsors or vendors as to how closely they adhered, or not, to the rules of governance at the shows or state and federal laws, we did have the opportunity to see that both the rules and the laws were occasionally ignored. One 18-year old University of Texas at Dallas student who we knew as a member of our college pistol team purchased 500 rounds of 22 LR ammunition

From a vendor at the gun show in Mesquite on November 13, 1993. Texas law requires that you be 21 years of age to purchase ammunition. She was not asked for identification. Neither was another member of the pistol team who purchased 1,000 bullets, 200 grain SWC, for reloading. While this student is 22 years old, he looks much younger than 21 and was not asked for identification as required by Texas law.

On September 26, 1993, at the Dallas Market Hall arena one of the authors of this paper was shown by a vendor how to load a high caliber pistol using live ammunition when no ammunition or loaded guns were permitted according to the rules of the show. This same vendor told her that three young men had pulled loaded guns from their belts earlier that same day and attempted to sell them to the vendor. We surmise that a number of vendors would also bend the rules in the interest of promoting a sale.

Propaganda and Paraphernalia

Gun shows have a political soul and as you might imagine it is staunch conservative and clearly in terms of Second Amendment rights. Aside from our conversations with vendors and customers, nothing could possibly give a more accurate depiction of this conservatism than the slogans found on shirts and bumper stickers for sale at the gun shows. A sample of the ideology can be found in Table 2 below:

________________________________________________________________________
SLOGANS

"Buy a gun and piss off the Clintons"
"China has gun control"
"Clinton sucks and Gore swallows"
" An armed society is a polite society"
"Politicians love unarmed peasants"
"Is your church ATF approved?"
"Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun" "For personal 24 hour protection - Dial 9 mm"
"I'II give you my gun when Hell freezes over"
"Take a bite out of crime. Shoot the bastard!"
"When the going gets tough, I get a machine gun"
"Happiness is a warm machine gun "

_________________________________________________________________
Table 2 Propaganda Shirts, Bumper Stickers and Posters
on Sale at Gun Shows
__________________________________________________________________

The shows at the Dallas Convention Center and at the Dallas Market Hall Arena also had dealers who sold books along with the shirts and bumper stickers. Revenge was clearly the titles available: Up Yours, Get Even, and Screw the Bitch (the bitch being an ex-wife). W e might add that the tactics prescribed often involved violence with details on how to effect it. One of the standards of this genre was also present,

William Powell's Anarchist's Cookbook. These titles certainly ran counter to the Ken Harris knife display whose sign read "Jesus is Lord."

The end of the Cold War has also had an impact on the gun show. Apparently a large surplus of Russian and Soviet militaria is available. One vendor we spoke to at the Dallas Market Hall arena sold Soviet military medals, hats, and books describing elite units of the Soviet and Russian armies. For $100, a person could buy a barrette worn by an elite Russian fighting force which selects its recruits from only orphans, according to the vendor who spoke with a Russian accent, in order that they would be willing to kill on command with no loyalties to anybody except the state. For an additional $10 you could by the story of the unique barrette and those who wore it.

We also found the North Texas Arms Rights Coalition (its motto being “Protecting your right to bear arms”) soliciting signatures on petitions at two of the shows demanding guarantees from Congress and the state legislature that the right to own firearms will not be being curtailed. At the Oklahoma City gun show, signatures were being solicited on petitions to limit the terms of service of members of Congress. In short, politically
conservative bent is evident at gun shows in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and in Oklahoma City.

THE PARTICIPANTS

Customers

All things considered, the gun show is a very civil proceeding. Generally, people come to the show looking for a good deal on guns or other items or to sell or trade a firearm. It is the best possible place to see the variety and volume of firearms in existence. You would have to travel hundreds of miles and visit dozens of gun shops to see anything approaching the variety of firearms available at gun shows. Likewise, you would have to run hundreds of classifieds to reach anything near the number of potential buyers for a weapon who come to a gun show. We found that people attending the shows go about their business in an orderly fashion, spending two hours or more at each show, and leaving the show with some type of purchase. We should note that you need to watch your bridgework and your posterior as you walk around the show because lots of people will be carrying rifles and shotguns they have just purchased or are trying to sell and occasionally they are not particularly careful about where they point the barrels.
Our methodology would not allow for an accurate taxonomy of gun show attendees. We should also point out that we were warned to be unobtrusive in our study since it is not unheard of that protesters and others seeming to have anti-gun philosophies have been asked, on occasion, to leave arenas. We did no surveying or extended interviews with participants. Consequently, our notetaking was done as inconspicuously as possible. We did find the attendees at gun shows, however, to be an interesting mix of people, philosophies, and motives. Below we comment on some of the more perceptible types who go to gun shows.

The variety of people attending shows ranges from what might be termed “rednecks” wearing spurs and shoulder holsters with a matching belt that reads “Billy” to middle-aged couples in formal attire who just came from Sunday church services. One apparent group at all of the shows are the hunters, often dressed as if they just came out of the fields or off of the mountain. The show in Oklahoma City had a majority of attendees in this category.

The survivalist types were also present at all of the shows but not in large numbers. They were dressed in camouflaged uniforms adorned with all of the paraphernalia that would be permissible inside the arena. One conversation we overheard in Mesquite at a vendor's table, immediately after the passage of the Brady Bill, dealt with this theme: "It's all over now," the bearded vendor in bib overalls said, “Communism is here and you better buy them while you can.” This vendor was selling custom made guitar and banjo cases to fit your machine guns and assault rifles. He was selling a 22 caliber semi-automatic rifle for $600 that was a replica of a
Thompson submachine gun, banjo case included.

Women represented only about 10-15% of all attendees. At several of the shows the women of Harley Davidson were present with their male counterparts, appropriately adorned. Any woman who expressed even the slightest interest in an item for sale was readily attended to by the vendors, primarily out of courtesy however, the attention paid to the female seemed excessive at times. A small number of the vendors brought wives or women friends and they could be seen often stirring around the arenas.

The vast majority of these attendees looked like the same crowd you would see in a busy shopping mall, mostly middle class in their appearance and generally polite and friendly to all who encountered them. Only a small number of African-Americans or Hispanics attended the shows. Most of the attendees, no doubt, had the money or credit to purchase firearms. Finally it was also noticeable that fathers often brought their sons to the gun shows.

Officials and Security

The tightest security we saw in the shows we studied was at the Dallas Convention Center. Security officers, many of which were off-duty Dallas police officers, conducted interrogations at the door relative to what you had on your person and did pat down searches for weapons that might be concealed. They also looked in some of the women's purses, a procedure we saw at no other show. If you were bringing a weapon to sell at the show, you were sent to a table where another police officer in uniform checked to see that the weapon was unloaded and then a tie was place on the gun which rendered it safe and inoperable. We imagine that sworn peace officers are used at the security tables in the event that some attendee wanted to be uncooperative.

It is important to point out, however, that at all of the other shows it was the honor system in effect. If you had weapons, you voluntarily went to the security table to have them checked out. You could walk right past the security table and not be stopped. No metal detectors were used at any of the shows. During the many hours we spent in attendance at gun shows, there seemed to be no problems resulting from the lax security
measures.

Inside the arenas we seldom saw uniformed police or security officers on patrol. We also noticed that not all of the entrances would have the same degree of security. At one show, we even saw doors with no security other than the person selling the ticket for admission. Keeping in mind that some of the vendors displayed hundreds of firearms, how is it possible to keep them from being stolen with so many people looking at the weapons and passing by? The tables loaded with weapons were watched closely by the vendors, but many of them also had an electronic security wire with an alarm attached through the trigger housing of each firearm, similar to the alarm systems used to prevent clothing from being shoplifted. Those who sold the cheap pistols didn't bother. One striking contrast to the use of this electronic security system, however, was the show in Oklahoma City. No vendors used an alarm but displayed just as many firearms as the Texas shows did. We believe that kindness and trust are such a part of the Oklahoma way of life that an electronic security system would be an insult to the Oklahoma residents. a The Oklahoma City show was also the only one which permitted customers to go in and out of the show after having their hand stamped.. This state has a small population and the business people in Oklahoma know they have to make things as convenient as possible for their clients and customers in order to make a profit. They will even carry items to your vehicle for you.

DISCUSSION

Firearms Purchases at Gun Shows

The "jackpot" for purchasing firearms in the United States is the gun show. If 7.5 million guns are sold through licensed gun shops each year (Big Loophole in Gun Control Law. 1993), millions more are available through gun show sales to and by private citizens. While politically correct legislators clamor over laws to keep handguns out of the minds and hands of children, debate the appropriate waiting period for a gun and try to identify what is an assault weapon, millions of firearms continue to be traded at gun shows throughout the nation. The United States records approximately 15,000 handgun deaths each year and firearms accidents claim an additional 1,400 lives (Accidental Deaths Decrease, 1993). Thousands more are wound and maimed for life as a result of firearms. If legislation is needed to control gun shows, what precisely would it be beyond the laws which govern the sale and purchase of firearms in other venues. Would new legislation translate directly into lives saved? California has a 15-day waiting period for purchase while background checks are conducted and it applies to purchases at gun shows also. Such legislation does not seem to have had much impact on homicide and firearms assault statistics in that state.

At the gun shows in this study we saw thousands of people enjoying themselves in a civilian manner while they shopped for firearms and accessories needed for various gun sports and for home protection. To these people the gun show was a "market of fun." Nevertheless, should that much firepower be so readily available to the American public? To others, the gun show is a “market of death.” A case against the gun show can certainly be made when you consider that David Koresh's Branch Davidians cult built up its arsenal from gun show purchases. Still what infringements should be placed on law-abiding citizens and their commerce in order to restrict sales to the relatively small number who will use the firearms they purchase unlawfully or carelessly. The answers to such questions are not easy and legislation probably needs to be levied on the side of moderation in order that the firearm business is not driven underground and that the prices of guns soar, making firearms themselves the object of deadly assaults as is with illegal narcotics

The Legislative Solution

Fever-pitch efforts concerning gun control legislation in legislatures at all levels of government lean toward passing laws which have both symbolic and real value. Some want to ban certain categories of weapons, disqualify a number of potential buyers, and restrict others from possession. Others want to tax guns and ammunition out of existence for all intents and purposes. Any new legislation action will add to the 20,00 gun laws and ordinances already in effect in the United States. Much of the tragedy of homicide in the nation has to do with guns in the hands of children at school. Unfortunately, we already have the federal Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 which barred the possession of guns in or near a school. We would suspect that state laws would have outlawed this same behavior long before passage of the federal legislation. The violence continues however.

Colorado, Florida, and Utah held special sessions of their legislatures in 1993 to outlaw the possession and ownership of handguns for anyone under the age of 18. Exceptions to the legislation are for hunting, target practice and shooting competitions. Again, we would suspect that all of the states had laws which forbade young people and children from carrying firearms in inappropriate places. By the close of 1993, eighteen states had laws which specifically outlawed gun possession by juveniles (Toch, 1993).

A softer approach to denying guns to youth has been tried in several parts of the nation. In Dallas, youths who turn in guns of any kind (no questions asked) will be given two pre-season football tickets for a Dallas Cowboy’s football game. The advertising theme has been “Real cowboys don’t need guns.” What the police department got for their efforts was a meager response and several dozen inoperable weapons along with a few firearms that actually had some value. Apparently some law-abiding citizens, who are also football fans, cleaned out their drawers and trunks and recognized a good deal when they saw it.

For more than 200 years the firearm has been a staple in American society. We are not the only people fascinated with guns. Check the local movie guide if you have any doubts about it being real fascinating to us. A case in point. A new chain of upscale, indoor firearms ranges have opened in Los Angeles and one category of frequent customers is the Japanese tourist who comes in for a quick training course and some target shooting. Many Japanese say, however, after firing a gun they never want to do it again. It is even more amazing that Japanese visitors to the United States would choose such recreation after the furor in Japan over the tragic death of Yoshi Hattori in Baton Rouge in 1992 (Golen, 1993). With so many guns in circulation, so much violence, so many laws, and so much heated controversy about what to do, our nation seems in a quandary as to the next logical steps. Legislation such as the Brady Bill is one response

Although no one seriously believes it will substantially reduce the firearms violence in the United States. One of the skeptics is Professor James Q. Wilson who has stated:

The Brady Bill, which I support, may affect the probability that one or two lunatics will get guns and go off on a killing spree, but the chances that the Brady Bill or any feasible gun control measure will really take guns out of the hands of criminals, I think, is quite farfetched (Baker, 1993).


We have done the equivalent of "leaving the barn door open" for more than two centuries concerning firearms regulation and now we are trying to locate and round-up the horses. If effective gun control were even possible, what other costs would we now realize in our society, which has become so accustomed to the idea of an armed citizenry? Perhaps there is credence to the position that guns don't kill, people do.

Severe and unmitigated penalties for unauthorized gun possession and firearms violence (something we have not really tried) is at least, on paper, a manageable public policy, unlike the thought of trying to regulate the ownership of more than 200 million firearms the actual figure we should become more aware of as the new "death clock" in New York City's Times Square now records the number of guns added to the nation's arsenal each day.


Peacemaking

The popular musical West Side Story portrays gang rivalry and violence in New York City in the 1950s. While artistic renditions of gang violence are depicted in the movie, no guns appear in the hands of the youth. Today youth gangs thrive on firearms violence and some music, such as Cop Killer, even seems to advocate it. What kind of society have we created for ourselves which allows so many young people to acquire values and form attitudes which legitimate killing another person, for example, for calling them a name or frowning at them? What regulation we implement for controlling the ownership of firearms or their sale at gun shows or any other location would seem to have little import until we face up to some more fundamental issues.
When families, schools, churches, and the vast entertainment industry with all its influence come together and re-establish the sanctity of human life and respect for one's fellow man, we are likely to begin seeing significant reductions in violence in American society . Like contending with other social ills, we may have to live through a couple or more bad patches before things improve. "Make peace, not war," to parody a familiar saying, is probably the answer. In a fractured and fictionalized society we have not worked hard at making peace. When we have pushed and "marketed" peace (made a profit out of it), guns and their sale will have little significance in our society.


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The gun show is a popular, convenient, and prevalent means of purchasing, selling, and trading firearms for millions of Americans. Texas is one of several states which hosts many gun shows annually. Dozens of gun shows are held in the Dallas/Fort Worth area during the year.
With the highest rates of homicide and firearms violence in the world, the gun remains an important part of American culture. Guns can provide us with power, status, protection, entertainment, sport, symbols of sexual prowess, and a host of popular metaphors replete in our language.

The gun shows described in this study were well organized and operated according to a minimum set of rules which provide for orderly and predictable displays, necessary security , and the accommodation of large crowds of shoppers and vendors. Along with firearms and their accessories, shooting and hunting supplies, militaria, gun collectibles, and propaganda literature are sold at gun shows.

Vendors at the gun shows in this study seemed to fall into several categories: Conventionals; specialists; collectors; citizens and wheeler-dealers. Those who attend gun shows have specific motives or business to conduct and seem to enjoy the experience. Large crowds of a variety of people pay admission and spend several hours at a gun show. To them the gun show is a “market of fun.”

Occasionally, security is lax at gun shows and rules concerning the sale of firearms and ammunition are either bent or broken. Weapons were on sale at the shows in this study which were specifically designed to get around federal and state laws and still perform functions of outlawed weapons. Pistols which fired shotgun shells and knives with brass knuckle handles are examples of such weapons.

Notwithstanding the bonanza of firearms available at gun shows and more than 20,000 gun laws on the books already in the United States, it seems unlikely that more legislation will help to curb firearms violence. Restoring the sanctity of human life and proliferation of a mutual respect for one’s fellow man seems more promising in reducing violence than the control of gun manufacturing, sales ownership, and possession. As always, families, schools and churches will need to carry the lion’s share of the burden if any improvement is to be realized.

REFERENCES

" Accidental Deaths Decrease." (1993) The Dallas Morning News, September 29.

" America's Vigilante Values." (1992) The Economist. June 20.

Baker, J. (1993) "Gun Control?" The Dallas Morning News, October 3.

"Big Loophole in Gun Control Law." (1993) Prodigy Interactive Personal Service. AP, December 19.

Dingus, A. (1993) "Tex Shooters." Texas Monthly, October.

Golen, J. (1993) "Gun Control Groups Say Slain Japan Student Is But a Statistic." The Dallas Morning News, October 17.

Haley, K. (1993) "Ice-T, No Sugar: Law Enforcement and Political Reactions to the Gangster Rap “Cop Killer.” A paper presented at the 1993 Annual Meeting of The Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, March 15-21, Kansas City.

Kates, D., Jr. and P. Harris. (1991) "How to Make Their Day." National Review, October 21.

Maguire K., A. Pastore, and T. Flanagan. (1992) Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C,: U.S Government Printing Office.

Metcalf, D. (1993) "...And a Cartridge in A Pear Tree." Harper's Magazine. January.

Persinos, J. (1g89) "On Gun Control, Both Sides Win Some, Lose Some." Governing, September.

Marich, J., M. Rand, and J. Robinson. (1990) "Right to Bear Corpses." The New Republic, April 9.

Schram, S. ed. (1967) Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse- Tung. New York: Bantam Books.

"The Battle Over Gun Control: The Black Community Has the Greatest Stake in the Outcome of the Debate.” (1993) Black Enterprise, July.

"Thunder Five .410/.45 Revolver." (1993) American Rifleman, October.

Toch, T. (1993) "Violence in Schools." U.S. News and World Report, November 8.

Underwood, N. (1990) "Up in Arms: Proposed Gun Laws Face Massive Opposition." Maclean’s, December 10.

U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1992) FBI Uniform Crime Reports. Washington, D.C.

Wilson, Laurie. (1993) "Keeping Guns in House Raises Risk of Homicide." The Dallas Morning News, October.

SHOULD THERE BE NURSERY PROGRAMS IN FEMALE PRISONS?

Should There Be Nursery Programs in Female Prisons?

Amanda Moon-Thomas

Most people have an idea of what a nursery is. Some people decorate a room in their house in a specific baby theme and refer to it as the nursery. Others drop their children off in nurseries at church or in a day care center. But a small number of women incarcerated at the Ohio Reformatory for Women (ORW) in Marysville, Ohio are participants in a prison nursery program which allows them to keep their baby with them as they are serving their felony sentence.

Since 2001 nearly 130 babies have been “incarcerated” with their mothers at ORW. There has even been a set of twins and a deaf inmate with her baby. This nursery program is called Achieving Baby Care Success (ABC’S) and is located within the razor wired fence in a separate housing unit. The mothers share a twelve by six foot room with their child in a housing area with an average of ten other inmate mothers and babies. The rooms are not the typical cell. They are painted with bright murals and have other baby décor such as stuffed animals, homemade quilts and pictures. My guess is that most of the babies have a much nicer living environment inside the prison than they would if their mother had never been incarcerated.

The nursery is funded by a federal grant that provides all the babies’ necessities such as diapers, wipes, formula and baby food while clothing, blankets, car seats, swings, and toys are donated to the program by various community organizations. The inmate mothers can also purchase items for their child through the prison commissary and outside vendors or their loved ones can send in clothing boxes to the babies if they choose. A pediatrician has office hours in the nursery once a week and is on call any time for emergencies. Also, because the mother is a ward of the state, she is eligible for federal programs such as Women with Infant Children (WIC) and Medicaid to assist with medical costs and medication for their babies. Child support may also be sought and received while the inmate participates in the program.

This nursery program was modeled after a long time prison nursery founded in New York. There are about 10 other prison nurseries nationwide. A new prison nursery is in the development stage and will be opened in a female federal prison in 2007. Although there are several other programs like ABC’S, the criteria for Ohio’s program are very strict. The inmate must be pregnant upon entering the prison system and cannot be serving a sentence for violence or have any crimes against children in her past. She must be a either minimum or medium security, have no more than an 18 month sentence for a felony in the fourth degree and have no outstanding warrants or detainers. Children Services, in the inmate’s county of commitment, is contacted upon her tentative eligibility and must render a positive recommendation for her participation in the program.

While participating in the nursery program the inmate has continuous contact with a case manager who monitors her program participation in various other institutional programs. Upon entering ABC’S the case manger meets with the inmate and makes a series of program recommendations based on her individual needs such as schooling, drug and alcohol counseling, life skills, stress management and vocational training. The case manager assists the inmate in enrolling in the recommended programs and follows her progress until completion. In addition to individualized programming, all the inmate mothers must participate in Responsible Family Life Skills, Help Me Grow, Infant CPR, Car Seat Safety and other child care specific programming.

This program, according to Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Director Terry Collins, “is hands-on learning to the extreme…It’s a chance for these women, while clean and sober and free from violence on the outside, to bond with their baby.” While there are many opponents of the program the benefits, in my opinion far outweigh any negative view of the nursery. Based on the eligibility requirements alone, the inmates in the nursery program will undoubtedly get custody of their child back upon their release from prison. If we know that from the beginning, doesn’t it make sense to allow them to bond with their child in the most essential phase of that child’s life? Caring for their baby gives the inmate a sense of obligation to their child. That child, unlike on the streets, is the mother’s first priority. If the inmate can form a bond with her baby while in prison and free from temptations she may have a reason to stay free upon her release. While there has been no study done to see if participation in this nursery program reduces recidivism, a mere 3 percent of those inmates who have been in ABC’S have returned to prison within three years post release. The state recidivism rate for all inmates in Ohio is 38 percent.

The inmates are encouraged to have prison jobs and make their experience in the program as life-like as possible so that they can more easily transition into the community. There are several inmates that have been thoroughly screened by prison administrators and Children Services who have prison jobs as nannies. These women are available to the mothers when they need to leave for either programming, dining or to go to work. In prison mother and baby are together much more than a parent in the community who leaves the home for 8-12 hours a day for work. The time away from each other is good for both mother and baby. Being with each other constantly makes the baby too dependant on their mother and makes it more difficult for the baby to adjust when they are separated.

Family visitation is important as well in this setting. Many of the participating inmates have other children in the community living with grandparents, another family member or a friend. A separate visiting area is reserved for the inmates participating in ABC’S that is more conducive to family bonding and relationship building. There has even been a situation where the father of the child is incarcerated as well and special phone calls were permitted in order for the father to participate in some parenting aspects.

Although there are many reasons to turn up one’s nose at the idea of prison nurseries, the other options available to pregnant women entering the state prison system are far less appealing. Women essentially have four options if they are pregnant upon their admittance into prison and do not wish to participate in ABC’s or are not eligible to participate. They may grant custody to family or a loved one, they may put their baby up for adoption, Children Services can take custody based on the mother’s history, or they may make arrangements for an abortion at their own expense. Does the nursery seem a bit more appealing now?

These babies have the best care and a host of professional staff caring for them while they are in the program. We do not keep the baby against the mother’s wishes. If at any time, the mother wants to remove her child from the program, she has the right to do so. Otherwise the baby will leave with their mother upon her release.

This program is wonderful for eligible inmates who wish to keep their baby and participate in intensive parenting programming. The program gives them a second chance to be a good parent. The babies are not being punished by spending the first several months of their lives in prison. They are being given an opportunity to form a strong bond with their mother so that they can have a better life. The most important thing is that the baby does not know they are in prison, they only know that they are with their mother and they are being cared for and loved.


REFERENCES

Avsec, Dana (2006 October 15). Program lets female inmates live, bond with their babies. The Plain Dealer,

Zachariah, Holly (2006 October 14). In Prison With Mommy. The Columbus Dispatch, p. D1.

SHOULD THE STATES PROPOSE A FEMALE SEXUAL PREDATOR ACT?

Should the States Propose a Female Sexual Predator Act?

Sherri L. Warnock

Ø Debra Lefave, 25, pled guilty to two counts of lewd and lascivious behavior. She is accused of performing multiple sex acts with a 14 year old male student. She received three years of house arrest and seven years of probation.

Ø Pamela Rogers Turner, 28, pled no contest to multiple charges of sexual battery and statutory rape for having sex with a 13 year old male student. She was sentenced to nine months in jail and supervised probation for the remaining eight years of her suspended sentence.

Ø Danielle Walls, 27, sentenced to one year in jail and five years probation for having sex up to twenty-five times with a tenth grade student.

It is supposed that a Female Sexual Predator Act is necessary to eliminate the disparity in sentencing between male and female offenders by acknowledging that the victims of female offenders suffer much like the victims of male offenders. The Act would provide for the immediate protective and therapeutic needs of these victims. Furthermore, the Act would mandate sentences comparable to those given male offenders in similar circumstances.

Throughout the ages women have been relied upon as the nurturers of our children. “Sugar and spice and everything nice” is what little girls are made of. Well, in nursery rhymes that may be true, but as a society we must come to the realization that women can victimize children and can do so in many of the same predatory ways that a man does. Coming to this realization may be difficult for a conventional society such as ours. Still, we must face the facts for the safety of all children, and rethink how we perceive this heinous crime when the perpetrator is a woman, and sentence her accordingly. However, with a Sexual Predator Act already in place, do we actually need to write one specifically addressing the female offender? No. What we need to do is show public outrage for this double standard, and insist on equal application of the laws that are already in place. A Female Sexual Predator Act would be redundant.

The problem is not in the construction of the Act, but in society’s perception of an offender. The women named above and many others who are not named have various excuses or reasons for their perpetration: “I was going through a divorce.” “I felt unwanted.” Many of these women lend a romantic undertone to their offense, claiming: “I loved him.” “We needed each other.” Regardless, these boys were just that, boys…children, and these women took advantage of them. They initiated or encouraged a sexual bond with these youth, sometimes plying them with alcohol and drugs, for their own selfish needs, sexual gratification, and for the thrill of breaking the rules. Some have admitted that they were even more aroused by the idea of getting away with a shocking and forbidden act. Others have confirmed that they were turned on by the power and control they exerted over these males.

It is not completely understood why women become sex offenders, but the switching of gender roles may be the crux of it. Psychologist A. J. Cooper points out in a Canadian news article that many of these women are immature, dependent, and sensitive to rejection, so they seek out younger people, who are less likely to reject them and they create situations where they are in control. He feels this may be the result of a combination of things such as heightened sexual desires of their own, a lack of impulse control, and an imitation of abuse that they once experienced themselves.

In Practical Aspects of Rape Investigation, Julia Hislop and Janet Warren observe that some women may seek out revenge against an absent male partner, or perhaps the man in their life is unfaithful and the male child becomes a substitute. Regardless of the sex of the child or the sex of the perpetrator, such abuse has long-term detrimental effects on the children. It “serves as a contagion that follows victims into the next generation with repetitious and cyclical traumatization of others.” These authors offer a typology of the female offender:

· Facilitators - women who purposely help men come in contact with children for sexual reasons.

· Reluctant partners – women who have lived with the same man for many years, and who abide by this man’s sexual manipulation of children out of an anticipation of being deserted. They fear that if they don’t cooperate, their significant other will withdraw their “love,” money, or more. The man they are dependant on in so many ways will ultimately leave them.

· Initiating partner – women who desire sex with children and who wish to harm them in this way, whether they do it themselves or watch while another perpetrates the fantasy.

· Seducers and lovers – women who desire child lovers and who develop an intense attachment for their victim. There dominance is sustained through the giving and withholding of their love (sex).

· Pedophiles – women who have an exclusive and sustained sexual interest in prepubescent children.

· Psychotic – women who have inappropriate sexual contact with children as a result of a serious mental disorder.

These authors point out that, women are rarely pedophiles. They are more likely to commit these crimes when coerced by a male partner or as seducers/lovers.

Laurie Goldman, a Boston psychologist, revealed in her 1993 doctoral dissertation, “Female Sex Offenders: Societal Avoidance of Comprehending the Phenomenon of Women Who Sexually Abuse Children” that agencies designed to protect children often reject disclosures of sexual abuse when the accused is female. Goldman quotes a Washington state judge who dismissed just such a case declaring that “women don’t do things like this.” An Iowa State University sociologist, Craig Allen, confirmed Goldman’s findings in his study “Women and Men Who Sexually Abuse Children: A Comparative Analysis.” He refers to this phenomenon as “gate keeping.” It is believed by some officials at the Canadian Children’s Rights Council that Allen’s theory of “gate keeping” could explain how female perpetrator’s make few appearances in clinical case studies and why, when they do appear, they are ordinarily portrayed as psychotic or otherwise severely disturbed. According to Allen, “by the time female offenders could be referred to a therapist for treatment, only those women would be left whose behaviors were so deviant that their abusiveness could not be denied at any of the preceding ‘gates’ in the system.”

Another possible explanation for a lack of clinical referral is a lack of reporting. Disclosures by children still constitute the bulk of offense reporting, and children are often reluctant to report because of their dependence on their mothers, especially in single parent households. Such a disclosure would result in the loss of the only caregiver the child has. Likewise if the female offends in partnership with a male, disclosure would result in the child being placed in foster care. Such a proposition is obviously frightening to a child who has known no other way of life.

Not all offenders are mothers or step-mothers of their victims. In fact, more often then not, female perpetrators are the neighbors, baby-sitters, or other trusted acquaintances of the victim, as revealed in a 1987 New Jersey medical study of twenty-five teenage males, which appeared in the American Journal of Psychiatry. However, this is just one study. In looking at numerous studies on this topic, I was unable to ascertain any results that were remotely similar let alone close enough to make any definite inference. The National Resource Center on Child Sexual Abuse claims that there are too many inconsistencies in research applications, definitions of sexual abuse, and absolutely no standardization in reporting, resulting in inconclusive data regarding this issue. They affirm that the hardcore numbers that everyone is looking for concerning various aspects of the crime and how widespread it is are disappointingly not available.

Finally, another explanation for why female perpetration goes undetected and why its prevalence is so obscured may be in the modus operandi of the offender. Minneapolis psychiatrist, Peter Dimock and Mic Hunter, a psychologist from St. Paul, and author of Abused Boys: The Neglected Victim of Sexual Abuse as well as editor of The Sexually Abused Male (Volumes I and II), agree that there is a pattern in client’s reports of female perpetrated abuse. It seems that approximately twenty-five percent of those abused sexually by a female experienced the abuse as subtle or seductive; the act being very covert and disguised as something other then sexual contact. Something more akin to dating, or care-giving, such as the application of medicinal ointments or the insertion of suppositories or enemas, or exposing herself with the intention of arousal, but all under the guise of normal behavior. Thus, it is difficult to recognize abuse as abuse.

Hunter goes on to describe a societal belief or myth that the male is always responsible for the initiation of sex, which can compound the boys sense of guilty with additional feelings of being responsible for his own humility. Furthermore, there is the fantasy of the rite of passage into manhood which is personified in such movies as “Summer of 42,” “Men Don’t Leave,” and “My Tutor.” During training sessions with prosecutors and district attorney’s, Hunter has observed that when an official attempts to bring charges against women for various acts of sexual misconduct, outside of prostitution, the male attorney’s will inevitably respond with jocularity and reply that tax payers money should not be wasted pursuing an end to this most coveted rite of passage. In response to a sixteen year old babysitters’ molestation of an eight year old boy, one prosecutor is purported to have said, “So he sewed his oats early. No big deal!”

Well, yeah big deal! Victims of child sexual abuse, whether the perpetrator is male or female, experience a myriad of mental health issues ranging from depression, to post trauma stress disorder, to gender identity confusion. Survivors of female abusers find it particularly difficult to reveal specifics about their experiences because they fear they will not be believed. This fear of rejection may increase their feelings of guilt and shame, developing into an even deeper sense of isolation. In our homophobic culture it is even more difficult for someone to believe that a woman might molest a female child. One therapist reported to a child protective agency that she believed her client intended to molest her three year old niece. The client in question was receiving treatment for an eating disorder. She lived with her sister. The client disclosed that she felt her niece was “coming on” to her, and that she had decided that she would have sex with the child because she knew she would be kind to her. The social worker at the agency graciously took the information and said they would look into the matter, but the therapist left with the feeling that the information was taken sort of “tongue in cheek.”

Ellen R. Stapleton, writing for the Associated Press, reported on law suits being filed against an order of nuns that staffed an orphanage in Louisville, Kentucky decades ago. Other similar cases against nuns emerged in Connecticut and Boston. The Catholic dioceses are aggrieved and offering their full cooperation with ongoing investigations. Unfortunately, many of those accused have expired and the rest are very old, living out their remaining days in nursing homes. It is assumed that the nuns perpetrating such acts were exploited by male clergy. Perhaps that is the case for some, but I wonder… Because they are women, we also assume that they want to care for and protect children.

Assumptions aside, the truth is, if we hold males responsible for initiating sexual acts, then in all likelihood an eight year old boy could be charged with raping a sixteen year old babysitter. Far fetched? Not to a Salt Lake City mother who had to come to the defense of her son when a game of ‘truth or dare” got out of hand. Prosecutors claimed that, even though the game was initially the babysitter’s idea, the boy was a willing participant. Yes, the girl had her way with the boy, but the boy was responsible for the act. Ridiculous? The prosecutors eventually dropped the charges, and expressed no remorse. But, this mother remains concerned.

Its time to stop being ridiculous and recognize that women, even pretty women, married women, mothers, teachers, babysitters, and nuns can “cross the line.” Sex provides equal opportunity to both genders. Crime provides equal opportunity to both genders, and is not age discriminate. Its time women were held equally accountable for their sexual nature and it is time to stop ignoring that women have a sexual nature. Every time a woman is shown favoritism in sentencing the American people should be outraged. We don’t need a separate act to bring attention to this matter. Those of us in professional fields responsible for the safety of our children need to stop making assumptions based on biased stereotypes and come to grips with reality. It is time we act with compassion and inclusion seeking justice and fair sentencing.

SHOULD SCHOOL CHILDREN BE TAUGHT TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST ARMED INTRUSION?

Should School Children Be Taught to Fight Back Against Armed Intrusion?

Sherri L. Warnock

School invasions are modern phenomena rightly invoking the utmost of media attention and public concern. Although we have experienced only a few school shootings throughout the nation, public perception is that the frequency of such threats is on the rise. Consequently, public confidence in school officials to adequately provide safe learning environments for students is dwindling. After broadcasts of recent incidents depicting images of children gunned downed in their schools, particularly those of five innocent Amish girls, individual parents began taking a personal stance asking, “Can this happen in my child’s school?” “What can be done to prevent it?” And, “What should my child do in the face of imminent danger?” Many parents are disappointed to learn that security measures in most schools are either non-existent or inconsistently maintained.

In response to parental demands, some schools in large cities have implemented various security measures such as security guards, hall monitors, metal detectors, and so on. These measures certainly aide in reassuring anxious parents, and by limiting access, they may prevent violence familiar to urban schools such as drug deals gone bad or domestic disputes, but they provide little defense against armed intrusion. Taking advice from a Secret Service study completed after Columbine, most programs developed to thwart armed attacks have centered on identifying troubled students with the potential of resorting to this type of violence. However, it is not only troubled students the school community needs to fear; it is also the deranged citizen or the fanatical terrorist. Because these acts provide the most notoriety, children and schools are prime targets for horrifying acts of violence that, to say the least, aggrieves and astounds civilized communities. To be able to perform these violent acts unimpeded is the primary motivation of the perpetrator. The notoriety as a result of the violence is the desired consequence.

Just south of Ft. Worth, in the small town of Burleson, Texas, students were being trained to immediately fight back against an armed intruder. Relying on the theory that there is safety in numbers and on the advantage of taking a gunman by surprise, students and teachers were encouraged to throw objects, make a lot of noise, and even rush the gunman, in the hopes of gaining control of the situation and limiting the number of potential deaths. Robin Browne, a major in the army reserves in Great Britain, and an instructor for Response Options takes credit for designing the course, which admittedly has its risks. “This is not a burglar! This is not a bank robber!” claims Browne in a statement to ABC news. “This is someone who has come onto school property with the express intention of using a deadly weapon to hurt and dominate people who cannot necessarily defend themselves.” Browne likens this person to a serial killer; power and control over life and death being the ultimate aim of the intruder. “We are dealing with a predator here and a predator, when he is offered prey, and the prey gives in, will take advantage of that prey. What we are teaching here is for the children not to allow the predator to take control.” Conceding that the first person to take the initiative and attack the gunman may be mortally wounded, Browne asserts that the surrender of this one person’s life, or the lives of a few, may save the lives of many others. “He won’t be able to shoot the fourth, fifth, eighth, twentieth, or thirtieth.”

At first, parents, students, teachers, and other local community members seemed to embrace this sort of take charge mentality, often citing the success of those who took the risk and fought back against the high-jackers’ of United flight 93 intended for the Pentagon. However, safety experts outside of Burleson have taken exception to the program. “When it comes to fighting an attacker, even SWAT teams have a hard time knowing what to do. How can we expect kids to know what to do,” asks Ronald Stephens, executive director of National School Safety in a statement to ABC news. Critics of the fight back program have caused Burleson to rethink its position and curtail further training in these methods.

In searching blogs for remarks from parents in various parts of the United States, I found a prevailing sense of helplessness. Many of these remarks centered on individual advice that parents are giving to their youngsters should they be faced with the unlikely event of a school intruder. One parent in a letter to the editor of Salon.com remarked that police departments should rethink their method of response to school invasions because they are so very different from bank hostage situations. “Bad guys in a bank can hold on to the dream of escaping with money, bad guys in a school aren’t there to impose their method of teaching trig.” This parent goes on to advise his youngster “don’t wait and listen to the police or your teachers…The teachers are unable and unprepared to deal with a shooter…run like hell, or fight, but fight to kill.”

William Lassiter, manager of the North Carolina based Center for the Prevention of School Violence seems to agree with the sentiments of the above anonymous parent. In a statement to the Portsmouth Herald local news, Mr. Lassiter declares that fighting back is worthy of further consideration and may bear some merit given observations from recent attacks. “At Columbine, teachers told students to get down and get on the floors, and gunmen went around and shot people on the floors. I know this sounds chaotic and I know it doesn’t sound like a great solution, but its better then leaving them there to get shot.” In defense of the abandoned fight back program, Jeanie Gilbert, district director of emergency management for Burleson said, “We want them to know if Miss Valley says to run out of the room screaming, that is exactly what they need to do.”

It is a sad commentary that we even have to think about such things. It seems rather utilitarian philosophically that your child may have to consider risking life and limb in order to save fellow classmates. In fact, in light of the infrequency of such events, it is very unlikely that youngsters you may know and love will be faced with making such a decision. But, then again, one never knows. Who would have guessed that just such an occurrence would have happened in Columbine or Bailey, Colorado? Or, Essex, Virginia? Or, of all places Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania? These tragedies have had a reverberating effect bordering on paranoia nationwide.

Recently, I have been working as a substitute school teacher for kindergarten through twelfth grades, to include special education, in local schools throughout Franklin County, Ohio. I was working in a cross categorical classroom at a middle school in the southern part of the county. Excitedly, a teacher from another classroom came in and told us to turn on our television. She announced that there were shots fired near a MRDD school in the downtown area, and they were “locked down.” At the same time, four bodies had been discovered in Florida. There was no further news coverage of the downtown shots fired. I looked around my tiny classroom in a modular building a short distance from the main building and I asked myself what I would do if a gunman were to walk in that classroom right then! I had two girls in wheel chairs with multiple disorders and virtually unable to communicate. I had two autistic children who required the repetition of simple instruction. I had one boy who might comprehend what was going on, but who would most likely have questioned the gunman too much. I had two teacher’s aides, but what did they know about such situations? What had they been trained to do? How could I protect them? I am a former police officer and soldier, but I would have been as much of a target as they were; unarmed except for my wits.

At another time, in another district, I was teaching a middle school reading class when an alarm sounded. A PA announcement was made, “Intruder drill.” Children were up and drawing blinds, one closed the classroom door, and they all gathered in a corner of the room. One mass of about twenty five students. One large target. I don’t think that I have yet comprehended the gravity of this situation in its entirety. I asked questions of other teachers present that day, and they informed me that this was the response that the local police department had instructed them in. I kept my opinion to myself, but I think a better response would have been to stand ready to attack should a gunman come through the door, or better yet, to stand ready for an escape.

Security cameras and metal detectors may deter some criminal objectives, but schools will remain an inviting mark for victimization, because they have an ample supply of desirable assets, children. Children offer the least resistance, and are of little or no threat to what Major Browne has aptly termed a predator. And, children are valued above all else in most societies, particularly ours. Set in a susceptible environment that is lenient by nature in order to produce the most conducive of learning situations, a predator can easily take advantage of the given circumstance. It is best if both teachers and students are educated, trained and prepared to understand and analyze the nature of the threat, as well as the intent of the perpetrator. We fear most what we know the least about. We fear the unknown. We can eliminate this fear, at least in part through knowledge and practice; developing the same mindset amongst all those most likely to be targeted.

Unlike a burglar or bank robber, whose intent is to steal money or property and escape, the school shooter is a predator whose intent is to cause fear, to dominate, and to hurt others through the indiscriminate use of a firearm. They have no fear, especially of dying, as is evidenced by the commission of suicide upon impending capture. We should not expect our children and teachers to sit huddled gravely together with their hands positioned passively in their laps awaiting rescue that may take hours to begin, or to be executed either one at a time or en-mass. In spite of the risks, fighting back may be the only option to the excessive loss of precious lives. And, if this is the case, then doesn’t it make sense to be prepared? Doesn’t it make sense that every student and teacher be thinking in a like manner? To react in the same way? Response Options believes that “proactive planning and prior preparation instills a commitment to and personal confidence in taking rapid and positive action should a critical incident occur.” Teachers and students are taught to “get inside the attacker’s decision cycle, and get them off-balance through the application of organized chaos devised to counter, confound, confuse, and defeat” the intruder.

School intrusion incidents such as we are discussing here really are quite rare, and the best response is a well practiced and rehearsed response. Responses born of paranoia and misperceptions of a growing need to fortify our schools with a myriad of inconsistent and ill maintained security measures is not sensible, nor reasonable. Locked doors, metal detectors, hall monitors and so on are effective if they are maintained and implemented professionally. Probably the worst offenders are the ones who are the most concerned. Parents! They complain about restrictions that limit their access to the school and their children. Teachers could be more diligent in confronting strangers by simply asking, “May I help you?” Again this comes down to training and information sharing. It is our first line of defense and warrants our best efforts. But, when all else fails, lets be sensible and prepared. Let’s be prepared to escape or fight back!

SHOULD LAWMAKERS INTRODUCE HARSHER SANCTIONS ON CONVICTED SEX OFFENDERS?

Should Lawmakers Introduce Harsher Sanctions for Convicted Sex Offenders?

Ronald Edwards

Throughout our relatively brief American history sexual offenses have been considered as some of the worst crimes committed against people, specifically those against children. Sex offenses are considered to be “perpetrated crimes of prey” where the weak are subjected to the lowest forms of victimization and degradation ever reported. Society demands retribution for criminals’ misconduct and demands the right to assign blame and punishment to the criminal. This is fundamental in a rule of law society. Criminal sanctions for sex crimes have always been pertinent to the deterrence. The political and social debates on the effectiveness of the deterrence against sexual offenses continue to rage on. There exists strong evidence that the deterrence approach for sexual offenses has not sent a clear message to lawbreakers that society will not tolerate such criminal activity. Sexual predators have no equal when it comes to public outrage.

The social response to sexual offenses will devastate a community, to the point of public demonstrations and retaliations. Crowds protest outside pedophiles’ residences and demand that they relocate to other areas and cities in the interest of community and child safety. Reports of vandalism and other acts of intimidation to get sex offenders to relocate are common.

Sex offenses continue to remain in the forefront of social problems. Many states are dispensing harsher penalties on sex offenders to establish more effective deterrence in an effort to stop such crimes. Many state legislatures have taken extraordinary measures to eradicate sex crimes from their respective communities to include lifetime registrations, chemical and surgical castration, and the death penalty for repeat offenders. There is strong evidence that sex offenses still continue to be a prominent issue in practically every city and community across this country for the foreseeable future. Politicians are becoming more frustrated with past and current penalties that appear to not be sufficient to deal with the savvy techniques of the modern day computer sex predators that lurk on the World Wide Web. Correctional agencies and prisons throughout this country are devising innovative sex offender programs that establish prison “therapeutic communities” that house sex offenders together in common cell blocks and dormitories while incorporating specialized counseling and group therapy sessions, all under strict supervision of attentive corrections officers. Many of these prison programs are mandatory and require an inmate’s successful participation and graduation to secure any possibility of consideration for release from prison. Most state prisons have long waiting lists for sex offenders to gain admission into these therapy programs, some waiting lists may extend beyond two years. Despite our best efforts the programs and available sanctions are not curtailing this social epidemic. It is time to increase the penalties and legal sanctions for sex offenders. Despite the noble efforts of our government leaders to “get tough” on criminal penalties, strong evidence reflects our best efforts are not sufficient.

Sex offenders are both young old and represent all ethnic groups. Evidence supports that short prison stints are not a viable deterrent. Support for the harshest penalties to include Internet notifications of sex offenders moving into a community, life time registrations, life sentences without parole, surgical and chemical castration and the death penalty are all receiving conservative support. Liberals still continue to view sex offenders as social misfits that can be rehabilitated with intensive programming. Many sex offenders are failing to register with their Sheriff or police departments after their release from prisons.

In Ohio, State Representative Tim Shaffer (R) has introduced a bill for stiffer penalties for those sex offenders who fail to properly register by assigning the same penalty as the original sex offense the person was convicted of. For the most dangerous sex offenders, it would be a first-degree felony with 10 years in prison. According to this proposed legislation, sex offenders who fail to properly register and have previously been convicted of failing to register would receive mandatory jail time for up to three years. Ohio State Auditor Betty Montgomery initially proposed this bill when she was Ohio’s Attorney General.

In many Ohio communities, sex offenders are restricted as to where they can live. Local community leaders in Pickerington, Ohio are trying to expand the scope of prohibited areas, limit the number of locations where sex offenders can live, and to keep them away from more than just schools. Legislation was introduced in September 2006, which would prohibit sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools, public swimming pools, day-care operations, city-owned or operated public parks, and playgrounds.

We must deal more harshly with the repeat sex offenders with the growing sophistication of the pedophiles on the Internet luring young children to remote areas across state lines for sexual rendezvous. It will be essential to deter these high-tech predators. The Internet has spawned an entirely new category of sexual predators. The Internet is providing the most graphic sexual depictions of children for on-line predators. It is estimated that they have stimulated a multi-billion dollar child pornography market in this country alone. Pedophiles are quickly learning how to penetrate the innocence of the on-line craze at “MySpace.Com”, one of the largest Internet sites geared for children and young adults to meet and exchange personal and private information. Authorities are perplexed at the sheer volume of people who are embroiled in this fast growing child sex Internet industry. This market has exposed the appalling level of corruption of children of all ages. The Internet market for child pornography is also fueled by the despicable commerce generated from third world countries. Children are used in pornographic photographs depicting sex acts with adults, pets, with other children. Unfortunately, the market is there, reportedly lucrative, and despicable.

It is evident, sexual offenses perpetrated on children rate among the most appalling and morally reprehensible crimes committed in our society. The current sentences, sanctions, and judicial guidelines are not effective in deterring pedophiles. It may be the prime time to introduce more permanent and harsher sentences that would guarantee society’s protection against such crimes. Adult sex offenders who gain the trust of society by working in the highest levels of government, scouting, and the clergy have traumatized child victims for life. The media typically reports sexual abuse on a daily basis in every community across this country. It is necessary that the criminal justice system, and particularly the judiciary, work to create bold new strategies to keep repeat offenders off our streets and out of our communities. Our children must be better protected if we expect them to go to schools, churches, social events and learn to be responsible and productive.

Public safety will soon put more emphasis on keeping our children safer in all public areas. Cameras and electronic surveillance equipment will play a pivotal role in where and how we interact with children in public places in the near future. We now have ample evidence to support the additional use of electronic cameras in all public properties and there is growing support for private entities to see and understand the positive features of surveillance devices that will protect the interest of the consumer and patrons. These devices have been successful in solving all sorts of criminal misconduct from abductions on city streets to homicides, all without the knowledge of the perpetrator. Time is of the essence. Lawmakers, communities, cities, and metropolitan areas must devise harsher penalties and sanctions to curtail this growing epidemic of sexual deviancy. Pedophiles are psychologically impairing our children, spawning child pornography and sexual assaults on our youth. We must do what is necessary to keep these sex predators off our streets and out of our communities. Perhaps life without parole may be our only guarantee of safety.


References:

Ohio Revised Code
Columbus Dispatch, Metro State section D, Jim Woods, October 1, 2006
Bangor Dailey News, August 1, 2006
The Eagle - Gazette Staff, Carl Burnett Jr. September 16, 2006