Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03091999 - SD11 SD.11 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Date: March 9, 1999 Matter of Record Subject: Public Comment On this date, the Board of Supervisors heard comments from the following people: James March, 2300 Humphrey, #6, Richmond, commented on a gun permit policy for the County; and presented the attached comments: and Warren L. Smith, 1100 Bailey Road, Pittsburg, presented comments in memory of his wife, Virginia. THIS IS A MATTER FOR RECORD PURPOSES ONLY NO BOARD ACTION WAS TAKEN c.c.County Counsel Good evening, My name is Jim March from Richmond. California's Constitution, Article 1, Section `IB says: "�4 citizen or class of f citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted" n t same t citizens.r, Right now, in this county, Sheriff Rupf s policies on issuing concealed weapons permits ssly violates this section of the Constitution. Permits are being handed out on the basis of wealth and political connections; Judges, Assistant DAs and others have no problems getting permits, but cabbies or people working late in bad neighborhoods and facing much higher risk of attack are routinely denied. Rather than evaluating people's risk of violent assault, the current system is based on "who's life is more worthy of self defense". We either have equal protection under the law, or we have an armed aristocracy lording it over unarmed peasants, wildly contrary to American ideals of justice. Worse yet, the Sheriff has a policy of absolute non-issuance in the predominantly minority towns of Richmond and Pittsburgh, and will not even allow residents of those towns to submit applications. Gun permits in California are almost universally being issued on an elitist, racist and in some cases outright corrupt basis, but Sheriff Rupf s"no guns for the minority towns" policy is absolutely the most blatant current example in the whole state of the original design behind California's"discretionary gun permit system" established in 1923. Our permit system was patterned after earlier Southern statutes, such as the one Florida finally reformed in 1986. In Florida, in 1941 a white gent was hauled into court for packing sans permit, and the case went up to the Florida Supreme Court. In the majority opinion releasing the guy, Justice Buford said: "I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied." - Watson v. Stone, 4 So.2d 700, 703 (Na. 1941) And if you don't see a connection here, let me remind you that California's permit system was put in place during a time when the KKK could garner 100,00€1 for a march on DC and "Birth of a Nation" was a hit movie. I am asking you, the County Supervisors to help me convince Sheriff Rupf to voluntarily end this last vestige of Jim. Crow. He needs to institute a gun permit policy that is applied uniformly to all citizens regardless of race, "old boy's club membership" economic status or recent campaign contributions. He can set the requirements as tight as he wants within current state law, so long as all citizens are treated equally under the law. I need to know how to contact the County's legal advisors, who will quickly see that the current system will cause any Judge in the state to gag. I brought copies of this speech with my contact info. Look me up, let's begin discussing reforms...because there's no way in hell the Sheriff's current permit policies will withstand court scrutiny, nor do you want a civil rights violations lawsuits naming these causes of action, or word of them appearing in local papers. Regardless of your personal views on civilian self defense, the injustice in this matter can no longer be ignored. Thank you. I've also brought copies of a document from Sacramento County that shows just how bad the gun permit corruption issue has gotten, plus a one-page outline for a non-discriminatory permit system. Jird March, Richmond, CA—home: 510-233-3180, Email ,ii ar;h�ria"v4�e�.nea �r'� ,fit A Objective Standards in CCW Issuance--an open letter to the California defense rights activist community. OK guys,let's say we can actually convince somebody important that"CCW as practiced today„is a screwed-up,illegal and unconstitutional mess. We've either convinced the Sheriff'of this or via a lawsuit and restraining order a judge orders"cease and desist"from illegal practices;either way let's assume the Sheriff involved is"mainly anti-civilian-defense". What kind of good results can we hope for? AB2022 will be a BIG help if we can get that far. The text of AB2022 as signed by Wilson can be seen at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/97-98/biU/asm/ab_2001-2050/ab_2022_bill_19980928_chaptered.htinl Using that,we can let the Sheriff set OBJECTIVE standards that are"as tight as he wants within the boundaries of law"and he can't really screw us over that bad. We need to show that the current SUBJECTIVE standards are wide open to abuse,which is now rampant. As I see it,the absolute worst he can do for objective standards now that 2022 is in would be: 1) Background check via state DOJ,which has already been a required part of CCW issuance. 2) 16 hours training,or 24 hours at a community college if the 24hours are applied"uniformly"to all applicants. That's codified in detail within AB2022—do a search of the text on the word"train". This suggests that if 16 hours is what's going on,it might perhaps be applied on a discretionary basis...which might technically be an equal protection violation...but...it might be worth not complaining about in order to get the Sheriff to"buy into the whole concept". 3) Fees of$100 to the issuing dept.and$70ish to the DOJ. That might be off by a few bux but who cares. 4) Up to$150 for psychological testing. It's up to the Sheriff to assign you to the same shrink as HE uses to screen PD applicants and if I'm reading this right,fees are payable to the licensing authority—so I assume the shrink bills at the"group contract rate„ already established for wanna-be cops. Good idea,as long as it's applied fairly versus"he wants a gun, so he's ipso facto a lunatic"<insert sick grin here>. 5) The license period is"up to"two years for most,or three for Judges,or four for"peace officers". I assume that mostly means reserve officers or any that don't automatically have off-duty carry status? Big potential glitch is if the issuer restricts it below 2 years on a"random.basis"---if he tries that,we nail him on"equal protection issues"if he gives 2yr permits to the elite,the rich, the campaign contributors,etc. 6) Now for the good news:the PD Chief/Sheriff cannot put up any"additional hurdles"that cost money. That's specifically verboten. So posting bonds for$1,000,000 are OUT,as is"take a three-month tour at a police academy" 7) More good news: Cops and Judges are"special case individuals"under the rules,but DAs and their staff are NOT. So anything he'll do for them he's gotta do for anybody who meets standards. 8) As I see it,a Sheriff/Chief can throw up one MORE barrier:he can require shooting skills at the same level of qualification as his regular cops,tested either as part of the 16 or 24 hours of training,or tested(for free)by one of his rangemasters at his or another range. 9) The Sheriff and Chiefs should be allowed to deny issuance based on sworn statements by cops to the effect of"the applicant is a crook we haven't quite caught yet",based on gang affiliation or other factors. These statements should be open to challenge in court by the applicant if it's BS;this is a common_clause in non-discriminatory permit systems in other states. SO:the above list taken together would constitute the toughest set of objective standards in the nation. Could we live with that? I think so,if it's administered rationally. If he's gonna crank the shooting standards up that high,we'd best get at least two tries at it,or rather,as many tries as a cop-to-be gets. Here's another point:do we want to allow him to waive part of the objective standards for holders of restraining orders for violence? Under current law,if you've been granted an order against a violent threat,it's a"potentially valid excuse for packing sans permit" that must be allowed into court. For this reason,it's clear that such people are already a"special case"and therefore,I don't think we should object if they get easier standards to meet so long as our training requirements are 16 hours. Mebbe Judges should be the same way...to limit the "flak"the Sheriff will get by cranking down on the standards. As long as the"regular folk standards"are a target we can hit,and that it's the SANIE target regardless of race,religion,gender, campaign contributions,social/political status,the usual current garbage. The Sheriff can and probably should put in a"no carry in bars or with a BAL of.08%or more"---*everybody*with a permit,even Judges. We've seen a few cases of"heavy restrictions that acid up to almost no permit",Alameda County is infamous for this sort of thing--but EQUAL PROTECTION applies,no more BS. Equal protection under the law WILL finally apply to civilian self defense. We need to give the Chiefs/Sheriffs enough"squirm room"so they buy into reforms more-or-less voluntarily,avoiding long messy lawsuits that won't help anybody and entrench the "state of distrust"currently ruining PD/Civilian relations and directly contributing to the violence levels statewide. The rift needs to heal as fast as possible,that means giving these idiots a chance at saving face. Jim March About Lou Blanas Only tough_ a successful lawsuit in the Sacramento Superior Court were we finally able to gain access to this hidden. report and learn a little more about the deep corruption within the Sheriff's Department. (Kasler, et al, v. Cram, et al, Case 0 95-CS-00404, Exhibit F, filed on March 21, 1995) Lou Blanas hid this embarrassing report and would not release it to anybody. At great personal risk, a supporter seeping truth and integrity in government has brought this report to your attention. In a very recent instance, several of Blanas' Deputies surrounded this individual in an attempt at intimidation with thinly veiled threats o retaliation for daring to inform people of the truth about this dgngerous dangerousroan. Log Blanas. The embarrassing COLA.PRANCBSCO Police Report (attached) shows how big money contributors are given special privileges by the current Sacramento Undersheriff`and Sheri. With Lou Blanas, money can buy you gun permits, Sheriff's Deputy badges, and get out of jail free cards if you choose to get drunk and threaten people with a gun. In this instance, the big contributor was given an Honorary Deputy badge and I.D.'s, plus a CCW permit (page 18), and when he was arrested for brandishing a weapon at two people, the privileges of big money continued as his charge of brandishing a weapon was reduced to an infraction of disturbing the peace, $100 fine. The arresting Deputy was punished and assigned to 5-years jail duty for daring to arrest one of the Dndersheriffs contributors. Beholden to special interests, and stiff'retaliation against those who would appose him. Like Glen Craig, Uu Bl, as is 12= of thenroblem. Just as CDLAF ANCBSCO said, "It is all political. It is just a big political game . d . " (,page 12). District Attorney Jan Scully, a friend to Lou Blanas and glen Craig, has extended privileges to many of Lou Blanas' friends who have committed crimes against the People of Sacramento. It is definitely time for change. S CSTTttill SACRAOMID C3JKTY SRO IFIF S DEPARTPUT U"T INJOER ?" i STXY _—PSD : Sm 1— i AT1CN . UARItD AOULI CItI� REPORT 04-076998utTN IxviWLriREDJLN. 6CCATICEN OF OCCURRENCE g REPORT DATE DAY TIM€ � EVENT NO. DAT9 FROM DAY ' NAS IOCC. DATE TO DAY 3 ARS COMWECT€D RE'PORT(S)-;YPE Alto (UMBER �. i X ( pmmE C P I`: A mN l iG T S F LAY OF AOil 6 � ` DO SPECIAL CRIME C.ATT=RIES EXIST? YES 1 NO AICN CATEGORY FROM REVERSE ;V NAME (Last. Pirst Aiddttt)/FIRM NAME IF BUSINESS i its. PHONE # BUS. ANNIE MCC-,RVER, WILLY RAY 1974-0625 RESIDENCE ADDRESS BUSINESS ADDRESS ($CHOM IF JUV.) 8 2 o kMU""'M%y S M). i A­ SACTO . , Cion � 3 S 2 0 At3SMT SL"J'I:?. , S.A=c) . , CA 9 S 8 2 i a 1010$ AGE � $EX Luz � VIC71l1"$ VEHICLE (Yr., Mak*, MOdek, LiC. NO.) # F G N I t V.z NAM CLast, PirYt Middk*)/FIRM NAME IF BUSINESS ; RES. PNONE � BUS. PHONE .. ! - S. 443-30066 1ESID€NCZ ADDRESS BUSINESS ADDRESS CSCHCOL IF JUV.) 3836 AT.TBnN BLVD. 014 SAC CA MC`ELLAN A.F$ MILDINC #625 A j DCB ## AC.£ SEX {{' RACE # VICTIMIS VEHICLE CY-., rlsKs, 1'awt, L',C. NO.) ! A I ! { C D f E i A. .ZLACE 1STRUCTURE A STREET/ALLEY 7 OTHER # B. DESCRIPTION 1 RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL. 7 CM WK i OF 2 - VEHICLE 5 '.LOTJPARK 1# OF Z . t7 &USINISS 5 1USTI M. a.: CT119t AIME 3 - RES/YARD 6 /STCRAGE SURROUNDINGS' 3 - INDUSTRIAL 6 CONST. SITE 1 3 C ICN-RESIDENTIAL i E R€SID IAL I {M/A A SIDE I ,/N/A � SUSIPECT INFO PAUI W 11ONVf3NIENCE1 SINGLE FAMILY 2 FRONT 5 - a LEST. I (NUMBER Of SUV .�,.Z YEE # ? PAST I= - 2 APT/CONDO 3 REAR 6 � UP LEV. � I ATTEMA'T ONLY - RESTAURN T/1AR m 3 OU>l.ED(/TOWN 2 NO FORCE = P#IY'�ICAL -EVIDENCE a RUC/MEBICJtL i A MOTEL/NOTI<L N y # 3 KETALIP ( G nlExEO BY R/O F YEffi 5 GAS STATION ' 5 wo I LE NOW 1 tIIIK1ll)ltli 3 t. BMY/FORCE " s RETAIL SCHOOI, i - 6 3 �#NCOit OTHER Z DOOR 5 SAW/ORILL CSI REQUESTED ns I 6 NTD IN SLOG. B IDENTIFIABLE PROP+FRTY YE# �* 1 - Y � 3 FINANL IRST. ' P TARGETS$) A SLICE GLASS i 7 CHANNEL I= e - r INT€RTAIN/AEC I STORAGE $LOG. 5 DUl'T'/VENT I E PRY TOOL ADDITIONAL VICTIMS/ � - 'C PUBLIC BLDG. - 2 CLOSET - 6 ADJ. BLDG. 9 LIFT OUT WITNESSES --YES -.r v 11 OTHER w 3 BATHROOM 7 ROOF/FLOOR 10 ItRICX/ROCX ' 1 7N( A OEM € WALL 11 BOLT CUT/PLIERS{ NEIGHBORHOOD LAtiV YES _ -W D TARGETS - 5 FAMILY ROM 9 BASEMENT 12 WINDOW SMASH ; PROPUrf LOSS —YES � N ' SHOP 6 /CARPORT 10 OTHER ®� - 13 TAP!/WtRE ; PRLRrtRT! LIST AT7ACH 11E3 # 2 CAS)( DRAWER 7 KITCHEN 1b OOO'R PUNCH i - 3 OFFICE S LIVING ROC7'I - 15 DORS KICK - SAFE/= 9 STORAGE AC04 I ALARM SYST8497 16 OT11€R � INVESTIGATIVE DIV/PUS NMI F' I a 5 VENDING MACH.! - 1D BEDROOM YES NO i i DISPLAY IT'EMS1 11 DINING � SET S^,FF? 1! _ 7 "LASSROCMI 12 OTHER Y113 go t'it�C*'s ACTION VJi �ft7P�4Y`I !ATOPY VOiI I SHTEAED CCCJPIED BUILDING13 !ROUND /ChGGEO VICTIM 1 LARGE LOSS VALUE """ 11 LARGE APOLIANICES - 2 ENTERED UNOCCUPIED #LOG. - 14 RIPPED/CUT CLOTHING � m 2 TOOK CXE=ICREOIT CARDS 12 SMALL APIMLIAMCSS 3 VACANT R0.11LDG. - 15 "OUSTED VICTIM 3 CCNSIA4"L£ Gam) 13 CLOTHING/FMS 3 - 6 VANDALIZEDIRANSACUD - 16 FORCED VICTIM TO MOVE � - 6 OFFICE EQUIPMENT - 16 DRUG$ g U5€O xATCSES/$MRNCSO AT SCENts- 17 DISAELEO PNOME/ELECTRIC ! - 5 CAMERA 15 CIIIN31RUVION +IAT€'JtIAI m 5 01 SAWLID ALARM - 13 INJURED VICTIM y - 6 PfAtE'R TOOLS/LAWN EQUIP - 16 AUTO PARTUACCESM11 - 7 ATL/ORANC ON PREMISES r 19 THREATENED VICTIM I - 7 FIREARMS17 TOOLS/CAAK/141CMALIC, s - d VEMICLZ NEEDED FOR LOOT 20 MASTURRAT€D I d SILVERWE - 13 Gv1LO/SILVER COINS 1 a USED VICTIM'S TOOLS - 21 DISROBED FULLY/PARTIALLY � - 9 FINE JEW£L>rT - '9 TV/$TERSO/VIDRIO ® "O GtEif LOCATION Of NIODtOI CAIN- 22 FIRED VEAPON - 10 NEY MO - 20 NO LOSS - SELECTIVE IN LOOT .13 SUSPECT, AAM€13 � � 244 OTHER - SYNOPSIS OF CRIME V-? and S-, engaged in a verbal argument outside a bar. S-1 then pushed bac Im eeacket he was wearing, exposing a. . 45 caliber automatic on his waistban .�. a rc:Lslber. Sm . placed his hand on the gn=, as in 'a drawing motion, an tcld 17-1, that he abetter go the luck around or there is gei.ng to be trouble,, 7-1 fled as S-1 w, detained, by a ii.mcusine dr:.ver., V-i sig ed a citizen' wTTI:Ca.a3inle for a _ . .t , S-1 was cite d, city nualber 47993.2 . ' INVESTIGAT17lG OFFICI:A(S) SACC£ SRT. AMOVING SUPERVISC. A - M. mopidiN 8 4.�,. f oG 3� CCNT=AT=02t REPORT j A i s ; c j o ! g 94-07699e f w REMIT xLE1m AUT#CSRIT'f T SECTMN ! FEL j Also 1 INTERVIEW* MONTH ; DAY � TEM � TIME x 3 i - C-?WMt.AIMANT/VICTIM (LIST FIRST VICTIM IF AME "RAN ONE) Mc CA.RVSR. Wl:�LY �W OEM$ INTERVIEWC (('LAST, FIRST MIDDLE) VIR/W/S *IL=TICN OF 19TERVIEW CdLAF RANCE.SCC > uA.NSs 5-" SCE "IME/DATE REPORT INFIOMATION IN CHRiStOLOGICAL O DEX. m to speak with C1' :;x-'R.ANCv_SCC. Immediately upon entering my patrol car, m C:0L;L^RA. CZ.SCC demanded to know what he was under arrest for. I advised him E zhat he was Lender arrest for the z-ade or threatening display of a firearm, and that it was a misdemeanorin the State cif calx.:o—4 a. Z advised him d � Lnaz he was goi.nc tc he issued a citation aid 'released. i , While m was looking through C0LA.FR. AU=-SC'C' s wallet for his i,dent rfication, ? I found two concealed weapons pests signed by Sheriff Glen Craig. a f asked COU.. FCESCC what he dial for a livi.rcx a -4 he ted that he worked sxst,action. . I was curious as to why a person who worked construction �. would need a conoraled weapons pe. Ii t. I asked COLAFRE MCE'SCO what specific _Iuz_4 es :he had tha: recruired him to carry a concealed weapon and to have a a3 i concealed wearons permit . ^CI A_7R. CZSC0 stated the fo?lowi nag to Ise i= .4 summary a� I 't i Www c F, i 4 s t T is all political . I,� s gust a big pr�li�.�.cal game . aiza a 1 Major contrihutcr of Lou Slanas and Glen Craig, and they care me s 1 a concealed weapons pe -mit . They ®old me not to screw around, and not to mess it up, and I have tried real hard not to . you a can call mo Sailev. You can Dell Lou Slanas . Thev know m am a : good guy. They know that I would never point mfr gun at anyone. w advised COLAFRANCSSCO that the victim had stated that COLAFRANCESCC had LL -�ust d sp payed the g-un in a rude or zh=eatening I.zx.aer and that the victim had not said anything about COLAFRA.NCESC:O pointing the gun at anyone. 7 At this t,ime, CC LAA- tWC_SCC,) stated the f ol.Lowing t z Ise im summary: e 0 "F 1 L.a:.I"fi Ota ld+d 3 s !FATROL S.�,CStAI►+�^T:`fl C T`� SEZR??, S TEpA.P°""XCEMyqT C0HTT.A 7XT10X REPORT A 1 3 ! v a f E 94-076998 F I G 11777" AUTHORITY SECTION FEL JISO ;NTERVII MCNl1Tt4 OAY Z rum_ TIxt 447 (2) PC I 1 x C2PPLAJXANT/VtCT41X (LIST FIXST VICTIM If *ORE TMAN OXV P59SCU iNrEAVIE'M CLA T, FTRST 01100LE) 1 /1t/WJS Ak L=ATTCW Of INTERVIEW v2:,..Ar�.�C: :�CI SCS 1 '!XE/TIAT£ REPORT WCRJSATION IN CIRONClLOG2CAL CJROIX. f 1 advised him that a citizen had stated that he had displayed his firearm i= a rude cox threatening manner, and that `he citizen was mak+.ng a C.iti en' s arr est. 1 advised COLA-FIRANCESCC that was not arresting h1m, that a citizen was a:r est. g him. C=LAr`"R NCSSCC then stated the following apont:.:ecus statement : y 11=k he saw my gg=u when I was in the bathroom. 1 ad*riscA- =LAFRANCZSCC !tat the victim had stated that CCLAFRANCESCC had displa"Ted the Sun outside of Brother Oliver, s . COLAFRANCESCO stated the 011owi=5 to :zee .ire summary ..2 i i - 2 Nc C didn' t. He saw it while a was in the bathroom. You' re 4 sa q, that because 1 was raking a piss, 2 am being arrested? Z5 5 w achrised COLA.FRANCSSCO that he was not under arrest for urinating. C.:LA .AAN ZSC:C then stated the following to me in summary: mary: . f Wkux= apt Z under arrest Qr? again advised COLA. FlCESCO that he was under a,r=est for the rude or 22 :Areat gR display of a firearm. While cctmoleting, the citation, opened COLAZIANCESCO' s wallet, in order to 25A rind a driver' s license or a California identification card„ '+4ile 2 ; ?i ppinxq through CG . NCSSCO' s wallet" Z noticed that it was a badge 2 _ wallet . A, badge wallet is a wallet: commonly used by law enforcement s 2� Personnel to hold itemp normally associated with a wallet, as well as a .cut sb G0a' =4VATT0N RZ20RT 9 77 4 G E E 94-0876998 L i G i tE i i XLPMT *Joe AuTMOR ITY SMION 9 FIL i MISD IXTERVIEN. MONTES ! OXT Tiji TIME 4;.7 {23 PC X CCM1PLAIU"T/V1CTIM <LIST FIRST VICTIM IM AM TUX ONE? McC•;,•RV%_-R, WIL.LY RAY _ PERSONSON INTERVIE ED (LAST, FIRST MISISLX. 9 V/R/W/S OILOCATICU Of INTERVIEW CC NCESCO, :WMES 1 S-? 3 SC=TI7- 'II4ElDXTE REP 7RT INFO MUTIOx IS! CJ11ON OGIUL MO. m out area to insert a badge. This cut out area is usually covered by a thy.= eat her an . --moved the: thin leather 21ap and -found a brass shield onside the wallet . This brass shield, at _414rst glance, appeared to be a 7 roma r+a n r .� ; 1 ,- ,•e , +s t law enlOzrcement badge . When given a c�cse.. .,c®} thee. was a ribbon t..a� an across the shield that had the word honcra:ryll across it . Directly ad"4 acent this badge was an i•denti icatian car: with CGLM—KAINCESGG' s pic a°..re clime ®t, whi ch stated that he was an honorary deputy sheriff with the Cou--tN 3 cf Sacramento . This honorary deputy sheriff identification card was signet € by Sheri_`! G-.en Craig. ®� a asked I:GLAF.RJW SGG why he carried around this honorary badge and he r stated the following to mein summary -_4 I already told you. 2 got that stuff due to some political ties ' S _ have. L rill a major contributor to you guys (Sheriff' s E E depar tent) and through my political ties, L have been given i 7 ce=tain things . ,ala probably going to loose them all now. .3 _9 E P Gcu I dn' t you please just call Mo Hailey or Lou Slana s so we can 6 :3 j sweep this under the rug? Do we really have to do anything about this? Gant we just f-orget that it happened? E :3 1 advased CGLAr'RMRM-S-0 that would certainly be an option was doI 4 6' dealing with a citizen' s s arrrest . i advised CuLAZ?J NGSSC0 that beca.us+ :5 ? someone had demanded a citizen' s arrest, the law stated that T muse corduc, :5 the; arrest . I advised C�JLA,r"RANGESCO that L was :cit going to take him is :7 Jail , and that taking hila to jail was certainly an option. i advised h pi :8 I =hat L was merely going to issue h.-.m a citation and release him �"a%: .XSING OF14CU J ; Iy2ATRCOL jXPr+rtovlxG Si11rfRVISCRt PliliyE Sb The Parable of the Sheep by Charles Riggs � -Not so long agcy and in a pasture too uncomfortably close to here, a flock of sheep lived and grazed. They were protected by a dog, who answered to the master, but despite his best efforts from time to time a nearby pack of wolves would prey upon the flock. One day a group of sheen, bolder than the rest, met to discuss their dilemma. "Cur dog is good, and vigilant, but he is one and the wolves are many. The wolves he catches are not always killed, and the master judges and releases many to prey again upon us, for no reason we can understand. What can we do? We are sheep, but we do not wish to be food, too. " one sheep spoke up, saying "It is his teeth and claws that make the wolf so terrible to us. It is his nature to prey, and he would find any way to do it, but it is the tools he wields that make it possible. If we had such teeth, we could fight back, and stop this savagery. " The other sheep clamored in agreement, and they went together to the old bonzes of the dead wolves heaped in the corner of the pasture, and gathered fang and claw and made thein into weapons. That night, when the wolves came, the newly armed sheep sprang up with their weapons and struck at them, crying, "Begone! We are not food! " and drove off the wolves, who were astonished. When did sheep become so bold and so dangerous to wolves? When did sheep grow teeth? It was unthinkable! The next day, flush with victory and waving their weapons, they approached the flock to pronounce their discovery. But as they drew nigh, the flock huddled together and cried out, "Baaaaaaaadddd! Baaaaaddd things! You have bad things! 'Re are afraid! You are not sheep! " (5 The brave sheep stopped, amazed. ,But we are your bretL11ren! " they cried. "We are still sheep, but we dna not wish to be food. See, our new teeth and claws protect us and have saved us from slaughter. They do not make us into wolves, they make Sas equal to the wolves, and safe from their viciousness! ,, "Baaaaaaadi " cried the flock, "the things are bad and will pervert you, and we fear them. You cannot bring them into the flock! " So the armed sheep resolved to conceal their weapons, for although they had no desire to panic the flock, they wished to remain in the fold. But they would not return to those :tights of terror, waiting for the wolves to come. Tr time, the wolves attacked less often and sought easier prey, for they had no stomach for fighting sheep who possessed tooth and claw ever. as they did. Not knowing which sheep had fangs and which did not, they came to leave sheep out of their diet almost completely except for the occasional raid, from which more than one wolf did not return. Then Carrie the clay when, as the flock grazed beside the stream, one sheep's weapon: slipped from the folds of her fleece, and the floe cried out in terror again,, "Baaaaaad! You stall possess these evil things: We must bar you from our presence3 ,. And so they did. The great chief sheep and his council, encouraged by the words of their advisors, placed signs and totems at the edges of the pasture forbidding the presence of hidden weapons there. The armed sheep protested before the council, saying, "it is our pasture, too, and we have never harmed you! when can you say we have caused you hurt? It is the wolves, not we, who prey upon you. we are still sheep, but we are not food! " But the frock drowned them out with cries of "Baaaaaaddd! we will not hear your clever wards! You and your things are $ evil and will harm us! " Saddened by this rejection, the armed sheep moved off and spent their days on the edges of the flock, trying from time to time to speak with their brethren to convince them of the wisdom of having such teeth, but meeting with little success. They found it hard to talk to those who, upon hearing their words, would roll back their eyes and flee, crying "Baaaaddd! Bad things! '' That night, the wolves happened upon the sheep's totems and signs, and said, "Truly, these sheep are fools! They have told us they have no teeth! Brothers, let us feed! " And they set upon the flock, and horrible was the carnage in the midst of the fold. The dog fought like a demon, and often seemed to be in two places at once, but even he could not halt the is slaughter. it was only when the other sheep arrived with their weapons that the wolves fled, only to remain on the edge of the pasture and wait for the next time they could prey, for if the sheep were so foolish once, they would be so amain. This they did, and do still. in the morning, the armed sheep spoke to the flock, and said, "See? if the wolves know you have no teeth, they will fall upon you. why be prey? To be a sheep does not mean to be food for wolves! " But the flock cried out, more feebly for their voices were fewer, though with no less terror, "Baaaaaaaad! These things are bad! if they were banished, the wolves would not harm us! Baaaaaaad! " So they resolved to retain their weapons, but to conceal them from the flock; to endure their fear and loathing, and even to protect their brethren if the need arose, until the day the flock learned to understand that as long as there were wolves in the night, sheep would need teeth to repel them. They would still be sheep, but they would not be food! 1997 Charles Riggs