LASERS, LIGHTERS, LOSERS & LUNATICS

By Diane M. Grassi

It appears that thus far in 2005 we have entered a new arena in the betrayal of common sense. This week in a bid to make more sense of our laws and in keeping our civility in check, not even the U.S. Supreme Court could clarify how our federal sentencing laws are to be interpreted, themselves looking less than sensible.

In the first major decision handed down by the Supremes in the 2004-05 session of the U.S. Supreme Court, they called upon an ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist to break their tie to in order to quash the 1987 public law passed by the U.S. Congress which was the amended 1984 Federal Sentencing Reform Act. This case was the first the Supreme Court heard in the 2004 session, this past October 1, 2004.

There will much debate for weeks and months to come over this most controversial decision, much because of the overturned law which imposed mandatory federal sentencing guidelines and stirred much controversy when it was originally passed. It gave federal judges less latitude in imposing sentences and provided more supposed consistency in criminal punishments. This new decision now allows federal judges to use the guidelines as advisory rather than as mandatory when handing down sentences.

But at this juncture what is most disturbing to the legal community and the public-at-large are the future ramifications of cases previously tried as well as those presently on appeal. The legal eagles will tell you two different stories. On the one hand they are saying that the new law does not extend to previously tried cases, but there is a contingent of criminal defense attorneys who obviously will test the water. At least temporarily this puts the whole federal legal process into a tailspin. But whether the judges, the Congress, the inmates or the public end up the winners or losers in this scenario, has yet to be decided.

In matters of homeland security, the Intelligence Reform Bill which was signed on December 17, 2004 by President Bush, in the shadows of the Christmas holiday in Washington, now requires all butane cigarette lighters to be banned from passengers’ carry-on bags on any U.S. airline. The ban goes into effect on February 15, 2005.

Again, with butane being a flammable chemical it may make sense from a non-security standpoint to be eliminated. Shoe bomber Richard Reid is the party to thank for this, but over two years have gone by since that incident, making the timing of this imposition questionable But while curling irons powered by butane will still be allowed in checked luggage and pepper spray may still be packed, get ready for the next “smoking gun.” Our astute mental giants overseeing air travel in the best interests of the public do not intend to stop with prohibiting lighters.

Given their way, regulators hope to ban paper matches from smokers’ pockets as well as carry-on bags. Since matches are not detectable by x-ray, this would require all carry-on bags to be opened and inspected in a hunt for the illicit matches. Therefore, additional TSA screeners and anticipated extremely long lines at airport security check-ins would have a crippling effect on passengers and the entire system, and would give travelers another reason to either cut back on air travel again or to acquiesce to ad hoc policy. Perhaps this is a win for the anti-smoking crowd, but another blow for common sense amongst the lawmakers. How about concentrating on 90% of the cargo which goes uninspected into the belly of the plane you’re on?

With a virtually untested Patriot Act under tow, David Banach, a Parsippany, NJ man has been indicted for interference with the operation of a mass transportation vehicle and for lying to FBI personnel about it. He shined a laser beam pen at a 13-passenger jet attempting to land at the Teteboro, NJ airport and then did so again two days later with a helicopter carrying Port Authority Police detectives.

The statute provides for a possible incarceration of up to 25 years in prison and a fine of $500,000.00 for his irresponsible and reckless behavior. We have plenty of laws already on the books to address his illegalities. But the Patriot Act which has come under much scrutiny because of its broad interpretation of the law was implemented to address issues of terrorist activity in the interests of national security. It would have come in handy when Timothy McVeigh was indicted.

The question will be whether Banach will be correctly tried under the Patriot Act. It will play out as either a positive for an opportunity to finally fine tune the Act, or it may turn out to be a negative as it could diminish the Act’s effectiveness when truly tested by actual terrorists who specifically threaten U.S. security. Either way, Banach is a loser, who should have known better.

And finally, two national icons in the sports world, and both dandy Randy(s) once again proved that they could not help themselves. After all, lunacy is not just relegated to the inner sanctums of the workings of our government. But Randy Moss of the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings as well as the other Randy as in Johnson, now of the heralded New York Yankees showed their less than desirable characters.

Moss, as well known for creating havoc off the field as for his stellar athletic prowess, in his pretend display of mooning the Green Bay Packers’ crowd at Lambeau field Sunday, took on a life of its own in the media. The aftermath in the press was almost as distasteful as the incident itself. The week prior Moss left the field early before the end of the game without his teammates, and speaks as much about instilling game rules as it does about the lack of character in this “I did it because I can” generation.

And pitcher, Randy Johnson, having spent the past 20 years pitching his heart out in baseballs’ Major Leagues, earning 5 Cy Young awards, and winning a World Series Championship as well as 246 games, was frightened by a WCBS-TV news cameraman. So instead of acting like a professional or a reasonable person, he attempted to knock the camera out of the cameraman’s hands in his grand entrance to win the hearts of Yankees fans.

So what kind of signal does all of this send to the American public? Namely that we can no longer expect the U.S. government, its administrators and lawmakers to not only not have all the answers for us, but to no longer expect to even be provided any answers at times. And that is a scary proposition. And also that it’s no wonder that so many have tuned out and tuned into TV reality shows instead of keeping up with the changing and sometimes lunatic choices our government decides for us all in the name of our “best interests.”