The Trauma of Being Re-victimized as a Survivor of a Crime Victim

The Trauma of Being Re-victimized as a Survivor of a Crime Victim

Being Re-victimized by an Uncaring Justice system as a Victim

Each of us in life will experience trauma of some type. The trauma of emotional or physical abuse, a catastrophic or debilitating illness or injury, death of a close friend or relative, a marital break-up or like millions of Americans over the past few decade's survivors of a murdered friend or loved family member.

Sadly, many Americans have or will fall in all of the category's listed and thankfully for most of them are able to seek help in overcoming their trauma's, through the assistance of mental, and medical health professions, a variety of support groups dedicated to the unique type of trauma they have experienced, physical or mental therapy, there are numerous resources available.

For the survivors of a murdered loved one, (of which I am) I find it most difficult in trying to deal or cope with this particular trauma that has been cast upon me. Why, one might ask? To me, it all comes down to one word or experience, re-victimization. Please let me explain exactly why I feel the way I do.

First, of course in order to be categorized a victim one has to be victimized in some manner. To those of us that have lost a loved one to homicide the moment they were murdered and especially when we were made aware of it our lives were forever changed as we were forced to enter the world of murder victim survivors.

Then after the first few weeks, months or years of trying to understand and cope with our newly found places in life while our grief and sorrow became a little more tolerable it never goes away as many of us turn to trying to help other victims and society in general by advocating for certain causes to prevent what happened to us from happening to others. Or we strive to get help from our elected officials in passage of laws that are tough on crime and the criminals who have committed them. We are merely seeking justice on behalf of our lost loved ones since they are no longer able to do so for themselves, and sadly there are many survivors of victims that will never have the chance at justice as their loved ones murderers are unknown and remain at-large, their only comfort being there isn't a statute of limitations on murder and perhaps many years later they will receive justice.

As traumatic of what victim survivors are forced to go through as they travel down the road seeking justice there will be what sometimes seem as never ending challenges, roadblocks and detours as they try and find their way out of the maze called the American criminal justice system. When they are finally able to reach what should be the journey's end and the murderer(s) of their loved ones have been apprehended, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced the ugly head of re-victimization pops up.

No, I am not talking about re-victimization being done by those that have been tried and convicted harming them again; instead I am speaking of the criminal justice system re-victimizing them. Let me explain further.

My family and I were introduced to victimization while living in California in 1993 when my son was murdered. From the years 1993-1996 we went through the trial of our son's murderer starting in the juvenile court system, progressing through the adult court, conviction and sentencing ultimately ending at the appellate court level after prevailing successfully throughout this journey. After this journey seemed to be ended we had to look forward to revisiting losing our son and the criminal justice system's process which is weighted heavily in favor of the convicted murderer, some 19 years later as a result of a consideration for parole hearing conducted by a state parole board. As our son's advocate and survivor's we had the right to attend the parole hearing that was held at the prison where the murderer was incarcerated. By this time we no longer lived in California and we had to conform our schedule with that of the parole board's and travel more than a thousand miles to attend the hearing. As parents, we felt we owed it to our son and the public's safety to appear before the board along with the murderer to argue that he never should be allowed to be released back out into society as a free person. It is an understatement when I say being in the same room as the murderer, once more coming face to face with him is one of the most difficult things I will ever have to do. As a result of California's Prop 9 commonly referred to as Marsy's Law named after the daughter of a friend of ours who was murdered just a few years before our son we were successful in convincing the parole board with the expert testimony and help from the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office not to allow parole of his murderer. In fact, the parole board also ruled that our son's murderer would not be eligible for another parole consideration hearing for an additional seven years as provided by Marsy's law.

Now, comes the trauma and re-victimization part of the equation of being a survivor of a murdered loved one. For the years since Marsy's law was approved by the voters of California and became a part of that state's constitution there has been an effort supported by persons and groups via lawsuits seeking to overturn that law by saying the provisions in it that allowed the parole board to have discretion to deny a parole consideration hearing for periods of three, five, seven and ten years after the initial one depending on the seriousness and nature of the crime committed. Recently what has happened is a U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence K. Karlton in his ruling has struck down key parts of Marsy's Law, most notably the one that gives the parole board discretion that allows them to restrict additional parole consideration hearings for longer than one year. Additionally, his ruling has also taken away the Governor's authority to review and reverse paroles in murder cases. What this means to victim survivors like my family and me is if we are interested in exercising our right to attend parole board hearings held on behalf of our son's murderer if Judge Karlton's ruling is upheld we will be forced to at great expense to us as senior citizens on fixed incomes to travel back to California annually if we want to again convince the parole board members not to release him. Also, due to advance age and worsening health conditions it may be physically impossible for us to attend hearings each year. If we don't or can't attend future hearings I have had enough experience as a victim's rights advocate to know that board members who are more sympathetic to the rights of criminals than they are of victims will make note of our absence and take it as a sign that we don't oppose our son's murderer's parole.

Another example of more concern being shown for the criminals than is for the victims really hit home hard for California victim survivors of murdered loved ones that were murdered by juveniles that were tried as adults and given a sentence of Life without the possibility of Parole or LWOP as it is commonly referred to when a law was passed and signed by Governor Brown in 2012. This law, SB109 (Senate Bill) overturned all the LWOP sentences handed down and mandated that these murderers, many whose crimes were so heinous goes beyond description as to the brutality they were, must receive a chance of being paroled via being allowed a parole consideration hearing. For many of the survivors of the juvenile murderers it has been at least a couple of decades since their loved ones murderers were sentenced and sent to an adult prison. To me, this is the ultimate example of a victim again being traumatized and re-victimized with a new travesty of justice being forced upon them.

As I have mentioned throughout this thesis far too many politicians, sociologists, social engineers and civil libertarians are dedicated to the proposition and is that society should treat murderers differently and with more empathy than they do their victims. To them it matters not how many times we can and are re-victimized and as a result suffer trauma once more.

As a survivor of a murder victim I hope that anyone reading my thoughts never is cast into a life as we have been forced into and must endure the ultimate indignity of being traumatized and re-victimized over and over again.

Ralph L. Myers

March 4, 2014

  

    

   

 

 

Why the Death Penalty should be permitted. Thoughts of a parent of a murdered son and victim’s rights advocate.

Judging from recent news articles and various governors of states like Connecticut and just this week, Washington State’s Jay Inslee placing a moratorium about the unfairness, inhumane, unusual and cruel punishment being inflicted upon those who have committed heinous and unspeakable murders and atrocities on their victims it is very difficult to accept the arguments put forth by those that are opposed to imposing the execution(s) of these murderers.(Please see my letter to Governor Inslee at the end of this blog.)

 As one who has lost a child to murder and has gone through the American criminal justice system as a victim survivor I want to address the arguments being expressed by the anti-death penalty proponents as being nothing more than yet another example of social engineering by liberal secularist’s caring for the right’s of criminals,(most notably murderers) over the rights of victims and their survivors of not wanting anyone being held accountable for their deeds or crimes committed in today’s society.

Thesis One:

 Opinion: The death penalty is not a deterrent to preventing murders and the United States of America should not be one of the few nations that still execute persons guilty of murder.

 Opposing Opinion: I agree 100% that the death penalty doesn’t serve as a deterrent in preventing murder but I disagree by the same percent that executing those convicted of murdering another person is immoral, wrong and a gross miscarriage of justice in fact sentencing for crimes committed (especially murder) is indeed a part of justice being served. The term or word justice is in part defined as “sound reason; rightfulness, reward or penalty (emphasis mine) as deserved, the use of authority to uphold what is right, just or lawful, the administration of law. Even in other societies that impose the death penalty murders are still committed but they don’t excuse the murderers because they are of a certain color, race or creed, if one takes another person’s life they should not be surprised (or excused) as their execution is of “sound reason (they were tried, convicted and sentenced to die for their crime), penalty as deserved and the use of authority to uphold what is right, just or lawful, which the imposition of the death penalty is.

The death penalty is the punishment inflicted upon murderers as that is the penalty our justice system hands down. Executing a convicted murderer is the punishment imposed on an offender for wrong doing once again, emphasis mine.  

Thesis Two:

Opinion: Executing a murderer is nothing more than an act of revenge, too expensive, cruel and inhumane.

Opposing Opinion: Again, I agree with the anti-death penalty movement that yes it is society’s act of vengeance or perhaps placates only the survivors of murdered loved ones like myself. Again, however, revenge is defined as “to inflict injury or punishment in return for an injury, insult, etc. a chance to retaliate. I as a victim survivor, no matter how badly I feel or am hurting because my loved one was murdered I don’t have the right to retaliate by killing the person that killed someone that I loved,  but the state through the constitutional and lawful application of the criminal justice system does. If the state’s right to impose the death penalty is taken away then I believe there will be a rise in vigilantism.

As far as the death penalty being an imposition of a cruel and unusual punishment against murderers who have committed heinous acts against their victims when they murdered them, I have no empathy or sympathy for them. To the anti-death penalty proponents as they worry the person being executed is in pain I want them to think about the victim and how they perhaps felt when they were being murdered as I have every day since that horrible night in July of 1993. In 2000, some seven years after my son was murdered I wrote a poem which in part reads; “Even after years of appeals and delay, irrefutable, corroborating evidence presented again and again yet for their murderous unspeakable acts the voices are many and wrong when accountability is dismissed as lawyers and organizations beg for yet another stay. Unheard, overlooked and ignored is the wails of the victim's mother, as she was deprived of saying a final good bye when the life of her child was brutally ended by another. “Or the horror of discovering the atrocity and violence done to her son or daughter, left in pain to die alone without benefit or comfort of spiritual advisor crying out in an unheard wail as they were murdered in a manner or by a means of a cruel act, and a commission of a slaughter. “No nothing can be compared or is there anything more horrible than the wail of a mother that through violence has lost a child to murder, nor do those opposed to the death penalty have any concern about the suffering, horror and pain inflicted upon the victim.”

 

Thesis Three:

 Opinion: What if the person being executed is innocent and didn’t commit the murder?

 Opposing Opinion: I have saved this opinion for the last of my thoughts to express because what I am going to say is not only controversial but also extreme in how I feel. While I agree whole heartedly that no one wants a person to be executed that is innocent of the crime for which they were tried, convicted and sentenced to die for I look at it in this manner. While this does and can happen the number of instances it does is very rare and when one compares that number with the actual murder count kept by the Department of Justice and the F.B.I the imposition of the death penalty is correct for the reasons I have already mentioned and many more I haven’t listed and should not be abolished.  From the years of 1960-2012 a total of 923,841 persons were murdered in the United States (data according to The Disaster Center’s UCR Crime Statistics) nearly one million victims one of which was my child. Almost one million innocent people as compared to 3108 inmates currently on death row in the U.S. as of April 1, 2013 (information provided by the Death Penalty Information Center on their web site) and yet it seems to me that those opposed to the death penalty are concerned far more about less than 1% of what constitutes the number of those on death row that could be executed than they do the truly innocents that were murdered since 1960.

 

When the U.S. Supreme Court re-instituted the Death Penalty as being constitutional in 1976 they did the correct thing in my opinion and the real miscarriage of justice and infliction of cruel and unusual punishment should not be shifted from the convicted murderers to the victims by revoking or declaring the Death Penalty as being unconstitutional.

Governor Jay Inslee
Office of the Governor
PO Box 40002
Olympia, WA 98504-0002

February 28, 2014

Dear Governor Inslee:

As a survivor of a murdered son, I think your decision to place a moratorium on imposition of the death penalty is a gross miscarriage of justice. As a victim’s rights advocate since 1993 when my son was murdered I have witnessed first- hand the concern the secular progressive left has for the rights of criminals while at the same time mocking justice for victims, even labeling victim advocates like myself as professional victims. I can assure you that isn’t the case.

Governor Inslee, if you don’t have the conviction to allow the execution of guilty murderers who for the most part have been on death row for more than a decade or two manipulating the system by appeal after appeal then you shouldn’t be the Governor of Washington.

I have added to this letter an article I have written that appears on my blog “Write Thoughts” expressing a differing opinion than yours or your progressive friends, I hope you will take the time to read and think about the plight of the victim as much as you do the murderers.

Respectfully yours,

Ralph L. Myers

Bellingham, WA

 

 

Could this happen in America, or is it already happening?

 

Many Americans feel our constitutionally granted rights are being chipped away, one by one and under constant attack by the Obama Administration. What do you think? To me, as an avid history buff, author and one that feels not only could this happen it is in fact happening I fear as I write this opinion piece.

Members of the left liberal camp during the George W. Bush Administration took great satisfaction in demeaning him, often times comparing him to Adolph Hitler. I think it is only fair to examine the political events that took place in the early 1930’s in Nazi Germany and compare them with what is happening in America today just as the left did during the Bush Administration.

Germany, 1930’s;

January, 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Reich Chancellor.

Since the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency, to me there are many actions he has taken that while not as severe as those taken by Hitler in the 1930’s I feel there is and can be drawn examples of events that compare to what transpired back then. Events that have posed an imminent threat to our Republic form of government and our cherished rights provided by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

February, 1933 the German Reichstag burned to the ground and now Chancellor Hitler persuaded Hindenburg to convince the German parliament to grant him an emergency- powers decree suspending civil liberties and the governments of the German federal states. This was allowed to happen partly because the continued decline of the economy and the inability of the democratic parties to form a united front, Hitler came to be recognized as the de facto leader of the opposition

After Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany by President Paul von Hindenburg he was able to convince the German Parliament to give him emergency powers that allowed him to issue decrees that effectively suspended German civil liberties. However, here in America the power of the Executive Branch of our government is supposed to be constrained by the Legislative and Judiciary Branch. President Obama doesn’t believe in the constitutional constraints of the checks and balances that our founding fathers set in place whose intent it was to prevent any of the three branches of the American government to become more powerful than the other, (even though he will say he does, his actions of trying to circumvent the Legislative and Judicial Branches are stark revelations that he doesn’t.) So, like Hitler he is trying to rule by decree, usually bypassing congress and having the department of justice disagree with past rulings and attempt to go around the Judiciary. The difference to me is that Hitler didn’t start issuing decrees until after he was given authority to do so by the German President and parliament. Obama on the other hand is attempting to rule by decree or executive orders and has done so more times than any other American President in history. I have read to date he (Obama) has issued several hundred executive orders many of which are considered by several members of Congress to be in direct conflict and usurps his constitutional authority or more importantly the provisions of the US Constitution.

March, 1933 with an enabling act (a four year presidential decree-law power that circumvented the Reichstag) Hitler was conferred by the Reichstag with dictatorial powers and he then began to manage political emergencies of the German State by decree. Given this new power Hitler and the Nazi Party established totalitarian control; they abolished labor unions, political parties and imprisoned their political opponents, sending them to improvised camps and then to concentration camps.

April, 1933 the persecution of Jews became active Nazi policy. On April 1, 1933 Jewish doctors, shops, lawyers and stores were boycotted, and six days later the Law for the Restoration of the professional Civil Service was passed. This law banned Jews from being employed in government.

August, 1934 President Paul von Hindenburg died and no new president was appointed. Instead the powers of the president and chancellor were combined into the office of the Fuhrer. Because of this and now a tame government with no opposition parties, allowed Hitler total control of law-making. Also, the army swore an oath of loyalty to Hitler which gave him power over the military.

May, 1935 Jews were forbidden to join the Armed Forces. Also, anti-Jewish propaganda started appearing in German shops and restaurants and The Nuremberg Racial Purity Laws were passed in addition to the Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor which prevented marriage between any Jew and non-Jew. At the same time the Reich Citizenship Law was passed and reinforced by a decree that all Jews even quarter or half Jewish were no longer citizens of their own country. Their official status was reduced to that of “subject of the state” which meant they had no basic civil rights, including the right to vote.

For the balance of the 1930’s more laws and decrees were passed by Hitler and the Nazis that banned Jews from all professional jobs. Laws were passed that forbid government contracts being awarded to Jewish businesses and that only the Aryan doctors could treat Aryan patients and since Jewish doctors were banned from practicing medicine medical care to Jews was seriously hampered. All of these anti-Jewish laws and decrees led to male Jews having to add Israel to their names and female Jews had to add Sarah to their names and a larger letter J was imprinted on their passports. Soon after all Jewish children were banned from attending normal schools.

As I have attempted to show in this thesis once Hitler assumed full power and control of the German government (given to him by the parliament) was the beginning of his efforts to strip all rights of German citizenship from the Jews that the German constitution had given them in 1848. Again, while not as overtly ruthless as Hitler or the Nazi government was in going about a systematic stripping of the Jews civil rights which ultimately led to the annihilation of more than six million of them the Obama administration is using the power of the IRS,  his appointed Attorney General and the DOJ to silence his critics. Only in the case of today the term or entity of those being targeted are not Jews instead they are Conservatives or any American that believes the Federal Government has become too powerful and is only interested in gaining complete power and control over its citizens, as the actions being taken against them are primarily by decree or executive order, ignoring the constitution’s guaranteed rights.

So, could what happened in Germany in the 1930’s happen here in America today?  As a veteran of the cold war and one who is interested in history and the events that took place nearly 90 years ago in Germany I believe not only that it could but is already taking place now. The Obama Administration has resorted to Executive Order which to me is nothing more than by decree as Hitler did in the 1930’s to eliminate all Americans basic civil liberties and constitutional rights. Through executive order he has attacked our 1^st Amendment Rights through his Health Care Law of forcing religious organizations or individuals to accept abortion, birth control if they believe they are morally and spiritually wrong and goes against their beliefs. He has attacked and tried to diminish our 2^nd Amendment Rights by issuing Executive Orders on gun control since his efforts failed in congress. He has through executive order tried to go around the 4^th Amendment Rights by telling mental health professionals they must share confidential doctor/ patient information of their patients to the Department of Human Health Services if they have been treated for conditions that could be interpreted (if it serves the interest of this administration and the gun control advocates,) that they are a credible threat to society. While this is cause for concern the issuance by Obama of an earlier Executive Order urging health care professionals to question their patients if they have firearms in their homes is yet another example of a tyrannical president and administration disregarding our basic constitutional rights.

 It is up to each of us to judge this for ourselves and to rise up in opposition to an administration that is ruling by decree as Hitler did in the 1930’s and exercise our basic civil rights granted in the U.S. Constitution while we still can if we think not only could this happen in America but in reality already is.

One of the greatest statesman of the 20^th century, Winston Churchill was quoted when talking about power, the following “When one has reached the summit of power and surmounted so many obstacles, there is a danger of becoming convinced that one can do anything one likes and that any strong personal view is necessarily acceptable to the nation and can be enforced upon one’s subordinates.” My personal view Mr. President is you can’t and won’t impose your strong personal view on me and a vast majority of all Americans.

Ralph L Myers

January 8, 2014  

 

Thoughts of a father of a murdered son opposed to gun control

The following is s true account of my families experiences after our son was murdered by an illegally purchased hand gun in 1993.  After his murder I became an advocate of the 2nd Amendment and vehemently opposed to gun control of any shape or hidden agenda. I have sent the remarks as contained in this post to the newly formed anti-gun organization founded by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg "Mayors against illegal guns expressing a different view point from a victim of a murdered child that is purposely ignored and avoided by this group and the President of the United States.

My letter;

Dear Mayors against Illegal Guns:

My name is Ralph Myers and I want to share my story with you as a father of a son that was murdered in   1993 by a criminal that purchased his hand gun at a Los Angeles area DONUT SHOP.

Here's my story and why I am opposed to your organization's mission to destroy our 2nd Amendment Rights under the guise of getting guns off our streets by advocating for more restrictive and to me unconstitutional gun control laws. My story is 180 degrees opposite to what your organizations stated goals are.

First; Background Checks and Waiting Periods

When my son was murdered in 1993 in the Los Angeles area California already had strict gun control laws on the books including a 15 day waiting period before one could take possession of any firearm purchased legally. This waiting period exceeded the Brady Law waiting period by ten days.

The criminal that murdered my son didn’t buy the handgun from a dealer, private citizen, gun show or any other recognizable source that has a federally approved permit to sell firearms. No, he bought it at a DONUT SHOP so all the gun control laws as your organization is advocating were meaningless in preventing my son’s murder, they will only serve to penalize those of us that are law-abiding citizens by making it more difficult to purchase a firearm.

Second; your claim that 91% of rank and file law enforcement support your organization’s objectives was not what my wife and I experienced when our son was murdered.

In fact our experience was just the opposite of what you are claiming. Here’s what happened, what we were advised by the rank and file LAPD officers that came to our home when we found out our son had been shot and killed and what we did.

My son, who was 25 at the time lived at home with his mother and me and was a typical fun-loving California youth. He was not in a gang but was murdered by a member of an Asian gang.  I only point this out because he was killed at a private party that he was invited to attend and several members of this gang attempted to crash. As the case unfolded the gang members tried to intimidate some of the partygoers that were scheduled to testify at my son’s murderer’s trial. Some of the witnesses were followed and even shot at by the gang members and I was fearful for the safety of my wife, daughter and me. My wife and I were told by the rank and file members of the LAPD they couldn’t protect us 24/7 and recommended we purchase a firearm for our home for self-protection. They also said they didn’t want us to say what they had just advised us of because of repercussions they would suffer from the anti-gun rights, politically motivated superiors of the LAPD and the mayor’s office.   

So here’s is the course of action I chose;

As a veteran of the US Army who was familiar with firearms I followed the rank and file officer’s advice of those brave men and women police officers who are on the front lines of the streets of Los Angeles risking their lives to “protect and to serve” and purchased a handgun. I did this legally, from a licensed gun store, waited the 15 days to pick it up. I then took my wife and daughter to a local gun range and taught them how to properly handle the pistol I had just purchased for our self-defense. (It is important to add here that while my son and daughter were growing up we chose not to have a firearm in our home but the key word here is we chose, not we were prohibited from having a gun in our home or on our person.) If your organization had its way and existed in 1993 I would not have had the choice to be able to defend my family and me from a criminal that didn’t abide by all the “feel good” political B.S. gun control laws that were already in existence and not being enforced.

Realizing that gun control only works for the criminal elements in society and against  the law-abiding citizens my next step was to join the National Rifle Association and take up the cause of protecting our 2^nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. As a veteran and former member of the US Army I had already sworn an oath to the US Constitution that I would uphold it (all of it not just the parts I agree with.) Now at age 71 I doubt if I have many more years left in my life but for the few that remain I will continue to fight your organizations and those that support it with all the energy I have left and until my last breath is drawn or my last dollar is spent.

As a crime victim survivor like those at Columbine, Aurora, Virginia Tech and most recently Newtown, CT I know all too well the feeling of losing someone to gun violence but I REFUSE to allow our 2^nd Amendment Rights to even be altered one iota, because if I do liberal leftist elitist like you and current president we have right now will ultimately destroy it and soon after the rest of our constitutional rights.

Yesterday, the president showed his true contempt for our liberties and has been shamefully exploiting the Newtown victims to further his agenda. Contrary to what he said after the US Senate blocked the passage of more useless and unconstitutional gun control laws it is he that should be ASHAMED not the Senators that honored their oath of office to uphold all of the constitution. As a crime victim survivor I would have gladly accepted a ride on Air Force One (at tax payer expense) to testify and lobby (which I have done before in trying to get a Crime Victim’s Rights Amendment to the US Constitution but at my own expense not the tax payer’s) but my testimony would have been unwelcomed because it would have been much more different than the staged and orchestrated views of those victims he was exploiting to destroy the rights of those of us that hold the US Constitution with reverence and respect.

I am but one of millions of others that feel this strongly and WE WILL NOT GIVE UP and if your organization succeeds in its ultimate objective of taking away our 2^nd Amendment Rights through the passage of more gun control laws that won’t and don’t work I feel you will have unleashed the wrath of all of us that like the criminals out there we will not comply. I too am fighting in the memory of my murdered son just as those from Newtown, CT are and my loss is no less than theirs, (which is something you or the current administration doesn’t want to hear) and I owe it to him to see that the 2^nd Amendment is preserved as a barrier against a tyrannical government which I feel the current administration is on the path in becoming and as organizations such as Mayors against illegal guns are.

Ralph Myers

Father of murdered son Tom Myers

             

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where do we go from here?

"Where do we go from here?"

 By Ralph L. Myers

4/17/07

 

I wrote this article the day after the shooting on the campus of Virginia Tech. What I have said in that article is once again being played out and applicable today since the Newtown, CT and Aurora, CO shootings.

 

April 16, 2007 will go down as one of the darkest and most tragic days in American history when 32 persons were murdered by a lone gunman who then took his own life at Virginia Tech University. Because of this horrendous event and as these shootings are being investigated I think once more a rhetorical question must be asked, "Where do we go from here?"

Depending on one's personal opinions and perceptions as well as life experiences the answers to that question are many and complex. To many people the shootings that occurred at Virginia Tech would probably never have happened if guns were not so readily available. However, others can also legitimately argue that if more citizens were allowed to carry a concealed firearm then what happened on April 16, 2007 at Virginia Tech may have been prevented or the murderous toll been mitigated significantly if one of those victims had been armed and able to defend themselves.  As horrendous as the shootings at Virginia Tech was I am of the opinion that there can not be any valid justification for law-abiding gun owners to give up their right to legally obtain and own firearms.

Let's examine both sides of this issue. As can be expected the call for more and stricter gun control laws were probably immediately voiced as the echo of the shots that were fired were probably still ringing out in the hallowed halls of Virginia Tech University. I am sure it has been said by someone that, "if guns were outlawed and not available to the ordinary citizen this shooting would or could never have happened." Perhaps in a perfect world or maybe a police state that argument may be a valid one. Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect world, and thankfully we do not live in a police state. I also think it is fair to say that as Americans who cherish our individual rights and freedoms we do not want to live in such a state.

 Okay then the anti-gun advocates might argue we have to pass more gun control laws limiting the availability of firearms to the American populace the effect being more laws and regulations will prevent future Virginia Tech or Columbine like massacres.

 But at what expense to our constitutionally granted and guaranteed rights, all rights not just the right to bear arms as granted by the Second Amendment. Many if not most persons who are adamant about restricting or limiting the right to own and bear arms are equally as strong in their belief in the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and assembly. They also hold this same zealous belief in the rights granted by the Fourth Amendment that "the people should also be secure in their persons, houses and papers," as well as the Ninth Amendment right that "certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Or the right retained by the people as granted by the Fourteenth Amendment or "equal protection clause." Yet they would seemingly be willing to sacrifice those zealous beliefs by allowing a restriction or complete denial of the Second Amendment rights.

 Sadly there can not or will there ever be a totally crime free and safe society and as the information becomes more available about the person who murdered all those people at Virginia Tech it is becoming more apparent that the shooter was in fact one of those undetected psychotics he would have probably found a way to wreak the havoc he did.. "Maybe not," anti-gun advocates might say but society everywhere and on April 16, 2007 at Virginia Tech University would have been much better off if guns were outlawed.

 Let's look at this argument and take it to another scenario. It is 7:15AM on Monday April 17, 2017 at Virginia Tech, Harvard, USC, UCLA or any other University or College in America. There are no guns as they have been banned and confiscated many years ago. However, no matter what laws have been passed for the good or protection of public safety the evil and deranged psychopaths that plague and freely walk amongst us and are hell-bent on making a statement by wreaking havoc, anarchy, chaos and mayhem on the rest of the decent and unsuspecting unarmed populous on University campuses or in the cities where they are located are unaffected by those laws. It doesn't matter if those deranged persons are acting alone or in a small group or an organized terrorist cell all the gun control laws and a repeal of the 2^nd Amendment that had taken place will not protect us from them. Instead of having guns since they are no longer allowed their new weapons of choice may be back-packs, book bags or brief cases filled with explosives or perhaps poisonous or toxic materials. Since book bags, back-packs and brief cases are so common place they can and more than likely would go innocently unnoticed by students since most of them have one of those items. If either an individual or a group of persons detonate one or many of those items or release the toxins into the environment or water supply this time thousands, maybe millions could be murdered as they were on September 11, 2001. What will be the response or reaction to this murderous event?  If after a considerable amount of hand-wringing, finger pointing and meaningless rhetoric will we now demand to outlaw back-packs, book bags and brief cases? A ludicrous analogy you say? I believe an event such as this could very well happen in the not to distant future and is a probability rather than a far fetched possibility.

 Earlier I mentioned "our opinions are shaped by perceptions and one's personal life experiences." From this writer's viewpoint that is definitely true and why I believe further gun control is not the way to approach preventing future Virginia Tech occurrences.

 I suspect the next question directed to me because of my belief in my 2^nd Amendment rights would be, “alright then Mr. pro-gun and anti-gun control advocate what would you be saying if one of those murdered at Virginia Tech was your child or loved one? “I bet you would want new gun laws passed and would have a different opinion then.”

 "I am one of them and my heart goes out to those victims and their surviving families and friends," Mr. or Mrs. Anti-gun advocate! I lost my son to gun violence in 1993 and the weapon of choice used to murder him was a Glock 9 millimeter hand gun the same as what the murderer used at Virginia Tech. At that time there was already many tough on guns laws on the books including the Brady Act. All the control laws in the world did not prevent my son's murderer from illegally obtaining the hand gun he bought it from someone at a donut shop near our West San Fernando Valley home. This information came out during testimony at the trial of my son's murderer.

In the weeks, months and now years since the murder of my son in an effort to survive and deal with the overwhelming loss and grief that had been cast upon my family and me I found refuge in becoming active in various victim's rights organizations and grief support groups such as Parents of Murdered Children and Other Survivors of Homicide. I hope and pray that these new survivors of those murdered at Virginia Tech will seek solace and comfort from others who have suffered a loss like no other. I must caution them however as they are trying to survive this horrible ordeal many of their friends and even family members will not understand what they are experiencing and thinking they are helping will tell them to put this behind them and get on with their life. If only it was that easy but as we all know life does go on and they will be getting on with their life a day at a time, recovering from something that has happened and they had nothing to do with. Being a survivor of a murder victim isn't the same as being a recovering alcoholic or drug addict there isn't any twelve step programs to help get you through the ordeal. Needless to say after 14 years my wife, family, friends and I are still devastated and haunted by a senseless act committed by a deranged individual. The pain those students are experiencing and the families and friends as well as the communities where the victims were from will never go away completely. For them there can not be any so called closure even though that is a word the media and even mental health care professionals like to use much of the time.

 What this horrible carnage and loss of life at Virginia Tech has to me once again been made perfectly apparent is the utter and unimaginable grief, loss and sorrow that has been cast upon the Virginia Tech Campus and especially on the families and friends of those who lost a loved one to the shootings. While at the same time it has created a media feeding frenzy and bonanza for criminal profilers as well as psychologists and the anti-gun rights activists all coming out of the woodwork appearing on the talking head news shows most of the time their attention has been focused on the troubled mental state of the murderer. If you are one of those that sadly and needlessly lost someone on April 16, 2007 your pain and loss is being exacerbated by the (predictable) direction the dialogue has taken since then. You have become victims and your victimization is being exploited! The loved one or friend that has been lost is soon forgotten as though their life was lived in vain and only the murderer's mental state matters. I know this from experience. I have and continue to live with an overwhelming sense of grief and loss.

 Forget about closure this term will have very little if any meaning to you and doesn't really exist. It is only a term or word used by those who have never lost a loved one to murder and who feel uncomfortable at being around you because they know the next Virginia Tech or terrorist attack may affect them as it has each of you.

 I personally find no solace in being forced to give up my right to own a firearm for protection of my family or myself and will refuse to do so if it is allowed to come to that. Like the millions who are in America illegally snubbing their collective noses at and ignoring our laws being aided and abetted by spineless politicians of both parties and the ACLU  I will become one of them. I will simply ignore the law. I will not give up what may be the last line of defense available to me to protect my family and me from the psychopaths and criminals that walk freely about in our midst.

 So, "Where do we go from here?" Do we simply give in to the demands of those that want to pass laws that will render law-abiding citizens helpless and defenseless making them easy prey for violent predators? Or do we take a stand and fight to preserve our Second Amendment Right to bear arms? I for one choose to fight!

Crime Victims against Gun Control         

You can trust your government.

February 26, 2013

As early as tomorrow the Senate Judiciary Committee could vote to allow the anti-gun, anti-2nd Amendment bills introduced by Senator Feinstein and other liberals to go to the floor of the United States Senate for a vote and ultimately approval by that body.

To many, the time is long overdue for new and more restrictive gun control laws be passed considering many of the mass shootings that have occurred in recent months. To say that killings of innocent children and others as well are reprehensible is true and must be addressed is the new mantra of the far left, the liberal mainstream media and the current administration. But at what cost to our constitutional rights as free citizens to bear arms for self defense and a right to resist by force if it comes to that the actions of a tyrannical government.

As I have written on this blog, many op-ed articles and essays as a survivor of a murdered son, killed by a criminal that bought his gun at a donut shop certainly didn't care about any existing gun control laws that were in effect, and to buy into the argument we need more of these laws that are not enforced as well as being unenforceable is ludicrous.

As a veteran and a firm believer that our federal government and many of our state ones as well true intent is to disarm the American public under the guise of protecting us from being harmed or killed by firearms. Contrary to this popular belief and misconception quite the opposite is true and the murder of my only son is the sad proof and testimony that an unarmed citizenry is a society that is easy prey for those that don't and won't obey gun control laws and it matters not if they are new, old or just an updated version of any of them.

As a victim and victim's rights advocate I have actively pursued laws that assure the violent elements in our society be held accountable for their violent acts committed against it. What I have found to be a sad and disconcerting fact of life when going before the federal or state governments to testify for passage of tough on crime and criminal laws, (notice I said crime and criminals not decent law-abiding citizens) is that the same liberal politicians, media and leftist organizations for the most part don't want criminals to be held accountable. Instead, they rationalize or focus on a fact that the offenders may come from an economically depressed or ethnic or racial class as the reason(s) they murder, rape, and inflict mayhem on society and shouldn't be held accountable.

While those that advocate what we really need is more, stricter gun control as the only  answer to ending violence they really need to listen to all victims of violent crimes considering their thoughts and opinions in addition to those victims that they hand-pick to support their attacks on not just the 2nd Amendment but all parts of the U.S. Constitution as Senator Feinstein and the current administration is doing.

A case in point, they should be asking for the advice of survivors of murdered loved ones whose murderers were juveniles, caught, tried, convicted and sentenced  to life in prison without the possibility of parole if they feel like they don't need to be able to defend themselves from those killers who now may become eligible to be released and once again able to prey upon an unsuspecting and unarmed society?

Couldn't happen you say? I wish I could agree with you but yes indeed it could and the liberal left politicians, media and organizations in California and I am sure other states will follow its lead has made it possible for it to happen. How is this possible, you can't be right?

Unfortunately it has happened as a result of a liberal California Democratic State Senator Leland Yee finally being able to get passage of his bill SB9 in California and then signed into law by the equally liberal and criminal rights oriented Governor Jerry Brown. What this bill has accomplished is nothing short of a total and immoral subversion of justice that was handed down that hit the victim's like a sledge hammer. It's sort of like all of a sudden our government buys into the argument and logic of other American and Israel hating governments  that deny the holocaust ever happened.

Under the new SB9 in California it essentially overturns the sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole that were handed down by the trial courts to violent juvenile offenders whose murders they committed were so heinous and horrific they would have received a death penalty sentence had they been over 18 years old at the time they committed them. Now these violent offenders will be given a second chance at life outside of prison by making them eligible for parole consideration. I can tell you as a father that lost a son to a juvenile I wish he could be given a second chance at life.

Currently, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is sending out informational letters to the survivors of murdered loved ones notifying them of the newly legislated and law that is effective giving their loved ones murderers a second chance. I am pasting in a copy of the letter and as you read it I want you to put yourself into the position of being one of those persons and families that will receive this letter who in many cases it has been years since they had to endure the process of going through the trial of their loved one's murderer and thought that justice had been served and they could now begin to rebuild their lives as best they could because, I can assure you for them there can never be closure and this is re-victimizing them all over again.

So, Mr. President, Vice President, Senator Feinstein, you want to take and make me to give up my firearms as I don't need them while you and your leftist elitists are going to give our loved ones murderers a second chance? I DON'T THINK SO!

Crime Victims Against Gun Control

 

OFFICE OF VICTIM AND SURVIVOR RIGHTS AND SERVICES P.O. Box 942883 Sacramento, CA  94283-0001

 

RE:       John Doe

CDC#: AF1234

 

This letter is being sent for informational purposes regarding the passage of a new law that may affect the above offender for which you are on file to receive notice of changes to the offender’s status. Senate Bill (SB) 9 was approved in September 2012. This bill authorizes an offender who was: under 18 years of age at the commitment of the offense, sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, and having served 15 years of that sentence, to submit a petition to the sentencing court for recall and re sentencing provided they meet all eligibility criteria and considerations. This bill does not allow an offender to petition the courts if he/she tortured his/her victim(s) or if the victim(s) was a public safety official.

 

If an offender meets all the criteria in the initiative he/she may petition the courts for re sentencing and if the courts find the statements in the petition to be accurate there will be a hearing held to consider recall/re sentencing of the offender. The victims and/or victims’ family members will still have the right to participate in this hearing.

 

Our office will work with the county courts and the District Attorney’s offices throughout the state to ensure your rights to notification and restitution are upheld.  If you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter, please contact our office at 1-877-256-6877.  For information regarding the status of an offender’s petition you can contact the District Attorney’s office in the sentencing county. In addition, attached is an informational handout on SB 9 and contact information for District Attorney’s Offices throughout California.  

 

Sincerely,

Office of Victim and Survivor Rights and Services

Attachments

 

Cc: County District Attorney’s Office

 

Dear Senator, Congressman or Congresswoman More Gun Control is not the answer

I am a 71 year old senior citizen, veteran who took an oath to uphold our Constitution just as you did and the President did when sworn into office and most importantly a parent of a murdered child like those  who sadly, tragically and senselessly became on Friday December 14, 2012 in Newton, CT.

 I urge you to remember that when you took your oath of office you swore to uphold the entire constitution not just the parts you like or agree with. That being said please remember the 2^nd Amendment is a part of the U.S. Constitution you swore to uphold.

 As you a member of congress begin your dialogue about what should, could and must be done in order to take necessary steps to prevent such horrific mass murders in the future I want to urge you not to only concentrate on gun control as the only means to see this doesn’t happen again as much as is humanly possible.

 I want to share my thoughts with you and why I am opposed to more gun control laws and why I have a lot of anger with the left leaning media and the Democratic Party as they are going to do everything within their power to circumvent, limit and even destroy our rights as Americans to bear arms.

 Point One: Tragedies such as the Newtown, CT shooting while being despicable and horrible the typical knee-jerk reaction of the President and our elected representatives must be carefully weighed so that in the interest of preventing these horrific events we don’t jeopardize our constitutional rights.

 Point Two: The current President, his administration and a large segment of the Democratic Party has had since the Clinton Administration targeted (no pun intended) the rights of all citizens to possess and bear arms.

 Point Three: While the left and the liberal media is always quick to want to take away or at least severely restrict our right to bear arms they don’t have the same fervor to protect their constituents or society after they have become victims. In other words they value the rights of criminals, even convicted ones more than they do the rights of law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves as I will illustrate further on in this letter.

 Case in Point A: Recently in California Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill (SB9) Authored by California State Senator Yee of San Francisco which in effect overturns all sentences of LWOP (Life without the possibility of Parole) of juveniles who committed their heinous and barbaric murders of innocent victims (including children like those in Newton, CT.) Murderers who have already been afforded all their rights within the Constitution and the American Criminal Justice System, found guilty and sentenced for their crimes. In short, these murderers will be given a second chance and possibly allowed to be paroled while the loved ones of their victims will be re-victimized by being forced to re-live those horrendous crimes even though they thought the criminal justice system and the sentences handed down would assure they are never again free and allowed to prey upon an unsuspecting society. Now they will be forced to attend parole hearings in order to see they are not paroled. Given the mood of American’s everywhere since Friday, December 14, 2012 I doubt seriously if you could now get them to agree that heinous murderers should be given a second chance.

Case in Point B: California Senator Feinstein has always been a champion of giving victim’s a right and standing in the U.S. Constitution through a constitutional Victim’s Rights Amendment since there currently isn’t any such rights in it at present. Such an Amendment was defeated in 1998 primarily by the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee blocking it from ever getting out of committee. I know this for a fact because I travelled to Washington, DC to testify in favor of a Victim’s Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution at my own expense as a victim’s rights advocate.  However, as illustrated through her recent statements she is dedicated to taking away our 2^nd Amendment Rights by limiting and outlawing what she and the liberal left labels as assault weapons. I feel most certain this will be but the first of many efforts at diminishing or eliminating our gun rights, which is the true intent and now not so hidden agenda of this administration and the Democrats.

Case in Point C: U.N. Arms Trade Treaty; Given the fact that perhaps up until the shootings in Newtown, CT on Friday 12/14/12 the Obama Administration felt that it could not  get gun control legislation through congress they took a back-door approach in getting gun control laws passed through the United Nations. Fortunately a bi-partisan group of 51 Senators led by Kansas Senator Jerry Moran signed a letter addressed to the President that if the administration signed the treaty the Senate would not ratify it.

This one point alone serves as showing the true intent of this President and his administration and the liberal left, media and the Democratic Party’s real agenda, total and complete gun control laws, confiscation of all legally owned firearms in America and elimination of the 2^nd Amendment.

Case in Point D: Dear Senator, Congressman or Congresswoman while reading this you might begin to think who is this uncaring, cold, heartless person that would still oppose more and restrictive gun control in light of the recent mass murders that have taken place the past few months?

Please allow me to answer this question before you throw my letter to you in your waste basket or shred it.

·         I am the father of a murdered child, a son in 1993.

·          I am the father of a murdered son that was murdered by a juvenile that although in California at the time the   Brady Law was in effect as well as several other restrictive gun control laws his murderer bought his firearm at a Los Angeles area donut shop. In other words those gun control laws were not something he felt obliged to follow and they certainly didn’t prevent my son’s murder.
·         I am a father of a murdered son who was advised by the Los Angeles Police Officers after his murder that even though the murderers friends (gang members) were trying to intimidate my sons friends that were going to be called upon to testify in the trial of his murderer were being followed and sometimes shot at, they could not protect us 24/7 and our best defense was to legally buy a firearm to protect my family and me.
·         I am a father of a murdered son that while he and my daughter were growing up chose not to have a firearm in our home for safety reasons, not because we were forbidden to do so by meaningless gun control laws.
·         I am a father that truly understands what the parents and loved ones of those innocent children, their families and friends are now being forced to go through, something that is so unimaginable and horrific it is and will always be incomprehensible.
·         I am a father of a murdered son that can understand if they (the parents and survivor’s of those children) choose to fight for more gun control that is their right and duty if they feel that way. However, no matter how earnest the President seemed (which I don’t doubt his sincerity) when talking at the memorial service in Newtown, CT yesterday that he and the anti-gun movement will and are using this horrific slaughter as a tool to take away our constitutional rights. An individual should and must fight for what they believe in not what you are told you should believe in.
·         Finally, as I have previously mentioned I am a father and a veteran that took an oath when enlisting in the Army that I would swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution even if it meant giving my life for this great country. I swore to uphold all of it not just the parts that I agreed with and destroy those that didn’t fit my agenda or personal beliefs, just like the President, Senator’s and U.S. Representatives did when they took their oath of office.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

Ralph L Myers