« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

My Letter to JN

By: UpLateAgain (Diary)  |  April 16th, 2009 at 04:26 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Secretary Janet Napolitano

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528

April 13, 2009

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

I am a regularly-retired police supervisor with over twenty-five years law enforcement experience. I am also an honorably-discharged Viet Nam era veteran (a Special Forces medic to be exact), who later joined the National Guard.

As it happens, I am opposed to abortion on principal, as well as illegal immigration. In both my military and
police careers, I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The government required it of me, but I was happy to oblige.

The Constitution includes (in case you are not familiar with it) what we citizens like to refer-to as “The
Bill of Rights”. There are Ten Amendments in the “Bill of Rights”, and each of them is a gosh-darned real part of the actual Constitution. Even number Ten, which limits the power of the Federal Government pretty-much to certain things that are specifically enumerated in the regular part of the Constitution, and
grants all other rights to the states or the people. You ought to read it sometime. It’s really pretty neat! Even though it’s not followed much these days, I still think it has some real merit.

From what I have heard of your recent DHS warning about “right wing extremism”, I guess I qualify as a right-wing extremist sufficiently for the police to be warned about me on at least four counts: abortion, illegal immigrants, believing in the Constitution, and, of course, being a veteran. ( Oh… and since I was in the National Guard following my original enlistment, I was required to swear to uphold and defend the CA state Constitution too. I guess that kind of works against me by implication as well).

Anyway, as I really am a concerned citizen as well as being a four (or five) count “right wing
extremist”, I was hoping you could clarify for me the specific point at which I become dangerous, or a domestic terrorist, or… you get the idea. I ask this because it really is not my intention to ever cross that line… so I’d like to know where you feel it is.

Let me close by saying that you probably need to be aware that of those Police and Sheriff’ Departments that you sent out your warning to on April 9, (and I can tell you this with reasonable certainty) about 95% of the actual working cops feel pretty-much the same way about those kinds of things listed above as I do, and a good 10% of them are veterans as well. And they have access to assault rifles and shotguns. I sure hope you didn’t make a big mistake in letting them know you are on to them.

Yours truly,

Devon M. Stavrowsky

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • UpLateAgain

    Secretary Janet Napolitano
    U.S. Department of Homeland Security
    Washington, DC 20528
    April 16, 2009

    Dear Secretary Napolitano:

    I refer you to the recent letter I sent you in which I pointed out that you had clearly defined me as a ?right wing extremist? to the fourth or fifth degree, and asked that you advise me where the line separating me from a domestic terrorist was so that I could be sure to not cross it.

    Since sending that letter, I could not help but notice your trek around the media attempting to assuage the hurt feelings of veterans such as myself. I noticed too that your apologies come across as somewhat insincere when you immediately follow them with a disclaimer saying that though you don?t mean for your offensive inferences to offend anyone, the facts on who the police should look out for in your distributed assessment are essentially true.

    I will try to be helpful here. Might I suggest that rather than demonizing a large amorphous mass of people (many of whom have given much more to and for this country than you will collectively in your entire life) based on what appears on paper to be nothing more than having legitimate political differences with you and your boss, that you support law enforcement officers in developing what we in law enforcement like to call ?reasonable suspicion? or ?probable cause? in relation to an individual and an illegal act before they do ANYTHING that could be construed as a detention, or an unwarranted intrusion into someone?s civil liberties, personal property, holdings, or effects. I can have workable definitions of these concepts forwarded to your office if it will be helpful for you.

    It?s a system (developing reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause before acting) that police have been perfecting for a long, long time now, and they seem to have it down pretty well. You might want to take a look at it.

    I say this so that you as a leader can effectively protect your officers from making costly mistakes. If for example, some eager rookie cop (I?m sure no veteran would do this) stops me because I have American Legion and US Army parachute wing stickers on my truck, not only will he get at least a really BIG chewing-out, and maybe lose his job, but the agency that had previously employed him will pay me lots and lots of (non-taxable, gees – you wouldn’t want that!) money (at least I don?t think you tax damage awards?. I?ll check on that).

    Anyway, I hope this is helpful, and still await your assessment on where that ?ol line-crossing thing occurs so I can distinctly avoid it.

    Thanks again,

    Devon M. Stavrowsky