Legislative Censorship Replacing Parental Child Rearing

As the battle cry continues to ramp up among all ‘concerned citizens’ about how we must protect minors from what they deem ‘inappropriate material’ on social media and now in our libraries, one has to wonder where the role of a parent fits into all this.  It seems that nowadays parents are so overwhelmed by their parental responsibilities that they need government assistance in controlling the behavior of their children. 

These folks continue to buy their minor children smart phones, tablets, and laptops, and feel good about themselves for keeping their kids ‘technologically’ up to date.  They may also assist them in gaining access to their local library and feel good about themselves for assisting in the ‘intellectual development’ of their children.

Then they stop, for whatever reason, when it comes to controlling the use of these entities and are happy to abdicate that responsibility to government regulation.  I am willing to bet if I were to examine the laptops, tablets and smart phones of the children/grandchildren of our esteemed ‘child protector’ Attorney General Jeff Landry, and the legislators proposing laws to ‘protect’ minors from what they deem allegedly ‘inappropriate material’ now available in our libraries, I would not find one device with the parental control settings activated.  And how many of these 'child protectors' go to the library with their kids? 

These battle cry folks all talk a good game about this hot topic but apparently feel that they as parents have no personal responsibility in regulating the behavior of their kids.

How many periodically check the internet browsing history of their kids’ electronic devises to see where they go on the net, or regulate their Facebook/TikTok interactions?  My kids thought they would outsmart me by deleting their browsing history each night.  A blank history is definitely a ‘red flag’ for confiscation of the device.

Parents need to get off their butts, for ultimately it is THEIR responsibility to supervise their kids, not politicians.  All of this so called ‘protective legislation’ simply serves as an enabler for these lazy parents, guardians and grandparents.  Pathetic.

Let's put the blame where it belongs

Even though LSU has a questionable past regarding the handling of sexual assault cases, the latest incident of a tragic rape and death of a co-ed in no way should be connected with the other cases involving LSU as is presently playing out in the media. The entire blame rests with the bar serving underage kids and the state of Louisiana for its lack of oversight.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that most bars located near the LSU campus are probably breaking the law by serving underage clientele for monetary gain. And this could be easily checked out by the state conducting sting operations involving underage informants in these bars.  But then again that would involve a genuine pro-active approach by the state of Louisiana instead of its present re-active approach after some tragedy occurs.  

Removal of this bar's liquor license obviously should have occurred BEFORE this student's death.  One has to wonder just how many other bars are doing the same thing. The bar owners and its management team are directly responsible for this woman's death along with the state by not doing its job and serving as a facilitator, not LSU.

The City Bailout for Mardi Gras

I am totally confused by the recent monetary proposal made to Mardi Gras crews by Mayor Cantrell. I can't remember the last time that a business model was proposed without knowing its cost. Apparently in a cash-strapped city Cantrell has offered up a blank check, with the City Counsel's blessings. How could this take place without any cost estimate being made accessible to the public?  I can't find the expected cost anywhere in media reportings. It also seems that whatever the cost, the city's coffers should not be used to fund costs beyond its manpower limits. Mardi Gras crews are private entities and the city, based upon its manpower, provides security for these groups.  As was the case last year, proposed parade routes were adjusted based upon these limiting realities.  If changes are desired by crews to go over and above the proposed plan, sound business practice would suggest that any costs associated with such changes be born by the crews rather than the city.  So just how much will this one shot spending cost the city, and could the monies be better spent to make long range lasting improvements for its residents?

And yes, I realize that proponents of the cash offer will point out that Mardi Gras will supposedly add to the economic wellbeing of the city and will provide a good return on the additional money the city spends.  But then again just where is that money that the city earns spent for long range improvements since these are funds over and above its operating budget?  Where is fiscal accountability for all of this in a cash-deficient city?