SACRAMENTO – Assemblyman Tom Lackey, R-Palmdale, took the oath of office Monday as the new representative for California’s 36th Assembly District.
“It is truly the honor and privilege of a lifetime to represent my community and the Antelope Valley in the state capitol,” Lackey stated in a press release. “I’m determined to work in partnership across party lines to solve many of the serious problems that face California today, including restoring jobs for struggling families, reforming our schools and keeping our communities safe.”
Lackey immediately went to work by introducing legislation to close a loophole in Proposition 47 to ensure that criminals found in possession of date-rape drugs are sent to prison.
The recent passage of Proposition 47 reduces many nonviolent property and drug crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.
Overlooked inside Proposition 47 is a provision that reduces penalties for possession of date-rape drugs. While other penalty reductions are for crimes such as drug possession for personal use, a criminal carrying a date-rape drug most likely intends to use the substance to incapacitate unsuspecting victims, according to Lackey.
Lackey’s bill would send this provision back to the ballot and give voters the chance to reinstate the felony penalty for this very serious offense.
“One of my top priorities in the upcoming session is ensuring that criminals are fairly punished for their crimes in order to provide a strong deterrent to committing these crimes,” stated Lackey.
Lackey began his career in public service in 1985 as a California Highway Patrolman, where he served for 28 years. In 2005, he was elected to the Palmdale City Council and served as the Mayor Pro Tem. Prior to his time on the city council, Lackey served on the Palmdale Elementary Board of Trustees.
Lackey represents the 36th Assembly District, which contains portions of Kern, San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties, including the communities of Lancaster, Palmdale, Quartz Hill, Acton, Littlerock, Pearblossom, Mojave, Rosamond, California City, Phelan and Piñon Hills.
–
jkpalmdale says
Prop 47 is already causing major problems. Those of us with brains, read the bill and knew it was Bad. Tom is trying to correct 1 portion. More needs to be done. The bill was complete bullshit and people that I talked to about it, thought it was just for minor pot possession and such. But under Arnold, possession of a small amount for personal use was decriminalized and you just got cited. Low information voters are why we are so screwed up.
http://m.krcrtv.com/prop-47-creating-havoc-on-the-streets-of-humboldt-county/30027976
callitasitis says
The people have spoken on prop 47. The jails and prison are full and under federal court order to reduce the population regardless of the crimes that are committed (do not forget the reduced plea deals for lesser time in prison & jail)
NOT all laws are good laws especial if they are driven by political agenda (feel good stuff). Laws should be written to address and solved a real problem or fill in the gap on current law (not feel good stuff). Prop 47 was written is a way that it opens Pandora box to unforeseen consequences we will all feel and see down the road. ** I have no problem about the simply possession (personal use) reduction to a misdemeanor but PROP 47 included petty thief under $950, shoplifting under $950, forging or writing a bad check under $950, receipting stolen property under $950. These crimes are property crimes which mean that their VICTIMS WILL get the stiff for all losses. There are no sticks just lots of carrots for the criminally inclined. Never make the mistake that all criminals are stupid THEY ARE NOT they will work the system to get the most out of it. Plea deal after plea deal will keep them on the streets stealing from us.
Forrest says
Alcohol, Ambien, Xanax and other benzos are the most common date rape drugs. Are these the drugs Lacking Lackey is planning on excluding from prop 47?
Drugs like ecstasy, rohypnol, and ketamine are likely the drugs he’s referencing, since the times didn’t actually reference his legislation or link the text.
But… those drugs are not solely “date rape drugs.” In fact, if you really want to get into it–most mind altering substances can be used as “date rape drugs.”
So what is the point? Someone who gets caught with ketamine is charged with a possession of controlled substance with intent to commit sexual crimes? You don’t know that’s what the person’s intent is and if you do, you can charge them for it–regardless of prop 47.
#idiots
Jason says
If someone is caught with Ketamine, they aren’t getting arrested if they have a prescription. Same goes with Ambient, Xanax, etc. However if they get caught with Rohypnol or Ecstacy they for damn sure are getting arrested. Ecstacy is a Schedule I drug and Rohypnol isn’t used medically in the US.
Forrest says
Of course not but a lot of people use those substances without a prescription–and not to “date rape” someone. The key is to show intent–not blanket law.
If you can prove it’s going to be used for sexual assault, you don’t need to close a “loophole”.
WT...? says
Thank you Forrest for seeing the point of my rant. The issue is intent.
I am in no way trying to lessen the importance of dealing with all of the various forms of rape in a manner appropriate to the severity of said crimes. Said crimes are a separate issue than mere possession. Now, adding enhancements for the use of said drugs in the attempt or commission of rape – sure, git ’em!
Jason says
If they get caught with date rape drugs, they will be charged with possession of a controlled substance. I don’t believe there’s an intent to commit sexual crimes law in regards to possession.
WT...? says
Apparently, you missed it in the article. Lackey’s stated intention was to increase the penalties for mere possession of said drugs based upon assigning intent automatically – without any adjudication to determine if such truly exists.
Therein lies my objection. I am not defending possession of any drug, or thing for that matter. I am defending our right to adjudication to determine intent in a court of law, as our Constitution intended.
Jason says
Youre right I did miss it, I missed it because he never said he was going to increase penalties based on intent.
Overlooked inside Proposition 47 is a provision that reduces penalties for possession of date-rape drugs. While other penalty reductions are for crimes such as drug possession for personal use, a criminal carrying a date-rape drug most likely intends to use the substance to incapacitate unsuspecting victims, according to Lackey.
Lackey’s bill would send this provision back to the ballot and give voters the chance to reinstate the felony penalty for this very serious offense.
Theres a difference between saying that a criminal caught with those drugs most likely intends to commit a crime and reinstating the penalties for being caught with those drugs.
The whole point of Lackeys bill is to REINSTATE the felony penalty that was reduced under Prop 47, not increase the penalties based on intent.
WT...? says
You missed it again.
“…a criminal carrying a date-rape drug most likely intends to use the substance to incapacitate unsuspecting victims, according to Lackey.”
At this point, I believe that you are being intentionally obtuse.
Jason says
And where does it say he’s going to increase penalties based on intent, which is what you are arguing.
You said his stated intention was to increase penalties based on intent, you use a quote where he talks about the intent of someone caught with these drugs and absolutely no mention of increasing penalties to try and prove your point. Right below that it sttes what the intent of the bill is and that’s to reinstate the felony penalty that was reduced by the passing of prop 47.
Trying to reinstate the felony penalty isnt increasing penalties based on intent, its changing it back to the way it should be.
William says
@WT…?
You must be new. You wrote>
“At this point, I believe that you are being intentionally obtuse.”
He does it constantly on every issue. It’s unreal. One time I asked him if 2+2=4 just to see what would happen with that question.
Jason says
William, or they are completely wrong and totally misreading the article. Their argument is that Lackey is trying to increase penalties based on possession with intent. Their evidence is Lackey talking about the intent of someone in possession of date rape drugs and somehow they start making the leap to increased penalties while completely ignoring the line after which clearly states what the intent of the bill is.
Lackey never once said his stated intention was to increase penalties based upon possession and intent to use said drugs. The whole intent of this bill is to reinstate the felony penalty that shouldn’t have been reduced in the first place.
WT...? says
@ Jason: “Trying to reinstate the felony penalty isnt increasing penalties based on intent, its changing it back to the way it should be.”
Seriously?
1) To ‘reinstate the felony penalty’ is, by definition, increasing penalties from where THE PEOPLE overwhelmingly determined that it SHOULD BE.
2) Lackey has stated that he want to do just that because, “a criminal carrying a date-rape drug most likely INTENDS to use the substance to incapacitate unsuspecting victims…” That is basing the change against WHAT THE PEOPLE CHOSE upon the ASSIGNING OF INTENT by MERE POSSESSION.
You really are being intentionally obtuse on a very clearly delineated issue, Jason. If you can’t figure it out at this point, perhaps your alignment with the local Republican Assembly has blinded you to the use of your mental faculties. At any rate, it is pointless and cruel to have a mental sparring match with an unarmed man – we’re done here.
Jason says
Why did I know that was going to be your response? William, is that you posting under a different name?
It was a felony a month ago and wanting it to be returnedto a felony is now increasing the penalty? The basis of the change is because it should have never been reduced, not because of assigning intent by mere possession. Did you have a problem with it being being a felony before the bill was passed or is it just because its a Republican trying to change it back? It being a felony had zero to do with intent but rather because some of the drugs used are Schedule I controlled substances.
William says
@Jason
Are you starting to get the hint about how your thinking, such as it is, is so convoluted that’s it’s impossible to have any discussion with you?
Someone else besides WT…? said about the same thing back when you were confused beyond belief regarding the unfinished hotel.
I wonder how you get through the day thinking as you do.
I even said I wonder if you do it on purpose a short while back. I’m not even commenting on the subject of Prop. 47 because it’s pointless with you, just your ablitity to comprehend everyday English.
But, you keep digging the hole deeper.
William says
Now, Jason, why did you think that I would respond as I did to a comment that said you were being ‘intentionally obtuse’?
He’s wasn’t the only one who thought that besides me.
You might want to carefully read your replies to other’s comments and see if they make any sense in the context of the article or the comment you are replying to.
Then, you typically ‘double-down’ making it worse for yourself. Truly, discussing anything with you is as productive as discussing the subject with a ‘birther’ or a ‘flat earther’ or any issue with a republican.
Now, did I say your are a ‘birther’ or ‘flat earther’. It was an analogy using the word ‘like’ as in ‘similar’ knowing you I can anticipate that you immediately thought that I was calling you one or both of those.
Can you give one example of a republican and/or tea party position on a issue that is well thought out and doesn’t fall apart on a rigorous examination.
For example, the right doesn’t want comprehensive sex education in schools, wants to eliminate the right to an abortion and even defund contraceptives from heath care insurance in some cases. Fine, so far. But, to back up a bit and look at how the same people want to cut any aid to families, single mothers and children with regard to such things as food stamps, Medicaid in red states or any government assistance. The right takes away with one hand and then takes away again with the other hand.
That’s makes them hypocrites of the highest order. They also want to “Drill, baby, drill” for oil while also eliminating any environmental regulations as part of the deal. Again, they are clueless as to consequences of their ‘bright’ ideas.
OK. Jason, name any issue that the right is in favor of or opposes and we’ll see if it stands up to closer scrutiny. Right wing solutions are typically simple-minded and will nearly always provide unintended consequences that they seem incapaple of anticipating in their binary thought processes.
They simply aren’t fit to govern effectively. See Lancaster for an up close look at how a conservative city is run. Magnify that to include the entire nation and you have the Bush/Cheney years: ignore warning about bin Laden a month before 9/11, little job growth, Katrina, ill-begotten War in Iraq, nothing done about illegal immigration from 2001 to 2007 when they held majorities in Congress along with the executive branch and now they are sitting on their hands, followed by the biggest crash and recession since 1929.
Yet, the republicans expected the President to turn around the economy in his first 100 days while they fought him with hammers and tongs to this day, 6 years later. They aren’t fit to govern.
While you keep saying both parties are equally corrupt or to blame, you almost always offer up the right wing talking points on every issue. Are you too embarrassed to call yourself a republican?
And, you keep saying both parties are the same which is one more reason why WT…? is correct in thinking that your are ‘intentionally obtuse’. It’s as though the pathways in your brain are crossed and you offer stuff that doesn’t make sense in the agreed upon objective reality we live in. Y’know the sun rises in the east and sets in the west and I bet you have an opposite argument.
What kind of work do you do where that kind of mentality suffices-crash test dummy or something similar? If your employer says “Do A, B & C, do you follow instructions or do you automatically do “X, Y & Z” because “You know better”? Even a greeter at Walmart has to be smarter than that. I can just picture you as a greeter, greeting Walmart customers as they LEAVE the store. “Hi, welcome to Walmart” as they push their full shopping carts past you on their way out wondering what the heck?
Lackey’s first proposed legislation is simply red meat for his right wing base. We’ll see how he votes on issues regarding California’s economy and other important statewide subjects, probably a bunch of ‘Nays’ like Knight. We’ll see how much his presence in the state Assembly actually benefits the Antelope Valley. Steve Fox, being in the majority, was able to do some good for the AV. Lackey will have to make do with ‘feel good red meat’ for his base.
Jason says
My convoluted thinking makes it impossible to have a discussion with me? That’s rich coming from you. Heres your idea of a discussion. Hypocritical rants and raves beating dead horses followed up by personal attacks and attempts to belittle if someone opposes your viewpoint. It as to be the Democratic view point or risk the wrath. Couple that when proven wrong with facts, you deflect, ignore or go off on tangents that have zero to do with the discussion.
Speaking of dead horses, its the hotel AGAIN. Somehow your refusal to accept an explanation given multiple times is somehow me being confused beyond belief. Guess the person who was involved with the project was confused beyond belief to eh?
What don’t I get about Prop 47. It was a bill good in theory and bad in implementation. It could have been written to exclude reductions in penalties for certain crimes and been a good thing. Yet somehow thefts of firearms and possession of date rapes drugs were over looked and now the effort to reinstate the penalty for possession of date rape drugs is a bad thing. But that must be my poor comprehension of every day English coming through.
Oh look another dead horse, I guess I’ll explain myself for the hundredth time. Ideologically the two major parties are different. They are the same in the way they go about achieving their goals. Both parties spin stories, lie, pretend to care about the citizens etc when in the end, all they care about who is gives them the most money. Both parties do this while trying to call foul for the other side doing it. Somehow me criticizing both parties and calling out the hypocrisy is me offering up the right wing view point.
Oh look, another personal attack and attempt at belittling. Crash test dummy or something similar? Id say my job is a little more complicated than that unless you consider following plans drawn up by civil engineers as basic as being a crash test dummy. Maybe Ill be a Walmart greeter when I retire, until then Ill continue to run heavy equipment.
Youre right, Lackey trying to reinstate penalties for being a sexual predator is just red meat for his right wing base
Jason says
Youre right, Lackey trying to get the penalties reinstated is just red meat for his right wing base. Has nothing to do with sexual predators being allowed to walk with a slap on the wrist. If this was a Democrat trying to reinstate the penalty, my support would be the same. Its not an issue that has to do with party lines but rather the safety of the citizens, you know like the title of the bill insinuated?
William says
After your rant, Jason, you didn’t provide 1 example of an issue on which the republicans aren’t hypocrites or haven’t thought through the consequences, unintended or otherwise.
You lost on the the hotel discussion back then and I wasn’t the only one who pointed it out. That was one of you ‘best’ efforts at doing what you do best.
And, no. Palmdale and Lancaster aren’t alike just because they share the same geographical area that is the size of Rhode Island. There are many dozens of cities in the LA basin that are next to each other but distinct in their management and other measures.
I grew up in Santa Cruz which is run differently than Capitola or Aptos or Watsonville though only a few miles apart. Why is that such a difficult concept for you to get?
As for your job, do you take correction from your employer or do you just do what you want? You don’t seem like someone capable of taking correction or direction….without an argument.
Like WF…? said, are you being intentionally obtuse? That’s how you occur on this site. And, I’m assuming that was his first encounter will you and that’s why I asked if he was new.
William says
BTW Jason, I worked in one of the biggest ER’s in the SF Valley for 15 years before I retired.
I worked with patients who were drunk, in excruciating pain, screaming infants, didn’t speak English, and so on.
Having a discussion with you reminds me of patients with head injuries. They would ask the same question over and over. I would answer it and a moment later they would ask it again. But, if after a half dozen times, if I didn’t answer, they would notice and get more insistent. You don’t do the exact same thing but it’s just as frustrating.
As frustrating as that could be at times, having a discussion with you is worse as I’m assuming you haven’t had a recent head injury. It’s just the way you are.
You complain that both parties politicians lie, blah, blah, blah.
But, after reading your comments, you too could be a politician. You have a way of not answering questions and changing the subject and making it difficult to get through to you. When are you going to announce your candidacy?
And, why do you always take the right wing point of view given that you think both parties stink? You must realize that of the 2 parties, the republicans are off the chart crazy by now unless you haven’t been paying attention. Yet, you speak ‘GOP’ fluently.
Stinger says
I am reminded of a passage from the great criminologist, Cesare Beccaria, from his book, “Of Crimes and Punishments” (1764, as translated in 1768), which was a significant influence upon our country’s founding fathers as they crafted this great experiment of these United States of America:
“In proportion as punishments become more cruel, the minds of men, as a fluid rises to the same height with that which surrounds it, grow hardened and insensible; and the force of the passions still continuing, in the space of an hundred years the wheel terrifies no more than formerly the prison. That a punishment may produce the effect required, it is sufficient that the evil it occasions should exceed the good expected from the crime, including in the calculation the certainty of the punishment, and the privation of the expected advantage. All severity beyond this is superfluous, and therefore tyrannical.”
Our current legislators need to remember the lessons of history before they repeat the same stupidities with new laws based upon shortsighted goals of reelection by a population salivating for punishments for perpetrators rather than protection from crime.
Anon says
What sucks is this law doesn’t even care if they have had felony charges in another state…as long as their priors weren’t in Cali they get reduced to misdemeanor. Even for besides drugs, like burglary. Someone one out there was just arrested on two felony counts for burglary and receiving stolen goods, and is still on probation from a prior felony in another state, but when he goes to arraignment next week the charges will be reduced because his other crimes weren’t here. That is BS!!! He should have to pay for what he took from me and is irreplaceable.
Bill says
As I told you before Tom you wouldn’t being doing your job if certain people didn’t bitch. They will never be happy no matter what you do. Go get em my friend
Ive seen it all says
If the Dumbmocrats were really behind Prop 47, why did they disquise it as, “The Safe Neighborhood and School Act”? No mention anywhere of it reducing the top four felony crimes into misdemeanors basically ensuring that criminals won’t do jail time for their crimes.
If the people actually read what they voted on instead of just the title, they would have never voted for this. Ask any cop or victim of a crime if they think this law is good.
William says
Is that you, Jason? It’s almost word for word one of your comments from a while back.
Jason says
Nope, not me, just someone else who sees the law and bill for what it is. You think I’m the only one who thinks this way about the “Safe Neighborhood and School” BS?
Only a moron would come up with that name after writing a bill that not only reduces certain felony crimes to misdemeanors and also releases people convicted of those said crimes early from prison. Ask the girl who was almost kidnapped a few weeks ago in Santa Clarita how safe she feels her neighborhood is after this bill became law.
William says
or you both copied and pasted.
William says
So, Jason, why don’t you accept the ‘will of the people’ on that proposition like you did with the grand jury in Ferguson?
In the Wilson decision, you willingly ignored all the unusual actions by the prosecutor and his DA’s and their not following normal protocol, so you should be willing to ignore a simple name you don’t like on a ballot proposition, n’est-ce pas?
You’re so funny.
Jason says
I have accepted the will of the people, does that mean I’m not allowed to point out the stupidity of the law? This law is as bad as AB 109 yet people act like its some great law. Who in their right mind would make the possession of date rate drugs a misdemeanor? Or the theft of a handgun petty theft? And to do this and call the bill the Safe Neighborhood and School Act deserves criticism.
It’s another law that sounds great in theory but horrible in reality.
callitasitis says
@Williams
The Grand jury heard it and made their decision. The Governor could have appointed a special prosecutor (his eyes & ears) to go through all the evidence while the feds were going through it. It does not appear that the Governor sent his own people in Ferguson to interview all witness to the shooting (if he felt the county prosecutors would failed to do their duty). IF the outcome is the same or the feds do not file charges will that make you upset? The feds have been there since day one, not a peep from them either. What I see is a lot of deflection and change of topic. I may not always agree with all outcome of the justice system but it is our system & it not perfect but better than most. If I remember correctly did not the Florida case of Zimmerman have a special prosecutor?? Because the local police chief and the local prosecutor declined to file until the state step in?
William says
@callitasitis
The whole thing in Ferguson was flawed from the get go.
-no police report immediately after the decision; a blank sheet of paper
-Wilson left the scene, went to the station, washed up and put his own gun in an evidence bag.
-measurements weren’t taken at the crime scene.
-there was no recorded interview with Wilson. He was able to hear witness testimony and forensics before he testified before the grand jury.
-that Wilson even was able to testify before the grand jury was atypical and he wasn’t able to be vigorously cross-examined except by DAs disinclined to make the case.
-the prosecutor’s DA gave the GJ, the wrong law at the beginning which was ruled unconstitutional. Then, gave them an update during deliberations without any explanation.
Witness #10 that the prosecutor mentioned in his press conference changed his story from being 100 yards away to 50-75 yards and began iniital report with “I can’t recall….” but all the other witnesses were deemed inconsistent and liars except #10 by the prosecutor.
Double-jeopardy doesn’t apply here so a special prosecutor or a federal indictment is still possible.
I can’t believe the prosecutor destroyed his reputation with this mess of a presentation just to keep Wilson from going to trial. And, then he resigns. There was no finding of ‘Not Guilty’ by the grand jury.
So, we’ll have to wait and see.
Stinger says
Perhaps you should read beyond the title of a proposition before you decide on whether to support it or not?
Give me a break says
I really hope this doesn’t go through. I have a felony for possession like 10 years ago. It certainly wasn’t any kind of date rape drug and I understand why you wouldn’t want anyone being in possession with a date rape drug.Then if someone does you certainly don’t want them to get a little slap on the wrist for maybe possessing it in a way that could very well hurt women. What is the date rape drug used for? What’s its actual purpose for ???However we shouldn’t have to pay or wait for all this to go back on the ballot or taken away because someone doesn’t agree with one thing that hasn’t even been an issue!! If it needs to be revised to explain about the certain kind of date rape drug not being part if the prop 47. Then figure something out to specify that. Then try and revise it in a way that the rest of us don’t pay for it. That’s just not fair. I’m so tired of politicians saying are vote matters but it looks to me that it really doesn’t mean a damn thing if this man can just go in and change things that just pisses me off.
Gary S says
Blah blah, “criminals, punishment,” blah blah.
That’s the splash you want to make, first hour of the first day?
Same old AV hicksville BS. Bring Fox back.
William says
Exactly. republicans complain about the economy and unemployment constantly but when they get to office they do this?
What did Knight ever do to help the AV economy?
Jason says
Vote him out!! Public safety is bad!
William says
As usual, Jason, you missed the point.
Dan C. says
Notice the & honest good politicians don’t come from Lancaster.
William says
How could they?
There ain’t none there no how.
WT...? says
Yep. The first thing the Republican does is try to chip away at the will of the people as expressed in statewide election… Typical.
So now, possessing something AUTOMATICALLY determines what you INTENDED to do with it with no room whatsoever for the vagaries of reality enough to put you in PRISON with a FELONY record.
*sigh* Here we go again with the same old same old. It’s gonna be a looong 2 years.
Jason says
What other uses for date rape drugs are there other than using them to sexually assault someone?
WT...? says
“Public Safety!” … The cry of the oppressor to justify the dismantling of Constitutional rights.
Drugs that are used for date rape were not created for that purpose. They were subverted to that evil end by SOME unscrupulous people. To AUTOMATICALLY assign intent based on mere possession would be akin to AUTOMATICALLY assign the intent to murder based upon the mere possession of a firearm. After all, one could easily use your own stated position, adapted, “What other uses for GUNS are there other than using them to KILL someone?”
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” B. Franklin, 11/11/1775
Jason says
You’re right that they started out for other uses but were subverted for evil use. If a person has a prescription for some of them, then guess what? They don’t go to jail. If a person gets caught with Rohypnol or GHB , they are going to jail seeing as how Rohpynol is not used medically in the States and GHB, except in one form, is a schedule I drug. Now explain to me how arresting people for illegal drugs is dismantling our Constitutional rights?
Its funny you say that then go on to try and use guns as a comparison. Guns are a Constitutional right, drugs aren’t.
Greg says
Jason’s comment is correct about arms being protected but drugs are not.
That said, guns can also be used for entertainment (target shooting), providing food (hunting), playing music (modified target shooting), and building (modified gun to shoot nails into stone and concrete). Oh, art, metal pierced by shotgun blast is kind of common in art.
Jason says
And its quite hilarious that you rail against the Republicans for trying to fix a bad bill and then saying that “Public Safety” is the cry of the oppressor to justify dismantling our Constitutional rights considering how Democrats go on and on about public safety in the gun control battle. Gonna speak out against that?
WT...? says
Yep. That’s just as silly.
jkpalmdale says
LMFAO You are kidding right about Republicans chipping away at the will of the people??
In CA especially, every bill WE THE PEOPLE have passed that Dems do not like they filed suit in court. That goes back to even before Prop 187 which was the first real big one they challenged. What about Prop 8 and Prop 22?
This prop 47 should be challenged in court due to the safety issues it brings with it.
RF says
But not to do anything about the stupidity that reduces stealing guns to a misdemeanor? What brainless imbecile came up with that particular idea?
JumpinJackFlash says
God bless you Tom, and good luck!