From: NephiOne@aol.com
Subject: SNET: Y2k and Washington D.C.
Date: 22 Feb 1999 13:31:17 -0500
To: Truth4rite@egroups.com, Potent357@aol.com


->  SNETNEWS  Mailing List



http://www.y2knewswire.com/19990222.htm

BLOCKBUSTER Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM REPORT

** PERMISSION GRANTED TO REPRINT THIS REPORT IN ITS ENTIRETY, CREDIT MUST BE
GIVEN TO WWW.Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM

FIRST, A LOOK AT WASHINGTON D.C.:

Y2K COULD BRING D.C. TO A HALT
[news]
The Washington Post published an eye-popping story on Friday that warns D.C.
citizens may be in physical danger thanks to Y2K-induced failures in police
departments and emergency services. The report says many city services may
simply not work after 1/1/2000. The story leads off with, "District residents
face a "significant risk" that the city's computer problems associated with
the year 2000 will disrupt schools, the police department, the delivery of
health care services and a range of other programs, according to a federal
report slated for release today on Capitol Hill."

The study was done by the General Accounting Office, and its conclusions send
a strong, clear message: residents of Washington D.C. are potentially
threatened by Y2K, and public safety can no longer be guaranteed, even by the
most well-meaning police officers and city officials. It isn't the people's
desire to protect the public that's lacking: it's the infrastructure!

(It also raises the all-important question: if the city that houses government
fails, how will government get anything done?)

Rep. Thomas M. Davis, chairman of the House Government Oversight subcommittee
on the District, says about D.C. "It is hard to find a city that is this far
behind at this stage... stuff will be all screwed up."

VERY LITTLE ARGUING OVER THE FACT: D.C. IS IN TROUBLE

The story also reports agreement on this assessment of D.C.'s Y2K status:
"Mary Ellen Hanley, the District's Y2K program manager, said yesterday that
the federal assessment of the city's potential computer problems is accurate.
She said the city's primary emphasis is on developing plans to prevent a
breakdown in the delivery of services to residents."

The report goes on to say, "The District may be unable to effectively ensure
public safety, collect revenue, educate students and provide health care
services..."

Link at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/feb99/district021999.htm

PRAISES TO D.C. OFFICIALS FOR TELLING THE TRUTH!
[commentary]

Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM applauds the GAO officials, representatives, and D.C.
officials who were willing to step forward and tell the truth on this issue.
Even though the situation is bad, the public is finally learning the truth
thanks to some courageous individuals. This is a landmark Y2K event, and the
people who have researched and acknowledged D.C.'s lack of Y2K-readiness
deserve your thanks. These include: Mary Ellen Hanley, Rep. Thomas Davis, and
all the people involved in the GAO report. It takes real courage to come out
and admit the sad Y2K status of the District, but that's exactly what is
required.
Rest assured, there are probably other cities in just as bad of shape that are
not going public with it. At least here we are being informed.

With the truth out, however, it raises many areas of serious concern:
NO GUARANTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY
[commentary]

One statement from the report: "The District may be unable to effectively
ensure public safety, collect revenue, educate students and provide health
care services..."

This is the first time Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM editors have seen a city openly
(although indirectly) admit that public safety is no longer guaranteed. The
implied message is unmistakable:

"You may be on your own!"

BUT THERE ARE FEW PERSONAL SAFETY ALTERNATIVES

If public safety services do fail in D.C., the public may be at a much larger
risk than residents of other cities simply because they are not allowed to
defend themselves in D.C.. Handguns are illegal to own for most residents of
the District, meaning that the people best equipped to provide for their own
safety will be the criminals themselves. And those least-prepared will be
those who chose to obey the gun laws. No matter how much the local law
enforcement officers want to provide protection, they are likely to be spread
very thin. One reasonable conclusion from reading the GAO report is that there
exists a very large, very real chance that police will simply not be able to
respond to calls for some critical period of time. It could be hours, days, or
weeks, depending on the severity of the infrastructure failures.

But this isn't about guns; it's about public safety. If emergency services go
down and police cannot respond, what reasonable course of action do D.C.
residents have to provide for their own personal protection? Now that the GAO
is publicly stating the District simply can't guarantee public safety, are
city and federal officials prepared to legalize alternatives for law-abiding
citizens with no criminal history?


THE CITY IS ABOUT TO VIOLATE ITS ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY: ASSURANCE OF PUBLIC
SAFETY

For one person to stand by while another is in danger -- and do nothing -- is
against the law in many states. These laws are called, "Good Samaritan Laws,"
and they require citizens to help protect their fellow citizens. At the very
least, they require a call to 911. But now, with Y2K threatening the safety of
private citizens, unless D.C. officials can either guarantee some reasonable
level of public safety -- or allow citizens to defend themselves -- the
District stands to be the all-time largest offender of Good Samaritan laws.
Officials there have an obligation to protect the city's citizens.

QUICK, MAKE OURSELVES IMMUNE TO LAWSUITS

The solution for some cities and states? Many areas are passing legislation
making them immune to lawsuits resulting from Y2K. That means if you dial 911
and nobody shows up -- and you get robbed (or worse) -- the city (or state)
disclaims all responsibility. With this immunity, not only is the city not
responsible for providing protection, and not only are they not obligated to
legalize a reasonable means for families to protect themselves...
unbelievably, they are also not responsible for anything that happens to you
as a result.

Any city or state that allows this situation to unfold is crossing a dangerous
line by basically stating: we will tax you, but we won't protect you. It is
one of the most basic covenants of a city or state: to provide for the common
protection of its people. Should this covenant be broken, expect long-term
social and political upheavals to result.

HOW MANY MORE CITIES WILL FACE THE SAME SITUATION?
Washington D.C. is now the first city to indirectly declare it cannot
necessarily provide for the safety of its citizens (even though it probably
wants to). How many more such cities will appear?

As always, there are some solutions for residents. If you think your local
city or state is not likely to be able to provide for the safety of your
family -- and if they outlaw your ability to protect yourself -- move
somewhere safer. Relocate to an area with either a very low population or one
that is dedicated to Y2K readiness and the public safety. There are many
cities that are taking the problem seriously. Portland, Oregon, for one, (see
article below), is encouraging household self-sufficiency! And in this regard,
Portland is correct: do not count on your local government to protect you.
Their emergency services may go down. Protect yourself. Work with your
neighbors, your community, your family... get the city on board if you can,
but don't expect them to be your backup plan.

CITIES BEGIN ALERTING THE PUBLIC
[news]
As the Washington Post reports in the story mentioned above, "The city
[Washington D.C.] will launch a campaign next month aimed at informing
residents about ways to deal with potential difficulties..."

D.C. isn't the only one warning citizens. All across America, expect to see
more cities warning residents in the coming months. Likely public-information
campaigns will encourage contingency planning and urge people to prepare by
stockpiling food, water, medicine and at least some cash.

The effect of these alerts? Y2K preparedness action will dramatically rise.
Currently, awareness is high, but action is still uncommon. Few people are
actively following the Red Cross advice to stockpile food, water, medicine,
heating fuel and some cash. But when they hear the same advice from their
cities and neighbors -- and they see people in their city starting to stock up
-- they'll be motivated.

These events represent a major sign: it means cities are jumping on board the
preparedness movement. In the history of Y2K, last Friday will be remembered
as a major triggering event. It was a day that two major U.S. cities declared
they would pursue campaigns to alert the public.

-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
->  Posted by: NephiOne@aol.com