I wonder what the teacher’s union - heck all the state unions - have to say about the state being able to strip a person of their pension if they are convicted of a crime.
Right now, its a gun crime. But that could easily be expanded to DUI, drug crimes, bouncing checks, speeding etc.
Not to be interpreted as being in favor of the unions. Merely surprise that they did not intervene. Maybe because it had to do with guns? Or is that any felony?
Sorry, not opposed to unions in general, just don’t like the set of circumstances that allows the state to simultaneously mandate a service, have its own monopoly on the supply of that service, and then grant a monopoly on who can work for the supplier.