As a smalltown newspaper editor, the two things that seem to give me the most consistent grief are the letters to the editor and the police report. Probably the latter is what causes the most problems. We publish the names, ages and cities of residence for those arrested on suspicion of such crimes as auto theft (rare), drug possession (not too rare) and driving while intoxicated (quite common).
I normally get calls from someone who was arrested for a possible DWI and doesn't want to embarrass him or herself. That was the case yesterday. He begged for me to leave the item out, or to not publish his address. But I told him the story of some friends of mine whose son was arrested for shoplifting. I didn't really want to, but that arrest was listed among the others. I can't pick and choose because that is unfair. Those arrested are accountable for their actions; while some may not be guilty, it's a matter of public record.
Many people disagree with this policy. It's not one I created, but I do support it. There is one particular reason why I have little sympathy for those who drive after drinking too much ...
He should have the right to grow up.
One of the other stories that I deal with on a weekly basis are deaths. When an elderly person lives a long, healthy and relatively happy life, that's not a case for grief. It's when a young person – in the prime of life – wrestles with death and loses. Shouldn't be that way. Parents aren't supposed to outlive their children; the pain is too tremendous.
A college freshman from this town was killed this past weekend when a driver – possibly intoxicated, maybe just stupid – drove the wrong way on the highway. Such stories can be a celebration of a great young person's life, but it's such a short life to remember. Potential is murdered by others who don't have the right to kill it.
The Cutlet and Petite Filet are coming home on Saturday after a weeklong trip to grandma and grandpa's house. There's only a limited time in which you can scoop up your child and squeeze him as tightly as you can, virtually protecting him from all the evil in the world. One day, they don't want to be held. Or they move around too fast. Or they're just too big and too independent to want to hold your hand.
No sympathy for the guy who wanted his name left out of the police report. None at all. I hope he talks to his school-age children before they find out some other way. And I hope it makes a difference in his life.
very well said/written!
Agreed.
And I'm going a bit off topic, I too had problems with the police reports, not becuase people would call and ask not to be printed but becuase the police department would never give us detailed reports and would often say, oh it hasn't been filed yet. Or whatever, we'd try to be dilligent about following up but we ususally ran, a "it was reported that a man in a white truck..." type of stuff. Not that compelling.
Anyway, I agree with you I have little sympathy for those who recklessly endanger the lives of others.
My wife and our 3 month old girl (in the car seat in the back) were almost killed head-on by a truck who swerved into their lane--3 days ago. It was evening and the road went from 2 lanes 2 way, to 1 lane each (both ways); the truck driver, we don't think, was drunk...he just failed to recognize the narrowing of the road and almost hit them head on.
Upon hearing this story from my distraught wife, I sat on the couch and poured a gin and tonic.
Someone was looking over all of us.
Amen.
My best friend was killed by a drunk driver right before I turned 16.
I've been a designated driver for life.
Aw, a sweater vest never looked so adorable!
Hmmm... I have to say, though... that's sort of odd. Our paper publishes when people are sentenced. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.
Yes, I have to agree with Pippa...papers should publish only after offenders are found guilty. This "shame" tactic doesn't sound constitutional to me.
I don't think there is a family out there that hasn't been touched at some point by a drunken driver. The laws should be much tougher on it, in my opinion. My daughter was rear-ended a few years ago, not seriously, thank goodness, but the driver of the other vehicle had a record of 7, yes 7, DWI's. I think he did some minor time, and he was probably back out on the streets. What's wrong with this picture?
Cutlet has never looked cuter!
I'm a militant (YES, militant) DD and taxi cab proponent, although I shouldn't live in a glass house and throw stones any time soon.
As a young person, I was probably the only one of my friends who would GLADLY and willingly give up their keys. I'd never had one of those nights where I'd look outside at my car and wonder how it got there.
Shortly after moving to the state where PF's family lives, I was out for dinner w/my friends from here, and got pulled over for doing 5 miles over the limit. Well, I'd had 2-3 drinks and guess what? Yup, I spent a night in jail and quite a bit of $$$ in legal fees.
But -- once bitten, twice shy. I can honestly say that I learned my lesson. I haven't gotten behind the wheel after drinking since. (Which is A LOT more than I can say about my fellow "students" in our drunk driving classes -- many were multiple repeat offenders) The "Victim Impact" panel we had to sit through had a MAJOR impact on me (as if I needed more guilt)...
Anyway, I'm certain my name showed up in police blotters. And yes, it sucked to be in a SMALL town, working for one of the largest employers, who apparently -- ALL read the paper.
Actions have consequences. And Pip and Robotnik -- in some cases, there is no need to be proven guilty -- as a breathalyzer will do that for you.
Sorry for taking up so much of your comments, T!!!
El, I don't trust the police--especially in certain counties in certain states. The breathalyzer means nothing in those parts.
I am NOT a proponent of drinking and driving; I am just telling you from experience that some departments are so corrupt, and use racial/social profiling all the time, that a breathalyzer is shite. I know some lawyers who propose that one REFUSE to take the test. Even though it lands you in jail, you can sort it out legally later. This way you don't get set up.
Again...let me say this: Drunk Drivers ought to be punished accordingly. Always! Just making you aware that your statement "the breathalyzer will decide whether you are guilty or not" is somewhat flexible and open to interpretation, ESPECIALLY by police depts.
Wow, talk about dilemmas. Not fair of those people to put you in that position.. I'm proud you stuck to your principles, T-bone.