Ya think that maybe I'm developing some sort of complex? A feeling of being neglected and discomfirmed? When Lapakko writes something, he expects it to be published! After all, who could possibly say it better? Well, I guess Alison Rasch of St. Paul can say it better, because the Star Tribune chose her letter to the editor over mine on the same subject. And actually, looking at both letters, hers may have been the better choice.
Context: A guy from Eden Prairie writes a whiny letter on March 19 complaining about those "photo cops" that can nab a motorist for moving violations. Here's the text of his letter:
I was one of the drivers who was ticketed by photo cop before the law was suspended. Photo cop does a great job of enforcing the law. But there is a huge difference between speeding through a red light at 40 miles per hour and making a "rolling stop" while taking a right on red (my offense).
Practically no one comes to a complete stop before turning right--assuming there is no oncoming traffic. It doesn't make sense to waste gas, brake linings and time just to fulfill the letter of the law when the spirit of the law is to prevent accidents. Yield signs already exist to remind drivers that cross traffic has the right of way. The law for right turns should be changed to "yield" rather than "complete stop" at most red lights. Otherwise, the law will be subjectively enforced (which is what photo cop is designed to prevent) and a lot of fines will be levied that will do nothing to prevent accidents.
Now I don't know about you, but I thought this guy seems to have some "entitlement issues." Heaven forbid that he should actually have to stop at a red light before turning! Such a huge waste of time, gas, and brake linings! And so I submitted the following letter to the StarTrib:
A March 19 letter writer has the gall to rationalize his failure to come to a complete stop at a “right turn on red.” He asserts that “practically no one comes to a complete stop before turning right.” He whines that having to stop before turning “wastes gas, brake linings and time.” And he claims that the current law is “subjectively enforced.”
Translation: this guy really doesn’t understand the law or why it is there in the first place. Yes, I do see people flaunting this rule from time to time, treating the red light as if it were a yellow one. But most people do follow the law, and they should, for safety reasons. Cars--and pedestrians--are moving in each direction; one needs to actually stop and look for them. Some people simply regard the red light as an annoyance, but I’ve seen impatient, careless right-turners create safety issues many times. And I don’t feel great sympathy for the loss of maybe two seconds of time and a ridiculously inconsequential amount of gas. And wear on brake linings? Give ME a break!
The letter-writer suggests that the right turn on red should be changed to “yield.” He implies that this would eliminate “subjective enforcement.” But in some ways, that makes for an even murkier law: now we would have to make a judgment as to whether someone did in fact “yield” or did in fact need to yield. To me, that’s even more subjective, and if the letter-writer actually thought about that a little bit, he’d realize it as well.
David Lapakko, Richfield, MN
OK, maybe it was a little nasty, and maybe it wasn't focused on the "photo cop" issue. But I thought it was worth printing. Still, the letters editor chose instead to publish the following letter from the aforementioned Alison Rasch:
A March 19 letter writer from Eden Prairie is angry that he was nabbed for not stopping at a red light before turning right ("Photo cop/It's too strict"). He believes the law that requires a driver to come to a full stop is "too strict" and "doesn't make sense."
If his contention is that the spirit of the law is to prevent accidents, he might consider that stopping and looking before proceedings will prevent him from running over pedestrians and bikers who may be out of his line of vision.
As a walker and bike-commuter, I am so glad I don't live in Eden Prairie and have to risk being smacked by this self-centered driver, who seems more concerned about wear and tear on his car than the safety of those who share the road with him.
Alison Rasch, St. Paul
Good goin', Alison! In the end, her letter was slightly more concise, slightly more polite, and dealt with the important biker/pedestrian issue in a nice "personal" way. I can see why if, they only had to publish one letter on this subject, that they would have published hers.
And so, the howling wolf/contentious introvert (that's me) keeps plugging along, hoping that I don't have to do something really weird (like sit on a toilet for TWO YEARS--now that's quite the story; look it up if you don't know what I'm referring to) in order to gain the attention of our mass media. This blog is a medium, but seriously, could we put the word "mass" in front of it? I think there have to be at least two or three readers for it to qualify as such!
No comments:
Post a Comment