Since police officers are sworn to protect the rights of others – which includes the right to free speech – this also leaves me in the ironic position of informing you that I will continue to write topics which I consider to be of worth to The News Tribune, its readers and myself.

Clearly, having as I allowed – and you admitted – writing tongue-in-cheek, hardly serves to position yourself squarely in opposition to the party-atmosphere which lends itself both to your heritage and the damage that often is the consequence.

That you should decide in response that the only change you would make in your piece – to designate a driver – hardly differs from building a hospital at the bottom of the cliff.

Never in my response did I suggest what you are extrapolating my comment to mean that you would be in support of what happened on the other side of the state. There were consequences. Drinking led to them. They were having a good time.

I would suggest that you use your position as an officer sworn to protect and serve that when you write you leave no shadow of a doubt what you mean.

This column was definitely tongue-in-cheek, as you suggested, and I deliberately chose a light-hearted approach. As an Irish-American I have grown very tired of being made out to be the stereotypical rowdy drinker, especially on Saint Patrick’s Day. I am not that type of person, and I pointed out in the column that the type of behavioral excesses associated with Saint Patrick’s Day actually bear no resemblance to the Irish experience. But we live in a flat and stale world of political correctness, and I do not wish to belabor the point. Instead, I suggest that the spirit of the Irish includes an open heart, and that if people want to wear green and go to the pub then they should go and have a good time.

Those actions are legal, unlike the violent crime described in your comment. The failure of the drunken mob to intervene on the victim’s behalf is reprehensible. Nowhere in my column did I advocate for this type of behavior. For that you will get no apology. The only omission (which I have since added after considering your comment) would be the suggestion to get a designated driver.

Unless you are a first responder or work in an emergency room, I likely have far more experience with serious assaults such as the one you described above. I have made it a point to use Blue Byline as a means of advocating for victims of violence (and received a great deal of criticism as a result), and I welcome you to read past columns on this topic, such as “Rights of victims are low priority” (http://blog.thenewstribune.com/bluebyline/2012/02/19/rights-of-victims-are-a-low-priority/).

Clearly you are upset by the atrocious crime you describe above, and I understand that you are looking to vent that anger at what appears to be a likely target. I suggest, however, that you read a bit more critically before you target someone’s work in this fashion. I would expect that most of these alleged 850 people to whom you forwarded my column will not see the negative portrayal you are choosing to read into it.

Brian O’Neill
Blue Byline

Brian O’Neill is a columnist for the Tacoma News Tribune, writing as a cop. Here’s an excerpt from what he wrote March 17: “It’s Saint Patrick’s Day. Which means that it is time to put on something green, head down to the pub, drink to excess and, if you’re very lucky, get into a fight.”

This is my response to Mr. O’Neill:

Your column entitled “Blue Byline” would serve better as the trash can liner in the cell of the 18-year-old young man now likely to be charged with murder in the death of a his neighbor this past Thursday night. While some 100-150 underage drinkers looked on, Frank James Motta was thrown to the ground and punched in the head.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/mar/16/assault-victim-frank-motta-fondly-remembered-as/

Motta was responding to a request for assistance from the home-owner who lived next door.

Motta was a 65-year-old Air Force veteran who fought in the Vietnam War. He was a football coach, retired high school principal, teacher, and volunteer at the Spokane Veterans Affairs Medical Center where he was a patient advocate.

And you, a cop, even tongue-in-cheek, are advocating for partying – and drinking – and fighting.

Motta wasn’t a police officer but he is dead for trying to protect and serve.

“Instead of fighting a useless battle against a cliché, let me suggest an alternative,” you write.

Let me do the same.

Rethink your position and publish your retraction. And when you do, I’ll be happy to forward your response to the 850 who are receiving this.

David Anderson